Roda Viva | Noam Chomsky | 1996

[Music] 1:08 alien mice important Spencer Doris Day's if you know the circle move centro de da de vive stop professor americano no one Chomsky you say Santa then put a bass amor you must leave Oh Lucinda costumers como contrasty open front we entry Estados Unidos you know so vh can abaya do spork using Koopa Ageha do Vietnam there mister scenario Ian wins with a decade' side one on a map to a linguist noam chomsky equally a Tod ahjumma gramma to communicate South Japanese engine of quadriga jeanette KU q DN a-- pallidus hermano Heligan to a lingua Oh America stonecutter ah I become a Buddhist una comunidad Synthetica a polemical miss ain't even on Chomsky is post-release on política suez chriskiss contra giovanna schemata sone komei Sabah UN commission Volta contra conquer modelo de poder to commune is mo illiberal is mo totally Torino Americana Oh true I would attack a Ahmadiyya Jamaat sir Chomsky trotta's Grande's hedges de comunicación como vehículos monopod or assassin fiesta de que le pasa dourados verdaderos dono Segovia nosiness wines with Grange's on bro morado smoothness or nice deceit Rara story portrays the media immundus pasa tempos favoritos - IANA keister off esto en happensand Oh Camilla induces mais de cincuenta libros Cuchillo suppose esta he shows leg towards all men template Isola Bella Dora ahankhah mascara pacifist ways President John Kennedy a presenter Jota efika comme un Rouge mentor esta empezando kuba yachak lado de Guerra Cointreau Regina it was gorgeous luckily in Brazil Chomsky fu jeju-do unter espera linguistica l-dopa Moroder tenebra co-host rented or za knows Chomsky Seto no kata drat code instituto de technologie massachusetts mundos mais Preciado centros de pez kisses do mundo whoa gee al Centro Edwin OHS consider Oddo une Douce Miura's intellectuals Jakarta UN creature covering desert was políticas interna es tournedos Estados Unidos mesmo jordan Joe Dycus yo Mufasa so learn cheap erotic our apologies le hace el supposition are in favor no estado Palestine Oh a perspective a Chomsky parody Radha Lucero embodied Agua Fria news a post rooster globalization para le eliminates under school to receive Jonas ent fairy incidence true mentos de poder como ofme Ubuntu mundial yatta Putin our own commercial a Doris Day pub Reza ambient and O's problemas do disturbance on your hand in front of the delicious Ben para tratar pasado no entrance que nos consider Moses annuity Roberto Jeanne's do laboratory disturb servants additional is not a unique country we've seen customer suka secretary asistencia doosron audit our analysis mo gusto de journee soup lo o estado de san juan daniel pieza de todo cultura la Gazzetta makin to brainwash moans grito de da sound ah hey Vista attention when estar en t stop elite youíve seen Spartacus did a tour editorial de novo - rah rah de vive transmitting head national team set a cincuenta ultras de mistura's distinction Estados brazil in fellas met comas programmer who agravado los no estamos haciendo a spells new tapas fashion itself spected work well know it professor no and from yesterday document service program do initio seizures of camisa de - - dos dos menos de agua yeppity-do said momento supe suta me a fuzzy - on political opportunists into necesidad G Intel fede like it's non-political well actually my first political article that I recall was when I was 10 years old in the school newspaper after the fall of Barcelona I was very much interested in the Spanish Civil War becoming involved at that time with left libertarian groups concerned about the spread of fascism in Europe at whatever level a ten-year-old understand such things and nothing much has changed since so it's not first linguistics and then politics that was long before I had heard that there was such a thing as linguistics or the study of language tell me now - my mother gave free it's conflicts and stars near jr. Soviet cinema professor somewhere Huntington a dynamical conflict contemporaneous the idea or never the series our songs and if the school two days now their daddy akuto see den Tao come to has the school a marketing firm we also see you a tragic traffic ooyama premier RT good far enough where they poisoned evil Segundo Kissinger Oliver mais important days the Commish like a half year just a big opinion certain is paid to Desa concepts on I do not have a very high opinion of most of the work of respected intellectuals I have to admit that they have a job to do which is to make things seem complicated and to present a picture of the world that will serve their interests and serve power interests the end of history has been declared at least a half a dozen times in the last hundred and thirty years always wrongly with the I think the Cold War was seriously misinterpreted in my view it was a phase of the what's called the north-south conflict sort of a euphemism for the European conquest of the world the Eastern Europe was the original third world back as far as the 15th century when it began to move towards independence in 1917 it evoked essentially the same reaction that was a vote when at the opposite extreme Grenada began setting up fishing cooperatives well the scale was radically different and it took on a life of its own but this basic structure of it is within that framework and so things continue what Professor huntington calls the clash of civilizations has been going on forever it's going on in approximately the same way today the idea that his idea that the united states is somehow can the wet the united states the leader of the west is confronting an islamic civilization i admission no sense one of the closest allies of the United States has perhaps the most fundamentalist Islamic country in the world Saudi Arabia that could change tomorrow if there was a revolution in Saudi Arabia the dynamics and the processes are about as they have been before in fact it's very striking in the case of the United States since 1917 every US intervention particularly since 1945 has been justified on the grounds of concern over you know the Soviet danger but right what happened right before the Cold War before which really broke out in 1917 immediately before Woodrow Wilson invaded Haiti and the Dominican Republic that wasn't in defense against the Soviet Union of obviously it was in defense against the Huns you know before that it was in defense against someone else in fact if you look at the development of the US Navy a hundred years ago it was in defense against Chile believe it or not and US you know warships were off the coast of Chile immediately after the fall of the Berlin Wall what happened a few weeks later the United States invaded Panama it was so conventional that it's hardly a footnote in history in fact about the only difference between that and preceding interventions for many years was that they had had a new pretext couldn't be in defense against the Soviet Union so it was in defense against Hispanic narco traffickers next time it'll be something else if you look at the conflicts that are now raging around the world most of them have been there for a long time in fact about the only ones that are new are those that are within the collapsing Soviet empire so Chechnya that's new but that's the result of the breakdown of every Imperial system when the Portuguese Empire collapsed there were huge conflicts still going on in fact in the Portuguese colonial system Angola and Mozambique team were in Southeast Asia when the French and British colonial systems collapsed there were huge massacres and slaughters and conflicts some still continuing the the ones in central Africa right now our residues of German and the first Belgian and German later French imperialism there's everything there are always new things happening but the fundamental dynamics I don't think have changed substantially in fact for a long long time addendum polka pretenders webliography determine initiative program Jeffrey Duke adenomas famiglia the first red zone cultural milieu de Familia de progress ceased when G as noticias de garde spring cigar in travel density kar komak CoV dos problemas legado da sua formation Oprah's Mona vamos todos de niro's psychologist a solution hijo Polito while future achieve a postal israel equal future achieve a blue soda evening not the aspirin it is young who to the pianist my damn morale yes you could exhale about asking folks to be history yes I was my parents were first-generation [Music] immigrants from Eastern Europe and very deeply involved in the Jewish community in fact lived in what was almost a kind of cultural ghetto at the same time they were New Deal liberals Roosevelt liberals you know that was basically the politics other parts of the family to which I was drawn very early we're working class mostly unemployed it was the late nineteen thirty a very lively intellectual culture there was a very rich lively intellectual culture at the time and I mean high culture so latest debates about psychoanalysis and Marx and the Budapest string quartet and so on and so forth many of them had almost no education but there was a rich cultural tradition and I was part of that so it's a mixture of Jewish and very heavy Jewish involvement through my whole life and also that at the time I was what was called a Zionist in fact most of my activism in my in those years and my teams was Zionist but opposed to a Jewish state because that was part of the Zionist movement at the time there are many illusions about this the first official commitment of the Zionist movement to a Jewish state was actually in 1942 in the United States before that it was it included within it strong by nationalist tendencies even including the leadership like David ben-gurion and others and it was a kind of a so I was part of a radical socialist wing which was committed to arab-jewish working-class cooperation maybe it was an illusion maybe it was real one could debate that but anyway that was the commitment and so it remained I lived in a kibbutz for a while in fact in his rule and might have stayed there and I go up and back but as for the future of Zionism well Zionism changed in 1948 political Zionism which became Zionism so the former anti-state tendencies were absorbed into the state from then on it's just another state in the international system behaving like every other state particularly after 1967 with the conquests it became an appendage of the United States so it's now the 51st state that's not quite accurate because it gets far more federal subsidies than any state of the first 50 so it's a an outpost of us power and there's a complicated arrangement Israel's become part of the the United States took over from Britain domination of the Middle East in nineteen 45 as it took over domination of South America and part of that part of the system is that there's a there kind of local Jean de armes what the Secretary of Defense once called the local cops on the beat you know the where's the police headquarters are in Washington Israel's one of them so it's part of the huge system which extends from the Pacific to the Azores that's aimed at the Middle East and controlling the oil you know the oil system futures of Judaism well you know people's futures in their own hands you can't predict tomorrow's weather you can't predict things like the course of civilization if you look at Israel itself it's it's very sharply split in many ways I mean there's a Arab there's half roughly half the population is from the Arab countries half from Europe there's a very sharp split on religious lines close to a civil war you know in fact if you read the Israeli press as I do regularly you read you can read stories now in the major press the leading press warning of the dangers of a military coup with religious elements in the officer corps they're concerned about that they're very sharp the last elections were very sharp cultures with and it's hard to predict the outcome in the Diaspora say in the United States which I know best there's a very high level of assimilation but at the very same time there's a return to something like slightly fictionalized version of the 17th and 18th century in Eastern Europe which is drawing in hundreds of thousands of people and you find both human affairs are a complicated business I wouldn't try to predict opinions global is a moderate element individual so for echoes Vibram question over modalities improvement to dispossess pious Jews conform ADO's key critique OS Madero mess reconsidering inevitable now opinion [Music] globalization alternativa Paris for a destiny a possibility motto Modell organization de sociologie in his post a global de semana pasado whereas a multi-modal is a dodgy non-capitalist a humid an alternative global is assume we are novel being job well first of all globalization in itself is neither good or bad it depends what form of globalization it is the kind of globalization that brings people together around the world is wonderful I'm all in favor of it the kind of globalization that transfers power into the hands of what the business press sometimes calls the de facto world government of international financial institutions that represent transnational corporations and there are local affiliates that's bad that's harmful to all the people in the world so the question is what form globalization takes incidentally about globalization and its inevitability one has to be rather cautious to distinguish doctrine from reality a few measure trade flows or investment and so on the level of globalization of the world is not dramatically different than it's been in the past there are differences but not dramatic and not in scale and furthermore most of the interactions are internal to the rich developed countries so most of it is about 75% is internal to Europe Japan and the United States and it the form that it takes depends on what people do it you can have a very constructive form of globalization in which there's cultural interchange economic interchange vital connections developing among people but or you can have a kind which is going to turn the world into a kind of Brazil Brazil is kind of an extreme case with two radically different countries one small wealthy country that's part of the international elite and another huge country that's you know somewhere in central Africa that the world could turn into that in fact that's happening in the United States and Britain and to a lesser extent elsewhere right now but these are matters that are under control there's nothing inevitable about them there are no these are not laws of nature there are decisions and human institutions and they can be changed like all others but what kind of a world could there be there could be a world of greater freedom and justice I have my own views about what it should be like I think I'm an old-fashioned anarchist as I was when I was 10 years old I think the world order ought to be based on mutual and voluntary association wherever people are together that means workers control in the workplace community control voluntary associations federal Arrangements among free freely interacting groups crossing borders easily there's nothing special about borders and I think a world like that is entirely feasible but it means for the eliminating concentrations of power right now power is actually concentrating democracy is declining and that's something I think that we should be struggling against but it's not inevitable and it's not a law of history and if you look over history it's gone always there have been victories for freedom there's been extensions of democracy there have been contractions we happen to be in a period of contraction but that will change as it has before sorry my disappear so democracies much this way that they a woman too with some attacks they see pressure on all the best as novices for my sister the concept of Marxism is one that I find troublesome in physics for example there's nothing like Einstein ISM because Einstein isn't God who you worship rather he's a human being who had important things to say and like every other human being made mistakes no so you learn from what he had to say and you disregard his mistakes now Marxism the concept in my view belongs to the history of organized religion it's it's a kind of worship of an individual that makes no sense in if you look at Marx himself and other people who've been working in that tradition you learn what's valuable you disregard what's wrong and then after that we just go and look so for example take say socialism Marx had almost nothing to say about it I mean if you read I'm not a great works specialist but as far as I understand and I've read a fair amount there are a few scattered sentences and Marx's writings about socialism he's a theorist of capitalism he was a theorist basically of 19th century capitalism perfectly naturally and he developed a sort of an abstract model of the capitalist system and its properties from which I think there's a lot to learn how much it and any intelligent person should read it and learn what you can from it as you learn from others to assume that it offers a doctrine for today is makes no sense I can't imagine that Marx would have believed that he also wrote important things about the contemporary affairs for example about the British and India certainly worth reading but if we were still repeating those things now civilization had been dead you know we should have learned something in the last hundred years so yes there's contributions as there is from the rest of our cultural tradition and you learn from them what's important then you disregard what's not useful machine i Brazil Padma for mommy asada well first of all I think we should be careful too when we refer to a country like say India or China or Brazil but we should recognize that that's a very high-level abstraction Brazil is not an entity in the international order nor is India so in India there's a section that's developing and there's a huge sector that's either stagnating or probably declining actually I was there not long ago and saw both sides of it when when you talk about the growth in India again be cautious when the neoliberal reforms were instituted and India there was as almost always a very sharp decline and collapse that's pretty regular then there's a recovery from the collapse so if you read The Wall Street Journal they'll talk about the wonderful growth but they'll start from the period of recovery go back ten years and you find that the growth during this period is actually lower than it was before but it's highly concentrated and it's also internet it's also a multinational so India has opened itself to foreign penetration meaning primarily US corporations and it's interesting the way they did it the first thing they did was take over the advertising industry so what you see advertised is foreign goods which undercut purposes to undercut domestic manufacture to get people tied to foreign imports now they're sectors of Indian society they're benefiting from this living much better than they did before there are other sectors that are suffering the same is true in China China is very sharply split parts of China are developing other parts are devastated enough so that many China scholars fear possibility of the return to the peasant Wars of the past period even if you look at things like just say mortality rates you find that they that the general health system improved quite sharply until about 1979 and it started leveling off and the most recent statistics I've seen it's may even be declining that's parallel to huge growth you know the yuppies you see on CNN television and so on and so forth to different China's how will that affect the New World Order well it depends what the world order is if the world order is run by transnational elites in their own interest with most of the population marginalized it will fit fine if it's a world order based on popular democracy and freedom and justice it'll break down the structures of check that are developing in China and India just as it will break down the prices in Brazil my guess is elitist look guys no say no wrong Veera is a social arrangement moneda do to assume it Protege me so he could focus on grandma crazy party Vanessa what those voters were despised into see because you so nobody seemed a protester contract exceed ESA meeting tonight Ranaut was committed to be cereal not same stir in the north what what's NAFTA the North American Free Trade Agreement it's a protection highly protectionist agreement instituted by the United States and associated they'll eat in Mexico and Canada directed against the populations of their own countries all three and also against Europe and Japan which the the law a large part of if you look at the NAFTA long treaty about ten percent of it consists of where called rules of origin requirements meaning that after a high degree of a percentage of production within the North American area to be able to export that's just the wet protectionist weapon against Europe and Japan the United States would like to incorporate parts of South America within a protectionist trade bloc East Asia has interests in doing the same thing Europe is doing the same thing I mean they're all kind on the other hand these are not just at war I mean the linkages among the international corporations in Europe Japan the United States now also East Asian growth areas and some in Brazil they're very tight linkages and they're transnational so they're lots of complicated things happening at all at once but the major tendency right now is towards transfer of power to private tyrannies and away from the public sphere and that's very dangerous it's happening in particular countries at different rates it's happening internationally and I think that's going to be very harmful to values that we ought to share like paga have 300 view Mahmood anonymous you know my steamer in Limington yatra decree OSI professional military do brasil furfest laboratory knock astounded assignation our analysis Volta de todo pi so so tech Assessor document secret no Bowden American cotton Okuda see no superiority no Brazil who make sure analytical ability for mass transportation this oh there's plenty of documents the United States is quite an open society and one of the good things about it is you have fairly good access to the record of secret planning maybe 30 or 40 years ago but sometimes even pretty reason incidentally I do not think that u.s. foreign policy changed dramatically after the Cold War if you look at say pick any issue middle-east Cuba Panama is all the same nothing much changed that some changes but the policies were not guided by fear of the Soviet Union that was a pretext and you can see it very clearly by the fact that the policies continued but with a different pretext so in the case of Cuba for 30 years the pretext was danger in the Soviet Union right after the Cold War what happened the policies get harsher but now they're because all of a sudden in the United States loves democracy so next will be some other pretext so I don't think the policies changed with regard to Brazil we know the record pretty well in the late 1950s the Eisenhower administration began to propose a strengthening of the Latin American military and a shift in their mission which is largely determined in the United States it proposed a shift which was finally it couldn't be instituted time Congress wouldn't accept it but it was instituted under Kennedy in 1962 the Kennedy administration shifted the mission of the Latin American military from hemispheric defense which is kind of a holdover from World War two to what they called internal security which is just a technical term which means war against their own populations and the Brazilian military coup in fact shortly after was one of the first examples of this very warmly welcomed in the United States even publicly you don't have to go to secret documents for that publicly welcomed by the but was by the Kennedy people I mean Kennedy had been killed by then but by his Lincoln Gordon Robert McNamara the rest greatest victory for freedom in the mid twentieth century and so on Brazil is a big country and had a domino effect it sort of spread through the hemisphere right into Central America in the 80s enormous plague of repression unique in the history of this very bloody continent and it devastated many popular organizations it set the basis for the kinds of policies that are now being pursued and yes you can trace it right back to the shift in the in the mission of the military the Brazilian military were called an island of sanity in Brazil and their takeover was very warmly welcomed the Brazil became what the business press called the Latin American darling of the business community meanwhile and we know enough to mention what happened to the population but a sector and so it remained until a late 1980s very high growth rate splitting into two completely separate countries all of this warmly welcomed in international financial circles and yes you can trace it to we don't have the records for recent years but we have them from the early 60s and they're pretty clear the the most important ones I suppose are from about 1966 they've been available for some years these are discussions within the among the Kennedy intellectuals McNamara was Secretary of Defense McGeorge Bundy the national security adviser and they discussed the developments in Brazil this is two years after the coup was a great success they argue that within what they call the Latin American cultural context it is necessary for the military the overthrow civilian governments when in their judgment the civilian governments are not acting in the interests of the nation and the interests of the nation are then described very explicitly in terms that you would think come from a Maoist tract referring quite openly to the revolutionary struggle for power among the conflicting classes in Central America and the need to improve the investment climate and so on very frank this internal discussion and the military takeover had indeed contributed to that so was warmly welcomed shortly after you have the overt US support for the overthrow of the am big government and then on through the atrocities in Central America and so on other respect and none of this had anything to do with the Russians I mean how many Russians were there in Brazil in 1964 in fact the Russian influence in the actually the Russians were supporting the Argentine generals they were one of their leading trading partners of course everything was for the American population in the u.s. population the Russian threat was always wave that's the way control you control people you frighten them but it in the United States in reality it's a joke there's no Russian threat in the Western Hemisphere the Russians were much more threatened in Western Europe in the United States was in Western Hemisphere professor Chomsky MNO sensei said they said super weak watching inside poor limbs our mothers not wandering in casue upon tava ah his possible daddies enter a plasma trabaja para guitarist an American Sociological is reduced intensity rate as Americans car Amazonia knows his massage the when we talk about intellectuals it's like talking about countries we have to distinguish there are those who are called the responsible intellectuals namely the ones who more or less serve power and there are those who are the dissident intellectuals who are outside the framework of the power system and don't serve it their intellectuals of all kinds there there have been as far as recorded history goes go back to the Bible we find the same distinction the those in recent years it's hard to say there's been a big change in the United States since the 1960s there was a large-scale cultural change the ferment of the 1960's led to subsist a change in the general society freeing up of the society so there's a lot it's a much more open society than it was say 40 years ago there's much more concern for issues of racial oppression of right the rights of women became an issue environmental issues solidarity with the third world all of these things changed and they've affected the whole country in fact activism was greater in the 1980s and it was in the 1960s and much more deeply rooted in American society and among the people involved in this are those who you call intellectuals what does that mean that means people who are privileged enough to be able to devote a substantial part of their effort to the work of the mind and for some of them that means to working with people who are struggling for a better life for freedom for human rights for others have been serving power so it's always been so but but the society is different and in many ways much more healthy Co certainly to Nevada's entrevista scheme a Shaka democracy at a sofa namah both in silver moon in terror GQ na liberalism ooh serie smes a democracy I'm sorry a Tamika judge Cassius podríamos a capitalist would you consume for just a McClurg was pressed was the last appeal for example Italian food regime is more crotch because people feel socially first of all there was never anything remotely like socialism in Eastern Europe in Eastern Europe the countries called themselves socialist and democratic remember these were people's democracies the West ridiculed the claim to democracy but it loved the claim the socialism because that's a way of defaming socialism but in fact they were about as socialist as they were democratic I don't think that the driving factor in Eastern Europe was a search for consumption in fact consumption levels have reduced very sharply in Eastern Europe since the end of the Cold War the search was for freedom which is fine they were struggling for freedom and democracy they got what they got was a return to the third world and most parts of it but and as for the first part of your comment yes I think that what's called neoliberalism it is an attack on democracy and is an open attack of democracy it's not secret the goal is to minimize the state and if you minimize the state you're maximizing something else what is the thing that you're maximizing well private tyranny the state is the arena within which the public has some role at least in principle determining policy in the private sector has no role so the more that the public arena is minimized and private power is maximized the less you have democracy now personally in my view the state is an illegitimate institution should be dismantled but not as long as private power is there because that's much worse that's a system which is unaccountable to the public and the main thrust of neoliberalism is precisely that it's to restrict the arena within which the public can make some difference another cassotto point okay so for a point my suggestion is to extend the public arena and in in the classic fashion namely as I said before working people should have control of the places in which they work not private tyrants the people of a community should have control of their community and they should interact with one another that increases the public's fear if the heavy concentration of private power is eliminated then I think moves towards dismantling the entire state system are entirely legitimate proper but you face what the world that you're in right now incidentally these neoliberal moves are not moves towards establishing a market system a private corporation is outside the market system if you look at world trade you know about take say the United States about half of US trade is not trade at all it's just transactions internal to a corporation run by a very visible hand and which just happened to cross borders so half of US exports to Mexico don't even enter the Mexican economy they're just thing parts are being assembled in the United States transferred to Mexico through another branch of say the same Ford Motor Company it's called exports they come back to the United States called import that's not trade that's mercantilism and that's huge part of world trade corporate mercantilism in which that the market is functioning only at the margins and functioning mostly to control people the the the ones who are running the world economy have protected themselves very strongly from market discipline in fact if you look at the top there are some good studies by good economists of transnational corporations and there's one major study by two British Economist's of the top 100 transnational corporations every one of them has benefited from the interventionist policies of its own of its home government and 20 of the hundred have been saved from complete collapse by state takeover and bailout over and above that the corporation itself is out of the market system its internal transactions are central centrally directed these are command economies so you have a the neoliberal system is an attack in my view both on the market and on democracy so this kept aside to do key submission on TaylorMade opinion public amazing for madam I also do da da da dee Alma deteriorate as no democracy adduced also needs make a possible the total immensity advanced in its not of llamada tariffs on democratic well world to complicated place there's there's a very clear class struggle those who control who own and direct the society and manage it would like naturally fear democracy and they'll use what measures they can to restrict it one measure is restricting the public arena another measure is massive propaganda the United States has a huge public relations industry which for most of this century has been dedicated to what its own leaders call controlling the public mind on the principle that the mind of the public can be regimented as much as an army regiments the bodies of soldiers and the reason is as they frankly say to one another quoting in fact that the hazard facing in dust realists is the growing political power of the masses so that has to be contained you can't contain it very much by force in the United States it's become a free society so you control it by propaganda by narrowing the public arena by treaty arrangements which like NAFTA for example which take many decisions out of the public arena on the other hand there's public there's popular forces struggling to increase democracies so the usual conflicts been going on for centuries going on right now it goes up and back in in the 1950s for example they were also declaring the end of history then called the end of ideology it's all over we've got everything under control everybody's a passive consumer nobody thinks anymore well a few years later the country was in an uproar you know that's happened over and over again in the past and I think it's now happening right now so for example the labor movement which was under very severe attack actually criminal attack in the 1980s is now reviving it's recognizing that the one-sided class war is going to lead the destruction and we can't tell where we'll go damos el agua de nata valine ents our boat ja ja kann sein de partie du haut de vive cast a new agent revista opens a door americano on shrooms Katia [Music] then also Thomas comedy ever cast on no eating 3d Stowe who pens outdoor americano no one shown as the umbrellas - keep calm his program of agravado knows no estamos en dos minutos de sel spected ways you can approve a tatami cozy on e gazecki auditories critter is talents on do is leave the professor shrooms novice avail as audience moody eyes they are JT say help in your block gene stop at a time for people to perform skill possible a veto premise family fracas meant to disturb significant year difference polarity dodging our photo Esmond associate dodge a bigger ax men to die arena public espresso illness Arianna publica immediate appeal fundamental you certitude my gurus critical the media international the media privada us today Camilla borracho pox abacus toe as a manipulation the media is Caminos the media but they will sell appearance attributes of greater capital or greater capital national international interest elite we appropriate research the president the Senate a lozada como como become service public accomplished period to public good question Jana has paid to this dispossessed oh well first to be clear I think that the pub that the public arena is now shrinking and I'd like to see it develop so the the minimization of the state is shrinking the public arena because of the extension of private power now as far as the media are concerned the the major media in the world say the United States or Brazil are private corporations and they're simply part of the private corporate system they are very closely linked to other their huge corporations they're linked to even bigger ones in the United States the take a look at the major television channels they're parts of huge mega-corporations closely linked the state power the individuals who are at the high levels the management levels move very easily between the executive suite and state management and the editorial board room and their interests are approximately the same and they present a picture of the world that reflects their interests they have certain goals the goals are not hard to determine from the structure of the institution they want to protect the Nexus of state private power that they represent that requires different modes for different audiences for a large part of the audience that means simply marginalizing them for the media the and its managers I think the social ideal the ideal they'd like to reach there's a society in which the social unit consists of a person and the television sit no other associations because other interactions among humans are dangerous they might lead to democratic participation but if you can the more you can approach the ideal of a society based on the person than the television set the more you can do that the more you're free to have formal political democracy without the concern that it might mean something because then the people will become passive consumers and obedient workers and separated from one another and civil society will collapse now for the educated elites the media have a different function for them it's basically indoctrination making sure they have the right thoughts in their mind these are people who make decisions and have to make the right decisions for those in power within that framework I think you can explain a lot of what the media do maybe you'll be able to join at least a mm-hm well I should say that I have quite a number of personal friends in the media some in free high places in the media many of whom were much more cynical about the media than I am as a result of their own experiences and they see their role as trying to work within the institutional structures to do what they can and there's a lot that you can do these are not military dictatorships you're not going to be tortured and killed if you say the wrong thing you may lose your job but that's a small problem and people work within them to press their openings to the limits often doing very important things others are subordinated to the system there are many journalists well-known journalists and privileged positions who consider themselves to be perfectly free rightly they'll tell you look nobody tells me what to write and that's true because they are so trustworthy that no one needs to tell them what to write they've already internalized the values so completely that they can't even think other thoughts so fine they are completely free others who are more independent are less free and are continually struggling against the limits that powerful systems impose the for the independent journalists the goal is that of any other decent human being try to do what you can to help people inform themselves work together for human rights whatever your values happen to be a proposed Odessa Keystone so testability stuck in a media brazilian service in chile is his be perfectly happy to talk to anybody whether it's the national television audience or people in the in a shanty town you know which i've done also it's my own personal experience is not too surprising i have much more exposure outside the united states than inside and part of the reason is views of the kind that i express are not much of a threat outside the United States it's much more of a threat inside so as soon as I cross the border I talked television and on national television and so on but not inside in fact the commercial actually commercial television in the United States surprisingly there's a little bit more free than public television that's interesting even though public television has the reputation of being more liberal in the American sense of the word meaning more progressive but that just means that they're more doctrinaire they are cultural commissaries they understand better the amounts of discussion and they see themselves at the dissident extreme you can go this far but no further actually public television is on record in the United States even in print as saying they will not allow me personally to appear on the major news and discussion program it's unusual to make such statements in print but it's understandable in fact in my view the this article that you mentioned about the responsibilities of intellectuals was primarily a critique against the sort of progressive end of the spectrum what's called liberal in the United States I didn't talk much about the right wing because in my view they are the real cultural connoisseurs I mean they are the ones who are setting the limits they act with a certain kind of dissidents but a dissidents that presupposes the doctrines of power and therefore helps instill them better and the smarter ones understand that and don't want to have anything that goes a little bit the critical side so this is the way institutions function it shouldn't surprise me to media since a minimalist Capades chorus provides matsuyama genome process we do control in sociology Democrats assume the media Metro stems do certain falada control asociado sobre square process provides new Tosta he knows de economía commercial machine Swami J's procedure control asociado Democritus the media should be involved popular participation actually that exists the model exists I actually saw a piece of it interesting piece of it in the URI a couple days ago when I went out to the suburbs to Nova iguaçu and watch popular television there's a an NGO that provides equipment mainly and some technical support for popular groups that do their own television they write the scripts they show the programs they act the people gather in a public square and watch it they discuss it and so on well that's form of public media in the United States communities there's a fairly substantial network of community supported radio that means small usually small radio stations though they can extend over a whole fairly city which are supported by the public they don't have advertising and they integrate the community you can tell the do I travel a lot because I give many talks all over and you can just feel the difference in a community that has community radio and one that doesn't there's a kind of integration you know people know about each other they know what's happening they they they even participate and it gives a kind of liveliness and vitality and vision to the community that you find lacking when people are separated from one another well that's democratic media and of course it's on a rail at the moment it happens to be in a relatively small scale but we should bear in mind that not too far back in the past it was not a very large scale so even in the United States which is a highly indoctrinated society with a powerful propaganda system it's a real business run society very free but business run even in the United States in the 1950s there were about 800 labour newspapers independent labor newspapers which reached about 30 million people a week you go back to the early part of this century the popular media based in ethnic communities or working-class papers or others we're virtually on the scale of the commercial press in England that continued until the 1960s the major newspaper in England The Daily Herald was had more subscribers in the which was kind of social-democratic had more subscribers in the 1960s than the other than that time as the Guardian you know the other major newspapers combined it was simply overwhelmed by concentration of capital resources and incidentally the tabloids in England that you know the real mass media they were kind of labor oriented I mean a lot of nonsense you know but labor oriented all this these media gave a picture of the world that's quite different from the one that's that's oriented to the interests and concerns of ordinary people and it was a different country then when this collapsed under the print not under force you know but under the pressure of concentration of capital resources that the tenor of the country changed you can see the changes that's the sort of background for Thatcherism well that's not far in the past we're not talking about some unimaginable utopia but things that exist in part and have existed in larger scale before and can be created again in fact the new telecommunications opportunities are offering ways to are sometimes being used to create them sometimes very effectively take say the last Nobel Peace Prize that was just announced a few days ago Jersey aromas worked I was here a couple days ago wanted this issue the Timor issue has been a major human human rights issue for 20 years but it's only come into the public arena in the last two or three years despite many efforts in which I've been involved - that's largely due to the internet it offered ways of getting information to people around the major corporate media which organize people and reach the point where in the United States there was enough pressure on Congress to impose restrictions on military sales the Clinton administration didn't observe the restrictions it had to evade them in some fashion but that's nevertheless important and in the nation generals take notice when things happen in the United States well that's new technology there and a democratic media can be reconstructive and in fact like any other system of private tyranny of tyranny whether it's military dictatorships or totalitarian rule or private corporations it can be eroded and eliminated these are not again laws of nature just human institutions professor Chomsky yo Pina also thinks so maintain that it's the same the technology itself is completely neutral it doesn't care whether it's used to dominate and control people or to liberate people you could say the same but the print me the print technology radio television or the internet not the question of what it becomes depends on what people do with it actually something very to be the internet itself like all of the modern dynamic parts of the economy was create was created by the public at the public expense so it should be owned by the people who built it that's taxpayers the major legislation of the last year in the United States Congress handed over this whole publicly created system to private mega corporations that's what happened with radio back around 1930 when the the free public spectrum was handed over to private corporations happened with television about 1950 there's an effort now just passed in the legislation to commercialize the telecommunication system which was all created at public expense that's who put up the satellites that's who paid for the computers that's who you know developed a technology and so on whether that'll succeed or not we don't know there's a lot of resistance to it there are lots of popular efforts to maintain the Internet as a system that is to which there's free public access and to which the which the public segments of the public can use for their own interests and purposes the major corporations are quite open about what they would like to see they would like it to be a kind of home shopping service technique another technique of marginalization and isolation and atomization and control but they don't have to succeed any more than they had to succeed in the case of radio or television or print for that matter so the internet will become with people make of it it has a lot of positive aspects it has some negative aspects to the communication through the internet does establish contacts among people who otherwise would be isolated but it also isolates people we're human beings we're not Martians and there's a big difference between face-to-face contact and you know punching Keys and somebody else punches keys and that has psychic effects which I personally am a little bit skeptical about so like most technology it has a lot of facets to it yo P Swami it was MIT international community which busi contact arm amputee consecutive traumas emails Atari he'll meet you shortly and a full moon would solve the International vote on kokkinakis don't do picado to dietrich twice almost critical does forever professor do you think he has no much changing achilles up ramirez you sure properly the angel short-term increase reduce intellect clients professors do the trick twice it sort of goes miss with social sciences attack you want to hinky amigo pasado is different he card wars the maitre d cool quando was intellect ratio no podía principal Mitchell moons RPGs in kills intellect risk is a poor thing over mythical dodgy in secret report of establishment police fascism partying attracted establishment a scientist classes mess privilege a days important arresting difficult da da goon cosmos atados nor aqui Shimoda contrary RS establishment conservatorship apparently troika moment recall nope oh dear an intellectual in power should act to eliminate his own power that's difficult and it doesn't happen very much but people sometimes asked me what I would do if I were elected president and what I say is well the first thing I would do is establish a war crimes tribunal to try me for the were crimes I'm going to commit and the next thing I ought to do is get rid of my own power and put it in public hands now that's not done very much event commands criticisms of course quite right like very old the first expression of it that I'm familiar with is by bakunin back in the mid 19th century when he predicted that the rising class of what he called scientific intelligentsia you know the intellectuals of the modern age would go in two directions some he said would try to use popular struggles say working class struggles to gain power for themselves they would become he says the red bureaucracy which will create the most brutal totalitarian regimes ever known others he said will recognize that power lies elsewhere and what we today would call the state capitalist institutions and they'll become the managers for those with real power they will as he put it they will beat the people with the people's stick in the state capitalist democracies yeah that's a pretty good it was a pretty good prediction then there's another group of intellectuals who usually wanting to be called intellectuals just people who are thinking who are working with popular organizations who are struggling against power who are trying to diffuse it who are interested in human rights and democracy and social justice and doing something about it and that's another group of intellectuals they need not have a high education incidentally I mean I've known people who work with their hands who do much more creative intellectual work than many people in university offices whether you're an intellectual or not doesn't correlate with your position and I think as I mentioned before the mayor and even from childhood one of the most lively intellectual circles I've ever been part of consisted of working people some of whom had never gone through primary education but were very had a very live intellectual life same is true of many others those of us who are you know wear jackets and ties and look nice you know we're wealthy basically we're part of the wealthy classes we have privileges and if you have more privileges you have more responsibilities and the question of how you exercise those responsibilities is a personal choice no Paco necesito mas que esto esto es más grandes nation twisting occasionally God we're mighty laboratory's media ji-hyun Leonato dispenser - Armada a volu so digital a suspense ado Ezra cozy Toni definitely nervous Media xenoverse technologies pueden a la vaca processes democratic internet Syria grandi a Supra trackers process Democratic Association increasing Mara psyche is a stereo hasty toes a complete pagar por lo menos de dollars tempo computed or much la Valliere a sequential percent at the Media Lab at MIT is no different than the telecommunication system generally there are people involved in it who are genuine and genuinely committed to making the new telecommunications media accessible and available to the general public as a method of democratizing the media increasing information flow allowing people to express themselves to communicate with one another and so on there are others who are committed to making it a system of control and domination and it's this it's in microcosm you have there the conflict that's expanding the extending over the whole society right now the Internet is an elite phenomenon I mean the overwhelming majority of the world's population doesn't even have a telephone the number who have internet communication is very limited they're usually part of wealthy powerful institutions and if you try to do it on your own it's quite expensive in principle it could be democratized the technology is there but I just mentioned the Telecommunications Act of 1995 that's a major legislative instrument instrument designed to prevent the democratization of the Internet by handing control over from the public institutions to the private make it corporations it was kind of interesting that in the United States here's an example of how the media function this was not treated as a public affairs issue it was treated as a business issue so you're read about the Telecommunications Act on the business pages of course it's a major public affairs issue but the framework of thinking is supposed to be it's got to be commercialized because that's the only option the idea that it should be under public control isn't even an option so we don't write about it on the front page we put it on the business pages the only issue was how will it be commercialized well those are some of the ways in which the propaganda institutions which is the doctrinal institutions shape options shape thinking so that the major problems aren't even visible to people very few people know this happened or are aware that there were other opportunities and the you mentioned the Media Lab there are people there who know there are people there who were in favor of it you find both kinds to President Clinton phenomenal show movement that veer America latina moon cruise off of tyranny briceño NAFTA named obvious consequences una cosa logical campout killa trapa Brazil Cuba stars indeed we're gonna make an open to diversity Kawasaki the various support over Brazil sovereign okay defendants interests do pies at scooting over North America notion here if President Clinton comes to Brazil it'll be because you have good golf courses he'll have a welcoming committee which wants to discuss with him the best ways to establish control of the subordination of the Brazilian economy to transnational corporations that's why I'll come to Brazil I may say some nice words but he's a representative of the business community he's not an extreme right winger he's sort of a moderate Republican roughly Eisenhower Republican more or less in virtually indistinguishable from his opponent in the last election what should Brazilians do well it's not their government that's going to do it I don't have to tell you that what Brazilians ought to do is overcome the the scandal of Brazilian society which goes way back and as part of a major Latin American scandal altogether a much more exaggerated form of what we find all over the world the state is subordinated to the rich who have very limited social responsibilities the country is radically divided I'm not saying anything that everyone doesn't know better than I do most of the population is simply out of the modern sector that scandalous Brazil is a rich country as an enormous resources throughout this whole century it's been called the Colossus of the south which ought to be you know counterpart to the Colossus of the north if it isn't that way that's a problem that has arisen from internal to Brazil of course supported by external factors like us backing for the military coup but the fundamental roots of it are right here and unless they are overcome internally it'll just get worse and worse and obviously the answers are not going to come from the owners of the corporations or the leaders of the pollute of you know the people in the government are certainly from President Clinton they're going to come from people within Brazil struggling to overcome these horrendous situations I mean the fact that Brazil after 20 years of some of the highest growth rates in the world roughly 1970 to 1990 much higher than Chile the fact that after this it was ranked in the UN Development Report next to Albania that would scandalize Brazilians and including what it represents whatever it presents is a disaster for most of the population which is particularly dramatic because this is not Central Africa the resources are there the human resources are there the material resources are there it's it makes the failure to realize the potential even more dramatic than it would be in a country that suffering real limitations as many are Sophie no solution Luther in the heat condos I read his work when he was a sociologist and found it quite interesting and enlightening that was some years ago now he's plays a different institutional role within the framework of a system of power that either doesn't feel free to challenge or doesn't want a challenge you have to ask him that I can't say but the system of power itself is a very ugly one so just to take one example the the policies of Brazil are very sharply constrained by debt payment well the people of Brazil should not tolerate this I mean if I borrow with regard to the debt and all aspects of pretty Brazilian policy are constrained by this limit now with regard to the debt there's two options either you pay it or you don't pay it I think it's perfectly reasonable not to pay it it's been paid over and over again but suppose that you decide to pay it well if I borrow money and spend it gambling is it your responsibility to pay it no my responsibility to pay it that means the Brazilian debt if it's going to be paid should be paid by the people who borrowed it are they the people living in the favelas around Rio they didn't borrow the money they didn't get anything from it the money was given to the wealthy in Brazil most of whom sent it abroad and enriched themselves final attempt aid but the generals and the wealthy faith it's not the problem for the people of Brazil now if the government of Brazil is unable to face that issue or to put it more accurately if the population doesn't compel it to face that issue Brazil has very few options and a person who sits in the presidents chairs has very few options custody is that I mentioned ecstasy dissapointed Avista política the Quadrangle smiles multinationals Cupertino Nicky the various gene also Mouton so nice I meet our petition is move dick Manila the choices are not in president Cardozo's hands they're in the hands of the people of Brazil he as a person that can't do very much the constraints are very narrow with regard to multinational corporations or corporations in general in my view our attitude should be the same as it is to other forms of tyranny in fact if you look at the history of corporations it's quite interesting there there's good academic studies by legal historians and others about the rise of corporations and it's an interesting history worth studying the the modern corporation I'm speaking now of the United States primarily but it's not very different elsewhere the in the United States the modern corporation was created by courts and lawyers not by legislations if you go back to classical liberals like Thomas Jefferson they were strongly opposed to corporations in fact early in history corporations were public interest groups so people would get together to form a corporation to build a bridge let's say at some point in the 19th century early 19th century they began to change Jefferson for example the leading classical liberal in US history back around the 1820 warned that woody woody the the the rise of financial institutions and manufacturing corporations would mean the end of democracy de Tocqueville said the same thing the Tocqueville winning another great figure of classical liberalism when he described the United States in the 1830s he warned that the manufacturing aristocracy which is arising before our eyes that's 170 years ago is the harshest in the world and if they ever get power that'll be the end of American democracy as well through the century through the century they got power they didn't get it from legislation they got it mostly from the courts they got the Rights of Persons they got the right of free speech you know they got the individual rights by the early 20th century they were huge institutions and dominating the society not by popular will quite the contrary if you look at their intellectual roots they're very similar to the intellectual roots of Bolshevism and fascism they come out of Hegelian ideas that developed in the late 19th century about the the rights of big institutions over individuals very similar roots that's why you often had progressives supporting corporations same progressives who are supporting what became Bolshevism back in the early 20th century and in fact that's not inaccurate a corporation is a totalitarian structure orders go from the top to the bottom you insert yourself in it and you take your orders from above you hand them down below at the very top it's a integrated sector of owners and investors banks financial institutions and so on but really as close to the totalitarian ideal as humans have constructed if you're outside it you have the only choice you have is to rate yourself to it which is called getting a job or to buy what it produces that's information if it's media corporations well and these are not small islands in a free market see these are huge tyrannies now very closely interlocked with one another tied to the states that they largely control integrated across boundaries the attitude toward them should be the same as to other forms of tyranny fascism was overthrown Bolshevism was overthrown corporate tyranny can be overthrown Guarico fascism fedorov our domain name is Raven mundo Hennessey main emphasis includes discussion Atsushi Onita Fosse fossa popular francica classic oh yeah Apophis is mu sin chief grief in psycho Assad as a brief is known as a shinobi episode that is fascism populist illusion after war and she's entire grains coppola so is a malaria parasite pixie barren emphysema botany dodgy the Liz it's me dodgy popular you're thinking now things like Lapine's movement that's better yeah well you know popular movements can take many different forms the very same social groups can struggle for freedom or can create be a popular base for fascism it be in the that's true of lepen I mean take say Hitler Hitler was a very popular leader maybe the most popular leader in Germany's history the popular base for Hitler was in part you know so it wasn't just industrialists it was social movements which could have been struggling for in other circumstances where the most militant labor movement in Europe taking the United States right now the people who are in the right-wing militias as they call them you take a look at those people they are the same people who are organizing the CIO 60 years ago they're coming from the same socio-economic sector there they have the same kinds of problems their lives are collapsing their wages are disappearing the world's falling apart and not the 1930s they created the American labor movement and won many rights an advanced freedom in the 1990s they are a right-wing populist movement which is very dangerous it is under the control of fanatical leaders many of them religious fanatics same popular groups and they have as in it's the same story as in all human affairs how they develop depends on what they do themselves and what others do others who like us were more privileged to interact with them that's always been the case it's still the case yes the popular groups and could be a source of very dangerous fascism they could be a source of major liberation surah Quincy do a Bollywood queen seducer film's producer they know Xie Jia du Chien who is no idea party's past the media so then you so accustomed to bougie which means a being together yeah Tommy to sewage tank a shoddy job in Pune Keystone to chew more semanek mushrooms rubric in Sao Paulo stories include aesthetic and premium over the pass Hamas or the kasumioji was décadas Caracas Tommy como as dark as the cobra's you can think 10 2/10 to Espinosa lingua concrete ami to come ashore at the Phoenix Asia my companions in Geneva new job Dao vu s mo Turkestan Shakalaka present electrons cases issue Manali samito Clara Jews problemas in J's mismo supportin committed vases solutions practice combat Isis - apparent inclusive is Oh professor Camus sort led Zuzu for example sera Shakya Valley do chaos room boycott boycott vovinam então o commercio bilateral endonasal DC no you substation MA sound - was a largely important to try to keep specialists oh well I'm perfectly happy to recommend very practical solutions and that's what I do in the United States all the time but I don't feel free to recommend actions to you that's for you to decide I do it where I live you know the brazils role in this affair could be enormous in fact you can see how enormous it can be by just looking at the history to the extent that people like josée have been able to do things it's because that he had support of governments which government mozambique you know santo may I mean governments of that scale he didn't have the support of Brazil within the Portuguese world former Portuguese world the Brazil is obviously vastly more powerful the kind of support that Mozambique gave Brazil could have given a hundred times that much support that means creating international forums helping put the issue on the international agenda gaining publicity and participating in economic pressures he has his own ideas about what's the right thing to do I have mine in my feeling my feeling is that the Indonesian generals are on the brink of a decision about this they could go either either way one of the foreign minister two or three years ago when public opinion was growing said publicly that East Timor is a pebble in our shoe maybe we ought to get rid of it the implication is maybe we got to get rid of it it's causing us too much trouble The Wall Street Journal which is not a very progressive newspaper had an editorial called something like a pebble in air in their shoe in the Indonesian generals look it's not worth it get rid of it it's just causing in trouble just this last week the Far Eastern Economic Review you know the major Asian economic journal had a interviews with top executives I haven't seen it yet I was away but sure they're almost worth that told me about it so there's a second hand he told me that overwhelmingly they were recommending to Indonesia to get rid of the pebble well pressure makes a difference now the kinds of pressure that come from Brazil are different than those that come from the United States the ones that come from the United States are obviously more important it's the world dominant power so we do it in our way but those that come from Brazil are not small whether they're threats about economic cooperation political threats public demonstrations you really have to decide judging by the Brazilian context socialism acontecimientos nice long process G discrimination in paradise the susceptor puto Cubano segunda Mandar to the Bill Clinton budget experienced significant economic again the decision is in the hands of the people of the United States and other countries in the world if the United States has it after the fall of the Soviet Union when you could no longer pretend that there was a Soviet threat the sanctions against Cuba got harsher and the effort to strangle Cuba increased intensity just increased again last year well at the moment most of the world is at least rhetorically objecting so there are rhetorical objections to this that is moves to break the the u.s. boycott now if those moves succeed if other countries begin to trade with Cuba you'll see exactly what happened with Vietnam in the case of Vietnam after the Vietnam War the United States tried to strangle Vietnam - it had already won the war my opinion in the China was more or less destroyed but I wanted to make sure that it didn't revive so there was an economic stranglehold and it lasted until other countries just started disobeying so after most countries obey what the United States says it's a powerful dangerous country but after a while Japan just stopped paying attention and European companies stopped paying attention they began to trade with Vietnam to set up business offices well at that point American business started complaining they're being cut out of important markets and all of a sudden you know actually over a short period of time at US government policy changed it suddenly discovered that the human rights situation is improving in Vietnam so therefore we can deal with it actually nothing had changed except that economic rivals were beginning to move in and American business was complaining that's beginning to happen in Cuba in Castro's last visit to New York he was I mean the government wouldn't mean through them the media denounced him you know bitter attacks except for one thing David Rockefeller organized a meeting of leading industrialists to minute because the American business world doesn't like the fact that Mexico is starting to become involved in the you know telephone business and Europe is trading and so on no there aren't Cuba and Vietnam are not the same kind of thing you know Vietnam most people in the United States never heard of Cuba has been the leading foreign policy issue for a hundred and seventy years back in the 1820s the United States was committed itself to conquer Cuba and I should say that was the nice people that was Thomas Jefferson and so on who said yes we've got to incorporate Cuba and our empire so they couldn't do it then because of the British fleet not the Russians but the British by the end of the century power had shifted and they could do it and they did in the under the pretext of liberating Cuba the United States joined the Cuban Liberation and conquered Cuba and sin from then until 1959 I was basically a u.s. plantation itself it's a deep-seated issue in the United States to reintegrate Cuba to subordinate Cuba once again to the u.s. system on top of that the United States elites are very much concerned not about lack of democracy in Cuba they don't care one way or another about lack of democracy what they care about is the social standards that have been achieved has very high health standards very high wealth educational standards in fact unique in the Americas it's roughly at the level of Canada in the United States which is pretty remarkable under the circumstances it's a poorer country and not only poor country but it's under attack by the hemispheric superpower and nevertheless it's maintained the standards and that's dangerous because it sends the wrong message tells people look you can do something about your own lives and that's very dangerous thing for people to think about so there are many reasons why the United States wants to ensure that Cuba does not pursue an independent path and it won't be easy to overcome but the major question I think is roughly the same as Vietnam if other countries break the boycott and enough popular protest develops inside the United States policy oh nos programa esta Segundo now every salvo boostedgt Mose McCurry is that what can occur is that so for donors which muscle East North America and actually I did it was the day before I left for South America in my view it's a decision of sort of tenth-rate importance but not of no importance the two political parties are more or less identical but they have different constituencies for historical reasons so the Demick the people who vote democratic tend to be lower income minorities women and so on the people who vote Republican tend to be richer religious fundamentalists you know just the racists you know other sectors of the population now any system whether it's a tyranny or a democracy is going to have to respect the rulers are gonna have to respond to their constituency so you know Brazilian generals had to pay some attention to what's going on in the society when you have a political democracy like the United States with basically one party and two factions they throw crumbs to their constituencies they follow the basic policies the same way but they do something for their constituents and they do different things now that makes a difference it doesn't change the world you know but it makes a big difference if a seven-year-old child has some foodie so I think that's a reason for voting one way or another into any way I split my vote so I'll sometimes vote for Republican sometimes for Democrats but mainly on the basis of considerations like that okay meters of presidents åkesson luigi did Castro passagio brazuca to be moon to for the back so Bruno spittoon it was Thalia to me a goddess a vast anchi presence of gnosis interested where is the kiyose annuity Nevada Viva goddess saraswathi so even brocco Qaddafi verboten appraisement segunda thira as days Mia Donatella but 108 protrudes [Music]

Channel: Roda Viva

Views: 67,476

Rating: 4.9269338 out of 5

Keywords: Roda viva, tv cultura, noam chomsky, retro, entrevista, pensador

Id: Zx6VlKOU1AM

Length: 91min 31sec (5491 seconds)

Published: Thu Oct 05 2017

Reddit Comments

[u/Flip-dabDab]

Wow, what an interesting view on Marx! Dam this guy has some intensely sharp wisdom

[u/stiggpwnz]

!Listen

[u/CommunistLifeCoach]

Holyshit that's in Brazil.