intellectual out of her.and all of these influences taken together really sit around the scores to understand totalitarianism, of course across the background of americanism. she would say things that nobody else could get away with, like i've always been passionately in love with my country. that was not just vulgar sort of boosterism of america. this is a real intellectual and emotional commitment. >> maybe we can talk about them when they met professor curt patrick and then, you know, her introduction but democratic politics to hubert humphrey and that wing of the democratic party was she began to get involved with as a graduate student. >> after she got her masters degree would then roughly 1950. her father's patience as supporting her kind of family entrÉe in finally ran out when she shows political science has her discipline because, you know, the word science promise of them at least. and seem to be coming you know, a real discipline. so she had to fend for herself and get a job. she went down to washi

reay inia ro esri intellectual series that made a continental intellectual out of her.ll of these influences taken together reallset her on this cose tdtay k totatarianism and of and of course always against the background of americanism. she would say things, jeane would say things that no one else would get away with like i'm passionately in love with thas agaorf terism of america. this was a real intellectual and emotional commment. >> host: maybe we can talk then about when she met herroio ukeirkpatrick and h cr plics,o hubert humphrey and that wing of the democratic party that you alluded to at the beginning which he began to get involved with a guest as -- i guess as a graduate student. >> guest: after she got her masters deritlde en roughly 1950, her father's patience and supporting her kind of finally ran out. hehad been reassud when she chose political science as her discipline a discipline because youn,a i pse that least. and it seemed to be real and a real discipline. so she had to get a job. she nt dn shonan a e d pursue her ph.d. with nyman on the side. she

in a course called the conservative intellectual tradition in america. taught by professor mallory factor. this is just over an hour and a half. [ applause ] >> thank you very much. let me begin by thanking mallory and, indeed, the citadel for this opportunity to talk to you about my old friend and mentor, bill buckley. you should know that the opportunity to attend a course like this is almost unique in american higher education. i'd like to just begin by reading a reference to this sort of thing from the chronicle review, the chronicle of higher education written not too many years ago by a columbia professor. he says the unfortunate fact is that american academics have until very recently shown little curiosity about conservative ideas. even though those ideas have utterly transformed american and british politics over the last 30 years. a look at the online catalogs of our major universities confirms this. plenty, of course, is on identity politics, post colonialism, nary a one on conservative political thought. professors are expected to understand

she was full-fledged public intellectual. she started writing formen commentary, and she, as you well know, always kept one foot in the academy and loved being a teacher, thought of herself as a teacher above all things, but she began edging into this public realm, the public realm of dialogue about what democracy was like, whether it was -- whether the american democratic example was not only viable but morally worthy, all these questions she kept framing through his hostile takeover of the democratic party, she saw it, by radical elements. she helped form a organization of these dissident centrists who felt they were people without a home now, the coalition for democratic majority, and tried to work for the centrist values in the period between 1972 and the ascension of jimmy carter in 1976, and a lot of those centrist democrats, like moynihan, supported carter, and thought he would be able to right the ship of the democratic party and believed he was a centrist. and jeanne was privately very skeptical about that but willin

intellectually powerful people in terms of their intellectual help. and then you had to bring the political process into this. there was a lot of debate. i don't think there was an easy day in this process from the day it began to the day it ended. >> from the start of the letter, this comes after the white house has issued its transcripts. and interviewed senator -- former senator cowen who wanted to participate -- >> braugt to tought to the chai office. >> this was a really hard event for him. he felt sort of left in the cold here. do you remember? it must have been -- he was here only, at that point, the only republican ally on this particular issue. >> correct. right. and he had been courted by -- courted is the wrong word. but he certainly had access to the congressman. there had been conversations. and, of course, the congressman, again, he thought he'd be important -- even though he was a young member. he thought that mr. cowen could be helped. but the draft of the letters weren't the same? >> no, it wasn't. >> you're smiling. >> it's called po

so it is not a simple issue and again, a lot of the smartest intellectual property experts in the world work on this problem for six years and added in a lot of really strong protections in the program so it is certainly much stronger with respect intellectual property rights than any previous top-level domain round. >> are you -- i apologize for interrupting. are you satisfied with ip protections around the world right now? >> you know, that's a big question to bigot am i satisfied. i think there's a number of challenges. let's take the trademark as an example. the trademark system is designed by countries typically buy nation states and then it has different categories. untypically more than 40 categories and 100 countries that have the systems, so there's 4,000 different parties that can have the right to exactly the same trademark said the trade market structured by geography and industry categories. the domain system is unique. there is only one brand name of tom for example what it means is there's a fundamental mismatch so the factor system is trying to map to a system that his i

i think intellectual property rights is different around the world because of actions that parties can take, and i think a we've seen in the icann community is a lot of work to improve those programs, and there is an intellectual property constituency, for example, in icann that has prominent attorneys. but am i personally happy with the overall global system? for one thing, i note that fundamental die notny in -- dichotomy in the infrastructure, and i know the difficulty of enforcement because of how open and unified the internet is. so i think we've got some interesting policy challenges. >> host: and what about privacy protection? >> guest: privacy protection? the internet brings radical transparency to almost everything it touches. privacy becomes a construct. it's an artificial construct, very important one, created by laws and institutions and enforcement. and so i think privacy is important because we all value it in our lives, and i think it's challenged by the internet, and i think it's why it's really important that there's outspoken, articulate groups out there that -- and c

the president and i discussed how the radcliffe institute could make an intellectual contribution to this historic occasion. and just as important to the two of us, both u.s. historians, how the history of women at harvard might be well represented in the course of the anniversary year. because drew was very committed to having this lecture today and worked with me to plan it, she wanted to join us here to welcome helen and to welcome all of you. so i'm very pleased to invite up here now someone who in this crowd needs no introduction. our own harvard president drew faust. [ applause ] >> thank you. i'm just delighted to be here, and i'm delighted to see so many of you gathered and so many familiar faces in the audience. as liz has said, it seemed extremely important to recognize in a very substantial way the place of women in the history of harvard in this, it's first 375 years. and those of you 450 know laurel orricks' work know how vividly she emphasized a decade or more ago that although harvard had not officially had women as part of its student body for many of its centuries, i

so it's certainly much stronger with respect to intellectual property rights than any previous generic top level domain round in i can's history. >> are you -- host: i apologize for interrupting, but are you satisfied with i.p. protections around the world right now? guest: oh, gee. you know, that's a big question. you know, am i satisfied. i think that there's a number of challenges. so let's take the trademark system as an example. the trademark system is designed by country, typically, by nation states, and then it has different categories. typically there's more than 40 categories in more than 100 countries that have these systems. so there's 4000 different parties that can have the right to exactly the same trademark, okay, so the trademark is fractured by geography and industry category. the domain name system is unique. there's only one, you know, brand name dot com, for example. and so what it means is there's a fundamental mismatch there. so the fractured system is trying to map to a system that has integrity and is internationally unique so you're always going to have tension

but then there are, i feel there's also this group of followers that kind of without any intellectual rigor kind of hear these buzz words, you know, constitutionalism and small government and just kind of follow along. and i think it's those are the people that are making, that are problematic with today's political, you know, the lack of intellectual rigor in today's political arena. i think they really don't know the issues, they don't know the specifics, and they're quite following along and sarah palin's an example of that, that people blindly follow these buzz-word policies and don't really know the specifics. and i think that's really bringing our political system down to a unfortunate level. >> guest: yeah. i mean, obviously, i would disagree with that. i don't know how many tea party events you've been to, but the general format of the tea party events -- and i've been to lots -- is that they are basically sort of book clubs. they read the federalist papers, they read the anti-federalist papers, they read volumes of letters by the founders and more modern books such as mine, u

that's not an uncommon exrience for m sot't serck ithe bck intellectuals, and the black intellectuals are no more typical of the black population than the whites are of the white population. but they have a vested interest in certain biefs which is cnrothorroamsha thhe elites ben fete from preferential policies, but the masses do not benefit. the case of the civil rights act, the masses are going to lose big if that l gont t te m bs will be applying, because those will not be jobs as rocket scientists or doctors or any of those things. therefore, they'll want to hold down -- theceesn hiksicl h less. so you're sacrificing the working class blacks for the benefit of the professional elite. >> how do the intellectual elite, white and black,et to unthouise ?n tyonhi their thought process that gets them there, emotion or fact? >> emotion largely, but also a large amount of self-interest, increasingly self-interest. if you wt back into the 19, ou feo kin luther king and malcolm x, and both believed in what they said. but today you have professional hustlers. this is not puliaro blacks racls

they're saying that's intellectually inconsistent. you can believe in limited government or you can believe in this sort of aught authoritarian idea, but you can't do both. i think that's a much more important kind of intellectual disagreement that we want to resolve rather than the sort of things that the left might want to foist upon us. a lot of people -- i talked to some people this weekend that have expressed something like this idea. so let's just talk for a few minutes about what i would call the tough cases. so for the person that sees himself as a fiscal conservative or libertarian, the tough cases are fairly obvious. they're life, marriage, and religious freedom. so let's just take life. i won't spend -- i can't cover all of these. but let's see if we can show that even given what libertarians believe, they ought to be pro-life. in fact, i would go farther. i would say if libertarians believe what they claim to believe about individual dignity and rights, and that a state must recognize that, you can get from that to a defen

and there are intellectual tensions, unfortunately. and the one tension i want to talk about this morning -- really two is this tension that we heard about already. is there really a fundamental contradiction between the things that most libertarians believe and then things that social conservatives believe, and is there a conflict, as many young christians now believe. i spent a lot of time on college campuses. a lot of the 18 to 21-year-old christians in the united states are convinced that capitalism and free enterprise is fundamentally incompatible with being a christian. that is they think our economic system is fundamentally immoral and contradicts with the christian world view. those are i think the two most potent and dangerous conflicts i think we have to deal with if we're really going to have in the conservative movement not nearly a marriage of convenience or a marriage of inconvenience, but intellectual program that we can stand firm on and that we can come together on in the public square to transform the public square. i

several years between canada and the european union i recently obtained a leaked document of the intellectual property chapter and while it dates from february of this year so it's several months old i was stunned to find that as you went provision by provision it was literally taking x. in a near word for word manner and inserting it into the sea to agreement. it seems to me they're also trying to get the courts involved here on asking the european court of justice to rule on act in hopes that the european parliament will then perhaps reconsider the issue well certainly that's what they're doing so well the parliament has rejected this and that of course is you know in a sense the democratic vehicle representing the views of so many europe the european commission which negotiates these trade deals where the canadian trade deal that they're negotiating now or the any counterfeiting trade agreement clearly isn't giving up in fact there commissioner gusts. fought for this literally so the very end of the day that the parliamentarians were going to vote he made one final plea to support it so th

saying that's actually intellectual inconsistent. you can believe in limited government or you can believe in this kind of awe her to taryn idea where y the government forces the government but you can't do both. that's a much more important intellectual disagreement to resolve rath every than the things the left want to hoist on us. i've talked to people this weekend that expressed something like this idea. so let's just talk for a few minutes of what i would call the tough cases. for the person that sees himself as a fiscal conservative oral a libertarian, it's life, marriage and religious freedom. so let's just take life. i can't cover all of these but let's see if we can show that even given what libertarians believe they ought to be pro-life. in fact, i would go further. i would say if libertarians believe what they claim to believe about individual states and rights, a recognize that, you can get to a defense of traditional marriage recommendseddy the states. let's just take life this morning. so here's the question. if you thi

online piracy act and it even sounds like the failed bill but this is not so far it's the only intellectual property quietly unveiled over the weekend so who is behind this and why is it being resurrected why some answers. plus the occupy gets raided activists in seattle are given a rude awakening after swat teams raid their home in the middle of the night is this an intimidation tactic or par for the course in dealing with the occupy movement will get to the bottom of it with a man who was there when it all went down. and it's a short fall from comedy to political incorrectness funny man daniel tosh is in hot water this week for a joke he made about raping women but where exactly does the line fall between what's inappropriate and what constitutes free speech last comedian dog stand. good evening it's wednesday july eleventh seven pm in washington d.c. i'm christine you're watching r.t. let's begin this hour by taking a closer look at our internet freedoms in the u.s. and around the world we all remember a few months ago when some members of congress tried to pass the stop online piracy ac

online piracy act and it even sounds like the failed bill but this is not so but it's the all new intellectual property attache act quietly unveiled over the weekend so who is behind this and why is it being resurrected and have some answers. plus singer songwriter don mclean said of bass the day the music died but you'll never guess how never ending legal disputes are killing off innovation technological advances including music the aids heavy we'll talk to the professor who laid out this theory in a case study next the point. that we give to everything in the budget everything in the defense budget is classified the pentagon works hard to defend american values and even harder to spend taxpayer money the problem we don't have a clue exactly what they're buying coming up why this may be a violation of your constitutional right. it's wednesday journal july eleventh four pm in washington d.c. i'm christine frizz out here watching our t.v. . let's begin this hour by taking a closer look at our internet freedoms in the u.s. and around the world and we all remember a few months ago when some membe

like the stop online piracy act that even sounds like it but this is not so but it's the only intellectually property. quietly unveiled over the weekend so who is behind this and why is it being resurrected we'll have some answers. plus singer songwriter don mclean said it best the day the music died but you'll never guess how never ending legal disputes are killing off beat of innovation technological advances and music creativity we'll talk to the professor who laid out this theory in a case study coming up next. it's wednesday july eleventh five pm in washington d.c. i'm christine you're watching our team. well last week lawmakers in congress took an important vote to prevent the doubling of the student loan interest rates for one year but in doing so and they also voted on some other things they voted to reduce other educational programs and also remove the grace period so despite this being one of the worst times for recent college graduates to get a job you're going to have to start paying off those loans immediately so what will the future hold for quite a few people are predicting th

barone is a guest lecturer in charleston, south carolina, and of course, called the conservative intellectual tradition in america taught by professor mallory factor. >> thank you very much. it's an honor to be here and a special honor to be asked to speak to speak on alexis de tocqueville. in reading tocqueville in preparation for this lecture. i began to think that he was something like mozart, that i was in the presence that was so bar above the level of almost anyone else in history, that there was almost no comparison with anybody else. you can listen to the music of mozart and it sounds pleasant and melodic and so forth, but if you really think about it, if you really analyzed it, you

wre them as i would approach any other subject intellectually. >> does it make you had when you

. >> it's an intellectual exercise, it would never have, you would need constitutional amendments to make it so. one thing, would like, health care become a right-- >> mr. trumka. >> and we're a natn where only a gun is a right and health care a privilege. >> owning a gun is protected by the second amendment. what about adding on to the bill of rights, like the right to full employment. the right to health care? >> you know, i have to agree with steve on that one. france is a wonderful experiment when you guarantee rights, the outcome you see high unemployment. don't see real job growth. you don't see entrepreneurialism and that's what makes america unique and we should be doing things to guarantee that instead of things to protect jobs even though it doesn't protect anything except lawyers who will enjoy lawsuits out of this. >> david: that's a good point. morgan, when i first heard about it, one thing i can't understand, you can guarantee the right to practice your religion. how can you guarantee the right of a job to somebody who's a lousy worker? we all know lousy workers that ar

certainly had the intellectual skills but he thought he wasn't the person. another issue that was very important to the congressman as is all politicians is loyalty. he never said this directly. i don't think he felt that jerry was going to be loyal to him in the sense that jerry had served other members of congress, other members of the judiciary committee before he became chairman, and i think he felt that, again, a very strong issue with congressman rodino because he just didn't feel he would have his complete loyalty in this most difficult endeavor. so i think if you put those two together, as a generalization, that's why he said, i think we need to form a new group, and first we must start with a -- with someone who will lead them. and that's -- that's how we got there. >> okay. now -- now the tough part. how do you, a non-lawyer, not from the that world, start to collect candidates? >> sometimes you never want to know how history is done. i remember i went back to my office. it was right next -- in the rayburn building right next to the congressman's o

the citadel military college in charleston, south carolina in a course called "the conservative intellectual tradition in america" taught by professor mally factor. >> well, thank you very much. it's an honor to be here. and a special honor to be asked to speak on the fragility of watered liberty and to speak on alexis detocqueville. i began to think he was something like mozart. that i was in the presence of a mind that was so far above the level of almost anyone else in history that he almost books no comparison with anybody else. you can listen to the music of

i felt intellectually engaged, challenged. what i loved about that world which was the combination of morrill feeling and intellectual rigor and clarity. these were smart people. they didn't just want to be good. they wanted to do good. they wanted to apply reason and passion to the problems of the world, and that suited me. >> you are not lawyers and 63 and 64. >> have your politics changed? >> i hope so. i don't have any cells left from a 26-year-old self, and yet i would say my principal -- to be intellectually alive to be alive is to be thinking. i didn't know whose remark it was but of course somebody has notoriously set of course i'd change my mind. what do you do when the facts change? the world is different so i would like to think i learned something along the way but i'm not one of these people who say certain everything that happened in the 1960's is evil, was evil as he was at the time that everything that happened in the 1960's was glorious. they recognize more colors in the rainbow and black-and-white. so i regar

strong intellectual. became very important to advisor. and more than an advisor, as a co-member. but very influential to the congressman in terms of his thinking, his sort of putting this intellectual thought into this. don edwards, a very liberal congressman from california, very important in -- because he was -- he was a very reasonable person. very liberal. but he was sort of the congressman's gate door to the liberal wing of the committee and the party, don. but don became very important. so there was a group that the congressman reached out to that became -- that were very influential in these decisions. these were not sort of a john doehr and that's all it was about. there's a lot of discussion. a lot of, i think, memos and a lot of -- they used to pack every friday the congressman went back to his district in newark and they'd pack a big binder with all of these memos and all of this thinking. and then he'd read them over the weekend and all of the discussion would take place with the various members. he couldn't do this without the consent of his fellow members. he had to

a great intellectual. maybe the reading intellectuals on the early doubt. úyío>> he taught school.ished books the whole time. >> absolutely. judges, have always been part of the intellectual life of the country. unlike in europe where judges are sort of bureaucrats in the ordinary courts, but at least in the more important courts, judges in our common law system have always been part of the intellectual discourse. even in the court of appeals level. people like henry friendly. >> we had you in 2006, we had our cameras in front of you. >> that's not true. unless you believe that every statue ever written produces a sensible result. but you know, the ideal rule for the honest judge is bar garbage in bar -- garbage. it's not up to you to decide the garbage. you should be more basically to either praise or criticize judges just because you like@alw the outcome or dislike the outcome >> i remember that earlier, you said garbage in and garbage out. you said colorful things over the years. do you know that when you're on the bench when you do that? is that something you do on purpose? >>

first, chairman of the judiciary subcommittee and intellectual property, competition in the internet and is cochair of the congressional internet caucus. he is our guest this week on "the communicators." representative of that, let's start with them the nature committee worked on earlier this year. the piracy issue. sopa, pipa, any chance of that legislation coming back this year? if not, do you see it coming back up next year? >> guest: well, sopa and pipa are dead. i think that's pretty clear that the effort undertaken there ran into a lot of controversy. a lot of miscommunication and so i think this does or not coming back again this year or any year for that matter. the issue, however, is very much still a problem. that is various parts of the crime on the internet. assess not only is movies and music, but really putting up a website to look identical to the company's website and then selling their product to tangible goods. in my district i have is that as soon as they have the language program knockoffs. you get a knockoff that looks just like the yellow box they shared the lan

intellectually serious.although because of the fact the left in the right each have their own sphere of media discussion, it's difficult to get a real controversy going. it was easier in the old days when there was one media platform and everyone had to fight for it. now we have our own. it has some benefit in that it has enlarged the market for books by conservative writers but it means we have to be smarter if we want liberals to read her books and pay attention. charles kessler is one of the smartest guys i've known on the right and i've known him for 20 years. he's a professor at claremont college and the publisher and chief editor of the claremont review of books, which is the conservative answer to the new york review of books. this is a book that stems from -- grows out of an article published called the three ways of liberalism. i asked him if you would like to expand into a book, to frame it as a study of barack obama's intellectual roots as a liberal. one of the things notable about kessler's book,

isasemt cm noen adequately weighed by our pundits and their intellectuals.to get information out on this scale not utopian. it's not ev particularly ealiic avfur st ou wikileaks, their mission statement if anyone cares to read it is not a utopian manifesto. a close from our bill of rights and from supreme court decisions. there isnothing about any kind loretiy this hdha i n fottr for worse in their statement of purpose. i think the wikileaks crod are basically 18th century classical liberals who are hap with computers. really nothing to be aif besanenapole s not invented last year by julian assange and in fact it's an old part of the american tradition. in fact it was james madison himself roaufy ventbuapog to a farce or tragedy or perhaps both. knowledge will forever evan and friends in the people who need to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives arstin i d james madison was not noam chomsky's teaching assistant. he was the fourth resident of the united states in the prime -- primary author of the u.s. constitution.

should be able to send people into other countries to force and keep an eye on intellectual property laws that was in the last pages section two hundred fifty of soap is dead so he took that last literally the last pages so put a new name on it and is trying to get it up a page it's on yeah well i think this is a bigger font computers all screen. it is just cramming things. literally the last part of resubmitted under a new name if it gets through all that just means that the us would be able to send people into other countries in police their ip laws which should come as surprise because that's the whole it's a way to. do it or else but this one of the have a cool name yet. if. we need some sort of campaign intellectual property had to act yeah you know do it guys don't do it. really quick do you tell us how we're doing this week and. i mean are we doing this in. the hold in a. container underneath a greyhound bus and head up to new york city later there is also a convention starting in the morning actually depending on if you're watching this live world friday morning in new york c

if we need some sort of campaign intellectual property had to. do it guys don't do it. really quick to tell us how we're doing this week and. i mean are we doing this in. the hold in a. container underneath a greyhound bus and headed to new york city later there is a austin convention starting in the morning actually depending on if you're watching this live world friday morning in new york city hope packers on planet earth i believe it's their ninth year it's just big convention people come in from all over the world and they give speeches. they promote you do what we've been doing every week when i come on and talk about this stuff but they do a much more eloquently and they actually have some sort of brain now hey now oh no i'm just speaking of my own behalf i got yourself well i mean but so lots of cool things happening this weekend in new york city at the hotel pennsylvania starts in the morning i think tickets are still available and what are you going to sell a just tell us what we don't get is why don't you give and watch r.t. if you watch the stuff that we do t

. >> host:ell, wn it comes to leuniondpo, prtabott a bl ogi w at t,isirof diy subcommittee on intellectual property, competition and the internet, and he is co-chair of the congressional internet caucus. reenveottet this we o cote wd rls are cys sopa, pipa, number one, is there any chance of this legislation coming back up th year, and if t,o yoeeock exea uewesonda e d. inat that's pretty clear, that the effort that was dertaken there ran into lot ofontrersy l scnionnd i inosil etom ye f t er the issue, however, ivery much still a pblem, and that is various types of crime on t rnheftotyof vindicantw t lytt uwe s lkenl he mps sind selling their product, tangible good, you know? in my district i haveosetta lagegrknd othey have the lojuik tl x sth lag a n,ce i incomplete. doesn't have everything in it that you'd get if you bought it from the company. the consumer doesn't know that until their actuallyry u , oetdafo ts pem mathoeh the little toes in them? on our committee testifying about the fact that they have an identical web si, or more than thks jikir b . u t , yrdt u k eig od aou ahp oc

her first impulse and her first effort was to try to, you know, do an intellectual assessment of this organization where the u.s. had become pessily ebled, where the, you know, she felt there was a "kick me" sign on the back of the u.s. dell dwaition by the time she got there. the u.s. was isolated. it found itselfyou know, outmaneuvered constantlyyhe sovi banet s h enn n. u.adhanged in the time since, you know, not only it was founded, but certainly since the '60s and the period of decolonization fro you know, 55 or 60as,asow heewnas. they were unpowerful, unrich, you know, unimportant except in the u.n. and they formed these alliances and, you know, the u.s. was the only country along with israel that didn'tve blot evheuan wwh anun hself often in contention had a kind of a weak bloc of their own. so she set out really to figure out how to make the u.s. an effective participant inhe , shidun, , wot practice politics. we've got to make there be consequences for opposing us rather than just, you know, kind of accept it as -- she said, you know, people say, you kno let the third worlds,

anyet i would s at my principal -- and to me, to be intellectually alive a politically alive to be i t w rk s, u a someone has eckersley said, of course i changed my mind. what do you do when the facts change? the world is dfferent. and, you know, i would like to think that 'm otone f epolatthg hne t96i evil, as it was at the time that everything happened, neither do i believe that everything was glorious. i recognize more colors in the remote and black money. rgrmye continued with that. i have different responsibilities. t iepoils at e hadootha a e feel that i'm struck by continuities. i am more courageous about stating my views-- but have outlandish views, the radical views about the movements. but, you know, a lot of the work -- writn work that inspired me a ofus we radr it. i orient to it. of course, there is a spirit. i m teaching a course actually this summer on the 190s. lmouheciri mend vam a on. that which i found dispiriting and dismaying, i still find it empowering and dmaying oa i feel that my young self would not write a letter to my old self has become. >> host: did you

trade related intellectual property rights, sanitary and phytosanitary.ll of them are basically saying, "let there be a monopoly of a corporation to have -- to write the rules so that only they can be players in the food system." and the final step is the retail, where food reaches our table. walmart wanting to have foreign direct investment in retail. a big issue in india's parliament, a very big issue on the streets of india. so from the seed to the table, corporations are saying, "we want to be the only players." five in seed, five in grain trade, five in processing, and five in retail. that is a corporate hijack of our food and a corporate dictatorship over our food system. >> but here's what you're up against. several activist organizations. some seed businesses. some farmers. organizations like yours. they filed a suit here in new york, challenging monsanto's seed patents. and the u.s. district judge here in new york threw it out, saying it was "a transparent effort to create a controversy where none exists. >> yes, that case has been a sad ruling,