ah ah ah ah

ah ah hello and welcome to well, the part of the economist stupid has been the axle of american and western political thinking even before it helped bill clinton wins in 1992 presidential election. the pursuit of money and profits above everything else has guided the u. s. s. development and global expansion. since the nation's creation with the dollar system. now reaching is objective limits what may possibly come in its place. well,

to discuss that i'm now joined by alan freeman, co director of the geopolitical economy, research group at the university of manitoba. mr. freeman as great pleasure to talk to you. thank you very much for your time. my pleasure. now i was initially intending to discuss with you the warrant in ukraine, and i still hope we can touch upon it in the 2nd part. but before we go there, let us know, look at the recent banking collapses in the united states. and i wonder if you see any connection between these seemingly isolated and domestic events with the larger u. s. policy, both monetary and foreign policy. there is a connection, but it may go in the opposite direction to your view as my think, which is i don't think the banking collapse is cause fire ukraine war ukraine. war is caused by the bank. he collapse. and the reason is that the collapse like this

because every 10 years it's, it's just last time of 2008 in 2000 dot com 90. 92 is the so called oil crisis. it is a feature of the way that this economic system works. and the curious thing is, every time it happens, people think there's a new reason for it. so there's always, oh, this is caused by toxic house is this was goes, well, no it's, it's the system dummy. as bill clinton might probably would not offset. and the system is one in which the n assets that should be invested in production are increasingly being diverted into speculation and finance. the reason for this is the systemic weakness of the economy. if you look at the long term performance of the u. s. economy and those of the global japan and europe it's, it's no different. you'll find that there has been a systematic study,

what we call a secular decline. really, since 960 s economy received a huge boost from the war from the 2nd world war. and it's gone down ever since it's now got to the point where it is no longer profitable to invest in production . so people invest in these risky financial assets. and each time in the cycle, the us, it's over valued. and then there is a crash and a credit ukraine, or is it a response to that weakness? now the connection that i see and let me know if i'm wrong here has to do with the united states. once again, i exceeding its death sailing of over $31.00 trillion dollars. but instead of closing the government as required by the law and the federal reserve for the treasury, and now engaging in various what they call extraordinary operations that allowed the government a certain life land but dry on the liquidity on the market,

which may have contributed to the collapse of sand banks and serve as difficulties at other banks. the fact that the american government has to use all these extraordinary measures instead of just printing out money as they've done before. isn't it a sign of the dollar economy? exhausting itself is very simple. if you can, ford dead, somebody has to buy it. and the solution way, the u. s. has worked well is confronted to crisis. since 1927, 1997 was very typically ation meltdown. you false foreign people to buy your stuff . that's what you do. because america is in this unique position, that is, currency is a world currency. what we're now beginning to see is a systemic crisis caused by the difficulty of maintaining a domestic currency, which is also world carts. now there are 2 things happening. first of all, increasingly american days being financed by americans because russia and china and

all the people who are forced to pan even who are forced to accept american debt, are no longer accepting or reducing their exposure of the 2nd thing that's happening is that the, the situation when you have a, an asset. when assets are overvalued, you have a terrible choice. you either have to increase the federal interest rate in downtown inflation. and you then basically encourage people to speculate in financial assets, or you have to reduce the interest rate in order to downtown, the speculation, but then inflation will go. so it's more of a die. lemme than a knockdown crisis. i think there's a famous saying that used to be said to marxists that they, they predicted 5 of the last 4 crises. the, you know, we're always sort of those of us who are bit jobs in florida with the american difficulties tend to say, it's all terrible really. this is dire. lemme now what i think is now happening is

that the fed is going to decrease interest rates and that will allow them to dump down speculation. and to some extent, i think it's, it's yet to be seen where the extent of this ridge. i don't think we're looking at a lot down crisis. the difficulty will be that there will be inflation. and that will promote folks domestic descent because it will affect poor people. and poor people in america have for a long time, increasingly being the target along with the global south under ushered china of american i. so i think that the, the, the fact that we can we serve moles isn't it, will increase domestic discontent within the united states. of america. now i heard you saying that the western elite views on economics have become a sort of and religious system in a sense that everything starts and ends with money and accumulation of profits. but any sustainable religious system requires a some humbling rituals and

a certain amount of self discipline, specifically aimed to kim, the practitioners ego in place. isn't that the main problem with the western driven academy sort of economic center worldview, that is simply incapable of limiting its appetites, even that for its own sake, i think they're very disciplined. they discipline people to do stupid things, and people carry out those stupid things in a very disciplined way. and they also are particularly disciplined perpetuating their teachings. so i'd interesting out of the 2000 and a crash on greenspan. i think it was, came on, testified to congress. this is challenged, actually everything. i know everything we thought was wrong. 3 years later he produces a book in which he says, no, it was all right, we just start to tweak and think that to me is this jesse with, if you want religious analogy, which circuit is a few problem, but we can pass them out with sophisticated reasoning, and thus while they do,

they don't acknowledge the fundamental things that are on the economy, which is this long term decline, its tendency to decline, processor financials, asian imperialism. the, in the unsustainable lity of the imperial wold, older that they, they don't recognize is wrong only tweak tweet the edges now and, but in department of the years, congress analysed recently that by 2032 within a decade the american casa servicing its dad will talk to you as defense, expenses which are humongous. i think there are more than 10 other countries you know, combine. what do you think it would mean in practical terms, both for the united states or what a larger west and for the world? well, i'm not a netflix. i don't want to be rude but almost suits i, i'm very, i used to work some practicing economists to live toby. only one thing is in the words of the famous, erased baseball player. never predict anything,

especially the future. so it's very dangerous to say, oh, this is immediately going to lead to a meltdown. i think, or the task of what radical political economy will do is to analyze the social and political consequences rather than try and call every immediate major economic happenstance. what will certainly happen is that the burden of is full full on everybody that the american elites don't want to make pay for it. they're making the germans pipe. that's why they blew up no, with stream they're making the europeans pay. that's why they're forcing them to actually send weapons to ukraine. they're not sending their own on the whole. and so they're finding that increasingly difficult, but they will now try and be forced to take out some of these difficulties on the american people. i mean, the end of the day is to say the debt burden is increasingly falling on the shoulders of americans. less and less other countries excepting that they will hold

american to pay for. therefore, more and more. and this is, i think what the leaks in america are really frightened. they will have to confront the anger of their own people. so, so that, that's the consequence that i would draw from, from the, rather than i have no, i don't a bank, right? i mean, i have no idea what the debt burden will. pete. some people have extraordinary debt . japan has an extraordinary debt versus the percentage of g d, p l. any company just plugs along. so i would be hesitant to say, like maybe you know that this is the ultimate, not down crisis. i don't look at things in that. well, when i'm asking in this question, i'm not looking for or you know, the collapse of the years. dollar system add response. i think the, the most typical answer i heard from russian economist is that the american currency will transition from being the world, the world main reserve currency to being a regional currency. and you know, one of many, but still a stronger once

a stronger was supported by the strength of the american industry by the western industry. now, do you think that's a sustainable ass scenario for the western world? because as you pointed out in many of your articles, the western economic dominance has been based over the last couple of centuries on centrally sucking resources from the rest of the world and redistributing it among its own allies. can the western count, the western part of the world sustain itself only by all means without the exploiting the rest of the world and in such matters and measure as it's been accustomed to. i think that's a really interesting question. and i, i agree with the analysis that you quoted, that what we're seeing is the end, the beginning of the and, and it's a long drawn out process of the capacity is the us dollars to function is the world's currency. but when you have something that is being dropped,

something has to replace it. so the issue is not just whether the us cannot function is the world's currency, but what is put in its place. now what you're beginning to see is arrangements whereby either through the currency swaps, for example, the relation between russian, the india, they trade in roubles and rupees. they don't have a joint currency or anything like that. but in other places, this proposals a foot to create a bricks, currency, i believe, certainly in latin america now, i think mexico, maybe it was really correct me if i'm wrong, but the idea is certainly being voted of a latin american free trade zone and currency. so, but to put these and trying are, is obviously developing swap arrangement with other countries. but what would be dangerous for, let's say china would be for its currency to become a world currency like than it would be in the same mess. the america has got into

so i think one should see it move towards a system of regional currencies without any single hedge. a mom, if you do that, then you have to make defined kind of arrangements. the keynes proposed bretton woods and he was defeated by the americans for a profit system of international settlements in which the priority is to secure the growth of the poorest countries, rather than to make poorest countries for what the rich countries are doing. and that's the way out, this is a long process. it combines economic, political, and geographical activities, the formation of regional blocks, the creation of workable trading arrangements. avoiding the over exposure of currencies to the kind of dangers that the u. s. is being exposed to. and so on, ultimately, therefore, is as much about the way that imperialism is declining, as it is about the specific reference the termite. and now the 3rd world countries, china, russia, india,

has to work together actually to create an alternative to the trade to the u. s. dominant, dominate trading, sold and i think they already did that. and the american sanctions are helping that a great deal. but let me reiterate that question. once again, do you think the west itself can lead to leave and such an arrangement when everybody is treated more fairly and then you know, when trade can be done in a way that is mutually beneficial rather than politically condition? well, of course, we must all wish for that i've so until now the prospects have not been particularly bright. and this is a puzzle. one of the things that exercises me because the me, the issue in understanding what's going on in the west is in a certain sense, or not understanding how stupidly they're behaving. because that's where you'll be, as you only have to look at 3 graphs, tell you what that what they're doing wrong. the real problem is why don't i

understand it? and i, i, i, i have this little quote that i love from bastere, where he, he says, i'm not great fan at nasty. i'm because we had reaction, read the french revolution. his, when plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society. over the course of time they create themselves a legal system that authorizes an a moral code that glorifies it. now that's what they've done, they've created and i think is a mythological system in which they don't understand that their wealth rests on robbing the rest of the world. they literally don't understand it because it's not a pleasant thing to admit that you're a bandage. all right, so what they do is they create a mythology in which they say, the reason we're wealthy is because with superior, as long as you think your superior, you're not going to get your problems right. it's a superiority complex until you understand why you don't understand. it's almost like friday and, you know, the patient has to confront her,

his own neurosis before he or she can put it right. and they're not, they're not doing mr. freeman, i have to confront our own fascination of with, with this conversation in order to take a short break. but we will be back in just a few moments that you, ah me the chinese president to russia is historic for a number of reasons. first to accent, the growing russia, china strategic partnership, and 2nd, to demonstrate what both countries publicly advocate the transition to a multi poll the world beyond american hegemony. ah, with

ah, ah. hi, welcome back to well, the part with ella freeman,

who director of the geopolitical economy, research group at the university of manitoba. now with a freeman. let's now turn our attention to the war in the ukraine, and in one of your recent articles you posed a question that i think doesn't have the right to exist in the western universe. you ask if nato one in ukraine, and if the russian army was driven back to the border, would there will be a better or worse place. and i'm sure it looks like a no brainer to most of your countrymen. why? even asking a thing like about isn't that anathema to a western ear? i asked a question because of the defect in the western so called left. even the fall, last, even the people you'd expect would be very revolutionary and against nato, because they have fallen prey to, i think, an illusory way of thinking,

which is they think that russia is an interior, this power. i think the china isn't period is power. that's the day when the united states is not still right. i mean, what they get wrong is very simple. imperialism is not what a single country does imperialism system. and, and, and president putin put it there way i would agree with. i don't always agree with peter and i agree with him on this that he says that essentially the colonial attitudes to shape the world. the colonial methods have been in place since 1492 and they're just being continued so they don't understand that. so what i was trying to say is, will look, you say you're against russia, okay. i'm not going to stop you being against russian. probably not going to stop. you do anything because it's very stop it. very difficult to stop stupid people being stupid. but i said, well, think what will happen if nato wins? do you think this will be a good outcome? and the answer is no. and the reason is because the motivation of, of the nato pass is fundamentally racist. now racism least a genocide,

1st truthful would they believe that they are superior. if you think that you are superior and that's why you are rich, why's everybody else tour? you shut out of your mind, the idea that they are poor because you are making them, by robbing them by getting to buy your food stamps and all the rest of it. and you think no, it must be because they are inferior people. what do you do with inferior people get really good of the stuff, the attitude of the americans to black people thus ever can attitude to russian, people on trade to chinese people. and so this is clear and ukraine because of the course of the war, which is this is a civil absolutely clear. you have a country in which 43 percent of the pay people, their native language is not ukrainian. and you tell them they've got to talk ukrainian or, or break the law. they can't, they can't do, of course. and it's not just about the telling them to learn the language of a nation. it's actually specifically making russian this new city or rational

cultural heritage. and, you know, being seen as incompatible with the ukrainian civic identity. it's not something that you should be ashamed of. it's something that you can be killed because of and i heard you say, suggest that it's i came to the united states banning spanish or canada, banning french, and indeed seems inconceivable in the western context. and yet, when it comes to the rational language, not only in ukraine, but let's say in the baltic states, why do you think that practice of you know, explicitly deliberately suppressing the russian language, the russian culture and the russian mentality. why do you think it's been an acceptable to the west? i think the and in, in 2014, i visited crimea. and we met with people who had just been in the odessa massacre, you know, and they were put into a traded german intro, trading and building, which was in center and alive. yeah. and alive. what struck me was, i mean,

cushions, it's horrible thing, but accidents can happen. but at the right wing, ukrainian groups then posted pictures of the child bodies on the social media networks. and i spoke to the people there and it was absolutely clear that what was in process was the general final process was a violent assault on people at the ukrainian, fascist, very far. right. i know there is a left in ukraine, it's deeply suppressed, but there is less than it. and, you know, i think that the opposition party admitted chic was, was 2nd in the pulse before he was suppressed them later. prisoner. right. ok. so, um, they think that the russian people don't belong there. when zalinski says he wants to take back crimea. he doesn't mean he wants to cry me and people you can't take over a place in which 90 percent of the population hates you. and is of the different civilization and culture because they kind of fight, right? so what do you do? kill him. it's intrinsically genocidal. this attitude that the only way that you can live in the territory which you crying claims for itself is to be

a ukrainian leads to the conclusion that the people are not ukrainian should be eliminated. so is a deadly racist and it's entrenched in it. the question of why america supports it, i think in 2014, when victorian newland was caught by the finish. and it was the finish intelligence authorities telephoning and saying to ukraine exactly who they could have in their government. right. in other words, it's, this was a gum construct. one can debate whether it was a co or not, okay. but what is indisputable is that that government was appointed by the united states of america know by the people of ukraine. and i think that was the decision of the neo kong wing her politics that it was not possible to pursue american ends by so called democratic liberal means they would need to make alliances with fascists. to do so, and i think there is now a very conscious awareness among certain sections that the american elites,

not all of them know, that they actually have to be in alliance with explicitly racist genocidal and fresh forces. if america is to prevail in the world which know that, that's their insane view. now are on that specific point, according to the russian view, or what the kremlin essentially did with the launch of the military operation in ukraine is to bring that proxy war that the west has been waging against russia for at least the past 15 years into the open and that was made not only for strategic, but for tactical reasons because lead in, put in supposedly calculated that it clash with native was inevitable that a, waiting for a longer or trying to solve it diplomatically would not avert the confrontation. i wonder if that was your view as well. prior to the launch of the russian offensive . did you think before that,

that russia and the west inevitably would confront each other in some way or another? it kinetically. i don't like to get engaged in conversations about internal politics of other countries. so i don't like to speculate too much about what my motivated putin. i will so this i think that both sides were probably aware the from 2014 onwards, but good. a confrontation was enough of some kind, and there was a gearing up. i think that what seems to have been the belief in russia was that there was a peaceful way out. and they thought that there was a peaceful way out because they thought european civilization would accept them. and i think this was a profound error because the european civilization is not civilization. it's an empire. and they would never have allowed russia, and they could never have allowed russian to become an influential part as a sphere of european politics. and i thought what was very interesting about the

speech that letting it putting gave at the val di club was that he specifically spoke what is europe? and, and he spoke of the 2 europe's, and i think the vision of your, of the house is the correct vision, which is that there is a eurasia on within that europe could play it's part. so at fun, some future time. i think that it should be a general come coming together of the ration nations, let's say, in a polity which might include europe. but the idea that this could be achieved, and i have been a long time in turkey, turkey for many years thought that they would be accepted as the european union. there was no why the european union could accept a country that has a bigger army than anybody else in europe, or they couldn't have accepted it. so this illusion that european civilization will let you in was a danger. and i think that was the problem. europe is a fortress, that's what it in dr. freeman. and when you talk about european civilization that

way, when i think about this term, it includes spirituality, it includes culture, it includes very diverse history, that with certain diplomatic tradition, like for example, the european con, sorry, that it's, it's a massive heritage that both russia and turkey have benefited from and some could argue that they had actually the 2 preservers of that heritage. and i think putting in, he's about a speech on the line that despite this current conflict with the western financial and political and military leads, russia remains a truly european culture or country by persuasion. and i like some european nations, we're not going to bad european coltrane. i see a lot of investments now going into the ancient greek art into our various european cultural tradition. so hopefully this war, this existential crisis that we are facing right now will allow,

at least some of us to preserve certain amount of european heritage. anyway, we have to leave it there, but it's been a great delight for me to talk to you meals. thank you. so much and thank you for watching hope to see you again on the world apart. ah, with ah, the chinese president's visit to russia is historic for a number of reasons. first to accent, the growing russia, china strategic partnership. and 2nd, to demonstrate what both countries publicly advocated the transition to

a multi hold a world beyond american hegemony. ah, ah, a relationship is built on contributing to the progress of mankind. we firmly stand on the right side of history. unbreakable bod, chinese president shooting, paint. the medicaid countries ties with russia as both they say, they hope to pay the way to a multi polar world, a violation of humanitarian law. that's how moscow condemns news that the u. k. plans to supply ukraine with depleted uranium. the mission. something is here before with devastating consequences for civilian.