the you listen, china, us in is not going to choose the wasn't a whole, which i know all the other with them. so i sense policy of non alignment is really the guiding principle when it comes to issues of global politics. because remember, even during the cold war and countries have us as an organization, they never went in for one site on the question of time on. even if the situation arises, i would look at other stakeholders. well, if anything, this green in crisis tells us how influential and powerful pressures software not compel chosen, but a softer elements of question. power in the us and vision center. so for more on how the, the energy crisis has affected the regional and global supply chains. and that's her up on the hours most pressing new stories from around the globe for learning and content head over to r t dot com. and don't forget to follow us on rumble. odyssey and god see you again next hour.

ah ah with hello and welcome to cross shop were all things were considered. i'm peter lavelle . are we witnessing the end of globalization as we have known it for about the last half century? it would certainly seem so. the west ability to shape the world and its own image also appears to be on the way. as a result, should we expect new regional and block globalization? ah, cross talking globalization, i'm joined by my arthur clara in toronto. he's

a liberty advocate and freelance editor in washington. we have thomas polly. he is founder of the economics democratic and open societies project. and in bristol, we cross to johnny brower. she is a spokesperson for the world anti imperialist form, as well as the author of dr. to war against russia and china, right cross cross and effect. that means you can jump in anytime you want. and i always appreciate it. are there, let me go to you 1st year. we didn't get a lot of coverage in western media, but there was a really big meeting between the chinese leader and in re odd with the saudi leader. and if you compare and contrast to what it looked like compared to bite and bite and got a, you know, a bump shake and the red carpet came out for the chinese leader. huge deal to being made. energy deals, infrastructure deals that works here. this is very indicative of how the world is changing. wouldn't you say? absolutely, absolutely. sometimes i worry that the western world is so caught up

in its own worry for lack of a better term. we're noticing what's going on around the world. i know we're better for the last 10 years, not more as been and expanding was i colonial power and it's projecting more and more of the power and world, including in, in the western world. you're in canada, united states and elsewhere. yeah. it's absolutely. thomas, i go, you do you, i mean, the globalization, when it was 1st conceived, it was quite popular and people were quite supportive of it because it will make the world like the west. well, that's not really panning out the way they thought it would. it is a matter of fact, there's a lot of dissolution with it, even in the west. i mean, the us seems to be moving away from it and creating its own block. hence, what i had to say at the end of my introduction, you have a eurasia block, an american block that is subjugated europe. we're seeing it. we're seeing it

falling apart fragments go ahead, thomas. well, let me just backtrack a little. what author just said, i don't see china as a colonial power at all. i see china looking after its national interest, and it has a national interest in having access to energy. it has a national interest in secure c lanes. it has a national interest because it's a massive, massive manufacturing power and being able to trade. and i see that is really what is driving china's global engagement. of course, it also has a national interest in as, as a regional superpower, immediately in the south china sea. and of course, as a major, powerful nation as having a respected position in the global system. and i suppose that that's really the tension between the united states and china, the united states is trying to deny china all of that as regards saudi,

the saudi visit. yes, this is very interesting because saudi arabia has been the linchpin of u. s. power in the middle east, and i think one of the interesting things, i think you can begin to connect some of the dots here. some of the stuff that the u. s. has done over the last 15 years is beginning to backfire now, particularly regarding using its power to bully other countries. and of course, you know, we've seen this in the russia, ukraine conflict, the, the, the way that the u. s. confiscated russia as far as the attempt by the western powers to undercut russian rushes economy. most recently by this oil cap machination saudi arabia reads all these things as well. and it seems that these same tools can be applied against it in india,

that modi is seeing the same. i in latin america, i suspect all the latin american leaders are seeing the same. everyone begins to connect the dots, except the folks in the us who are the imperial masika. you're absolutely right. it's back to just let me go to you. i mean, it's more pernicious than that because if you don't want to play our game, we're going to punish you. we will even punish so called allies. ok. this is very interesting as well. and there's the pushback that we have seen maybe not from allies, but the rest of the world is d dollarization. now, once that happens, then global hegemony comes to an end. jesse go ahead will definitely what we're seeing is the, the waning of u. s. global hegemony, which let's face it really, i took on a new aspect with the collapse of the soviet union and with the collapse of the soviet union that the but the sort of balancing act between the socialist world at no capitalist,

imperialist world kind of collapsed and we had this ramp imperialism which was like, right, we can lose everywhere. we can wage war against everyone who stands against us. every body better get in line or will be invading you and stealing your wealth. and people felt that they had to countries that they had to get in line. they weren't strong enough to stand alone against us bullying. you know, look how difficult it's been for countries like north korea, cuba, iran who've been under sanctions, regimes for decades. you know, without much relief and how hard it was for them, particularly in the period after the collapse of the soviet union. so this kind of expansion of the aggressiveness and, and, and kind of rampant looting of the globe, of the imperialist after the collapse of the soviet union. you know, it lasted a certain amount of time, but it couldn't last, ever, it hasn't lasted forever. and now we're seeing the rise of the independent world. and world countries are finding is the key to their independence is getting

together. the only way you can stand up against the power of the u. s. it's an, it's army is, you know, it's economy. is it, it allies is to stand together and that's the attraction now of the, of blocks like the brakes and the s c o that they're offering the ability to trade in atlanta. but they're taking away this dynamic of serve and, and master. you know, you know, arthur, it's, it's very interesting. we had the german chancellor a couple new cycles ago saying that after the conflict is over and ukraine and russia loses, he's saying this, they will have to re assess trade with russia. but that is such an arrogant point to view. i mean, maybe the russians don't want to deal with you anymore. ok. i mean, again, it's is kind of this imperial mindset is that you want to be with us. you want to be like us and you want to hold our values. but every, with every passing day, every single one of those propositions is false. arthur. well, i think, i think what that points to similar to what has been mentioned by the last 2

speakers here as well, is that there's this universe that has come with power. and i like, for example, with united states and it's, and it's interjection of certain values around the world in the beginning, i believe that actually did start with some, some measure of genuine attempts to do good. you know, how people have democracy, help them have better lives, that sort of thing. but i think that that very quickly, especially post soviet union became a point where power corrupted and power is corrupting. absolutely. and for, for europe and united states, and i guess the western robin general, they underlined themselves at home. they find themselves abroad. and yet somehow, at certain levels, they still see themselves as master of the world. and in canada there's, there's a famous hockey player who made his reputation off of skating,

where the pack was going be rather than where it was or where it is. and if feels like those families are weighing where wiser is rather than where it's going be. that's, that's an interesting way of looking at thomas, you know, i think we need this, this whole mindset about western globalization is reflected in joseph burrell. blogs, you know, where europe is the garden and everywhere else is the jungle. i mean, if that isn't the neo colonial outlook, i don't know what is commerce? no, you, peter, peter, you're absolutely right. there is a and i like the expression that the previous author just use hubris. pride goes before a foreign. i'm not that has sort of what has happened to the u. s. project, which i agree initially. initially there was some good intentions, but the united states has been captured. i mean on both sides about political aisle

by this neil con view that the u. s. has to be globally hedge, a monic, and that is community looking at it. we don't want to be to the definitive about these things who's good, who's bad it on all sides is always a mix. but it violates the most fundamental principle of the global order that made all else possible. and that goes back to the west trillion principle from the 1648 creative westphalia that other countries don't interfere in the rise of others. and for all its screaming about russia and china intervening in the affairs of the united states, the u. s. is the global champion of interference and, and now it's actually pushing it to the point of belligerence and war. and this is the, the root cause of the problem, the u. s. agent insistent on being globally hedge, a monic not allowing space for other countries to develop. they all going to

develop along their own particular pods, both politically and economically. we should be the best thing we can do to encourage these values of democracy and human rights is to help these countries. not yeah, but i mean, i mean, but thomas, you know, in democracy in human rights, if i go to jesse right now, that's just a political cudgel. i don't, they don't believe in it. they don't believe in democracy in their own countries. go ahead and no, i think i think it's more complicated. ok, well, we'll get it in the 2nd half of the program talk to you want to feel that. i mean, i think you're upset, you write pete, to the imperialist words, have always differ greatly from their deeds. they say these, these words to make a veneer. they took about civilization, culture, human rights, democracy. they've been talking like that for 200 years. you know, many countries have suffered, nevertheless, from their domination and control, you know, over the last century, many of them fall back against that, you know, but in recent decades it's been honda because as i said,

the collapse of the ussr shifted the balance of forces in the world, but the fact is that imperialism seeks domination, not democracy, doesn't matter what it says, look at what it does, you know, and we have to, we have to recognize that, let's not forget, that this whole notion of a rules based order was invented when the imperialist decided to launch their aggressive illegal war against yugoslavia. i hold that thought, hold out that we have to go to a hard break. and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on globalization state with ah, a wrong one, i just don't know. i mean, you have to figure out this thing becomes an engagement

equals betrayal. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground. with my mother in my name is in with

a because she knew spencer with berkeley knew that with him is us a list of national leader, which is obviously new to still when john was in the controllers like going to do i don't. but who do a medical with national anthem. com protect a campus that the cop there from wanted

a voice or a 2 i oh, the welcome back to cross sock we're all things are considered. i'm peter labelle term and you were discussing globalization in the okay, it's go back to arthur and in toronto, the lynch, the list, the linchpin of the west vision of globalization is through financial institutions . now that you know, you have been his way, was gold frozen, stolen from it, rushes for and reserves stolen from it? i mean, what kind of rules based order is that, i mean, you know, what about the rule of law?

this is why is josie pointed out on the 1st part of the program. other countries are getting together and saying, we don't need their institutions, we can have our own institutions, we can go around them. ok. and they use the, the west uses it financial institutions as a cudgel. well, if you can get around it, then fine. okay. and then you have not just, you know, trade, but you have free trade where everyone benefits from it. ok, the west is destroying itself and its own institutions. arthur. yeah, there's a, a great book of exit, voice and loyalty that covers a lot of the personal dynamics that go on with this sort of thing. but really, if you can't set a set of rules and then go back on it whenever you want, it's finished that's being faced domestically. and most of the western world as well. where there's an expectation of a certain rule of law and a way of things are non but depending on your politics, depending if it's in favor or not, you get different treatment and robbie, seeing that in a world stage as well, there's, you know, differences don't going the wrong way, they all bets are off. we can change the rules number one, and you have have

a stable rules based system that way. tom, tom, it's basically the same question to you because the, if these institutions work against the national interests of other countries, they have every incentive to walk away from it and they can because new institutions are being created here. and as i started out with the example with saudi arabia, i mean they were in the pocket of the american since 19 thirty's. and to have this happen right now they, they want to have control of their sovereignty. and it's sending a message to other countries in the world as well is that you don't need western institutions. the problem is, is that as josie is pointed out, the west will use its own military institutions if you defy them, go ahead thomas. well that's, that's all true, i can argue with that. i agree with what you've said and what the other speakers have said. the major challenges. so i don't think it's as easy as you make it out. it's one can put in place new currencies or new mechanisms for

exchange, but countries will be looking to have, how do they store value if you want to balance of payments surplus, you need to be able to park that finance somewhere for a while and then have access to, again in future. and so that's going to be a political problem for countries like china, russia, et cetera, how to build confidence in their own systems and, and that's why i was saying how complicated this issue is. the west is overreaching . china and russia. good, have challenges of their own to build competence in their systems. and that's something that i would like to hear more of from russia and china, how they're going to do that be very well actually. i think they are doing it right now. when jesse, when russia was thrown out of the swift system, there was a, a burgeoning one here, one already existing in china. and it is expanding now. it's going to take a long time, but it's already happening. it these making, these things are yes, they're difficult, but if you put time and effort into the resources they will work and there's an

incentive to make them work for sure. go ahead and agreed. there's absolutely incentive to make them low because what people are realizing is, there is no way to co exist on terms of mutual respect with imperialist powers. they will total subordination, or all you know, or it's war and there isn't an in between. so they, what people have learned to understand is there is no rules by a store. that is the law of the jungle. and the law of the jungle is the law of might is right. you know? and so that's why they say people have been making these moves to stand together economically as well as militarily, it's the only chance of retaining independence and self determination. there is no other way to do it. you know, these moves that usa got used to be able to dictate to everyone. it didn't stop to think about the consequences of its actions. it can't really, it's, it is impelled by its, its own, you know, a logic. but those moves towards financial warfare against russia and china over

the last decade. have as you rightly pointed out, peter have forced those countries to slowly and steadily start to reduce their vulnerabilities to u. s. financial control. because they knew if they didn't, they were going to be destroyed. yeah, i mean, arthur, i think future historians all marvel at how the europeans have surrendered their sovereignty. ah, read even rejected their own national interest. i mean, again, you know, you know, what trade with russia will, maybe russia doesn't want to trade with europe anymore. they're unreliable partners . they don't keep their deals. these, the, somebody blew up those pipeline. somebody did, and there is no, but nobody in the west is particularly interested in it. why would russia, china, or any other major power want to deal with people that don't keep their word? they're just simply dishonest. when it comes to exchange arthur? well, this is the massive strategic blunder that the west has has not, it's just, it's a little bit baffling. understand why there's,

there's this time over the last few years where there was an opportunity to bring russia into the fault here. strategically hedge against some of the rising hours from a weapon perspective. instead of that, it's like we enter the new century and new way of doing things so many other ways. but at our strategy from the cold war. and obviously there's complexity you this, but it's, it's baffling me why this is the case for both europe and united states have been a bit thomas, i think it's idea logically driven because neoliberalism doesn't like to compromise . you know, i mean, i kind of grew up. no, i'm okay. you're okay. i'm going to do my thing. you're going to do your thing and will manage it. new liberalism doesn't work that way you must submit. that is the problem here. yes, it's an uncompromising ideology. i do think that western europe is really the key here, is baffling. what has happened to the central positions in,

in western europe? i always think of western europe and russia as being an economic marriage made in heaven. russia has resources and needs capital. russia has some technology, western western europe has capital and technology needs resources. this is the really the basis for a true economic alliance. but that's what, that's what washington didn't. why? yeah, that was just the point i was going to get to that washington has never wanted that to happen. and that's indeed why they, even though they paid lip service to gorbachev division, they were never going to allow go. but job zation to happen. now the, the question is, why has western europe western european politicians failed so comprehensively care? and by the way, in the course of failing, i think they've set western europe up for a tremendous amount of economic and political trouble in the coming decade. my fear

is that the center will collapse in western europe and then you will have a choice between left and the right. i would prefer that we would go in the left direction, but my fear is the wife is going to win out. and that would be a terrible step back now. for russia and china, they don't really care who wins out. they would have liked to have dealt with the sensible center, but once the sensible center sheets on them and turns against them aggressively, then they'll deal with whoever they have to. so i think western europe is going to be the most interesting point of political and economic conflict in the coming decade. josie, isn't it interesting, you know where the west says it, projects, prosperity and security and itself now is the, the, the poor region of the world. ok. it's going in the wrong direction. while most of the other parts of the world, they're going advancing working together, as you pointed out. the thing is, the rest of the world working together is precisely what's undermining europe's

western europe. the imperialist, europe's ability to have their stability and prosperity right. one rested on the other, you know, why was europe complicit with the usa for so long? because it's so it's best interest as being a junior partner in this hegemonic rule of the world, than in, you know, trying to, to trade separately as it was, wasn't strong enough after world war 2 to the european powers, to be, to be a power on their own, you know, the idea of them making a partnership with russia did always, always make the usa nervous. because that's the potential ability then for power to be strong enough to question. yeah. and threaten dominance of the usa. but the problem for the western europeans is they want to rush that was subservient not to partner. that, that's, that, that's how imperialism works. they wanted rushes resources. they wanted its military power, its technological base, its agriculture. but they wanted to just take it, they didn't want to get to join and share the spoils, share the lute. there's too many russians to, should, you know, to,

to cheryl the outwards of fundamentally, i think, you know, that's where they've been, they've been sort of led by the usa, by the nose, you know, into the situation. but it's all actually driven by the fact that the capitalist economy and the world is in crisis. this is desperate drive to, to sure up again, money to find profits at the expense of other people. and europe right now is suffering a boomerang effect from the humorist, with which it went into the economic war against russia. they thought they would bring russia to its knees in a few weeks. they failed and, and arthur, as a result, the sang, the sanctions that have come out of western capital in the, at the end of sanctioned their own people. okay. i live here in moscow. we don't feel the sanctions, the way western medium claims. it's not true. it's simply not true difficulties. yes, but that's too difficult. these great challenges and new solutions and i, and that's what i want. i want, i want russia to be cut off from the west con boy lee. okay. because that's where

the problems of the world are. arthur, bears, ace. you also address what was, what was said about imperialism there. i think more point, the problem for the west right now is behind this slice sank west ideological possession in all or institutions. anyone speaks our stance against that possession is cold, yet meaning that we have a very monolithic way of looking at things. and it's not a very good one. when it's prosperity came very much from the ability to open up markets to have certain amounts of freedom to stick with a certain wall of law as we discussed earlier. and in the vein of this idea ology. now we are just point all of that. we produce some sort of utopia. now every time i've seen that sort of utopian vision or read about that sort of utopian vision of the past, it's never ended well. and we can see all ready for the west. it's going badly,

very bad. well, i mean, arthur, isn't, it really isn't really curious. it's the west, it's the most the idea, logical part of the world. the rest of the world is figured out that pragmatism is the best way forward, but not the west and, and that's why their whole ideology is short circuiting against them and makes them very dangerous for the rest of us. i'm sorry everybody. that's all the time we have . i want to thank my guests and watched in ritual and in toronto, and i want to thank our viewers for watching us here. are to see you next time. remember prosper. ah ah i

choose ah only 41 percent of you has a down tab and i'm savings to cover a $1000.00 emergency. we have record numbers of americans who are on the verge of having their cars repossess more than a 137000000 americans are facing financial hardship because of medical that in america we do have a well 1st system in place to help people who are struggling financially, but it's a conditional system you have to prove to the government that you truly need help. the simplest way, like explain a basic income, is that it's like a social security for the rest of us. a basic income would be a monthly payments that would go to everyone, does a $1000.00 a month,

no strings attached. i mean, i don't know, i just won't go crazy. the reason that i am a fan of guaranteed income because it is this idea that everybody is deserve it. and just by virtue of your being here ah, the provide the much needed warm under the hint at come foot amid the very difficult conditions here. all the follows russian troops as they bustle, ukrainian, artillery, and freezing weather conditions on the front lines. the u. s. organization protecting journalist world wide refuses to support russian media and a u. s. senate of backtracks on his own resolution funding american support for saudi led military operations in yemen. prob.