Ibaitik Itsasora
******
Gaza BEFORE Israel showed up
Israel is a criminal state
Bideoa: https://x.com/i/status/1887980771178070396
******
******
Zionists in 2025… “Palestine never existed”
Zionists in 1899… “We will colonise Palestine”
******
In 1948 Albert Einstein foresaw the Israeli terrorism in Palestine that would eventually bring a catastrophe on the Jewish colonists.
******
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs : Trump’s Dangerous Moves.
Honen bidez:
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs : Trump’s Dangerous Moves.
(https://www.youtube.com/live/GheVaaGLZYw)
Transkripzioa:
0:12
[Music]
0:22
[Music]
0:36
Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Npalitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, August 4th, 2025. Professor Jeffrey Saxs
0:45
joins us now. Professor Saxs, always a pleasure, my dear friend. Great to be with you. Want to spend Thank you. I want to spend
0:51
a little time with you uh seeking your analysis on some rather dangerous things
0:57
the president of the United States has done and said lately. But before we get
1:02
there uh I have an interest in this and I know you do and I know it’s one of
1:07
your fields of expertise and I know viewers are interested in it. What are the origins of American hostility
1:16
toward China? Why this hostility rather than compatibility?
1:22
Well, we had compatibility up until 10 years ago and then a conscious decision
1:29
was made to move to hostility. Uh this was uh actually a contrived
1:36
move to try to stop China’s successful economic
1:43
development. The origins of of it are that from the 1970s
1:49
to around uh 2010, China was viewed as uh both a a
1:58
constructive partner, a trade partner and geopolitically
2:04
helpful to the United States for quite a while. Remember when Richard Nixon went
2:09
to China, uh the idea was a kind of triangulation that there was the US cold
2:16
war with the Soviet Union by the US warming up with China. Uh this would
2:23
help to put more pressure, it was thought, on the Soviet Union. So it was an instrumental idea that the US would
2:30
get closer to China. Starting in 1978, China undertook remarkable economic
2:39
reforms, arguably the most successful economic reforms in world history
2:45
because China went from being an impoverished economy in 1978
2:51
uh to being one of the most successful dynamic arguably uh currently the most
2:59
successful economy in the world today during a period of just a bit over 40
3:05
years. Uh now during that time US China economic and political relations were
3:13
good for most of the period actually a lot of Americans were making a lot of
3:19
money by selling things to China or making investments in China or
3:24
integrating Chinese companies into global supply chains. And uh America on
3:30
the whole benefited enormously from uh China’s economic growth. Though some
3:38
places in America faced intense import competition from China and suffered but
3:43
others boomed. California boomed no question as a result of the growing US
3:50
China trade. probably uh places in the industrial Midwest were hit by the
3:58
increase in competition from China but net net uh the US China relations were
4:05
very positive. Now, starting around 2010, uh, American strategists, I use that. I
4:14
think it’s a euphemism because I think they’re idiots, basically, as as you know. I don’t think that they’re
4:20
strategists at all. But anyway, who’s the president uh in this time
4:25
period? That’s Obama. Uh, but it doesn’t matter. This is another point of American foreign policy. All this idea that, oh,
4:32
we’ll see if it’s Clinton or Bush Jr. or Obama or Trump one or Biden or Trump 2.
4:39
This is not actually how foreign policy works. It’s the Pentagon, the CIA, the
4:45
deep state, the military-industrial complex. And starting around 2010, uh
4:51
these strategists said, “Oh my god, China’s too successful. We need to do
4:58
something.” In 2015, a very uh interesting article, horrible on one
5:04
level, because I think it’s foolishness to the maximum, but insightful also to
5:11
the maximum, was written by a former colleague of mine, Ambassador Robert
5:17
Blackwell, who was a professor at Harvard, then a senior US diplomat, and
5:22
another leading specialist, Ashley Telus. And the paper in 2015 was written
5:28
for the Council on Foreign Relations. You could put a link uh to it because I I believe it’s uh openly uh available.
5:37
And it declares bluntly that America’s goal or its grand strategy is primacy.
5:46
In other words, the grand strategy of the United States is to be number one.
5:52
And China’s rise, these authors say, is a threat to America being number one.
6:00
They don’t say China’s evil. They don’t say China’s done something terrible. They don’t say uh that China is a threat
6:08
to US national security or prosperity. They say that China’s success is a
6:14
threat to the American grand strategy of being number one.
6:20
Okay. If you’re in a high school clique, maybe that’s your goal. If you’re
6:26
grown-ups in a in a world uh where there are dangers of nuclear war, where you
6:35
need cooperation, where there’s mutual gains from trade, the idea that being number one is a meaningful idea when
6:43
you’re 4% of the world population. And the idea that the success of another country is harmful to you because
6:52
they’re successful, not because of what they’re doing, but because of their successful
6:57
is, to my mind so mind-bogglingly wrongheaded.
7:03
But that became the core of American policy. And in this very interesting paper, which I really would like people
7:11
to read with their own eyes because it’s incredible, says we must stop China.
7:17
It’s no longer in our interest for China to be successful. And they list all the
7:22
things we should do. For example, one of the incredibly stupid ideas was we
7:29
should have a trade arrangement for the US and Asian countries that excludes
7:34
China. It’s like uh kids on a you take a map, we put an X over China, but we
7:41
trade with all the others. Not noticing that all the others have their main trading partner, China. But Obama really
7:50
tried to do that. He tried to launch something called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which was a trade group
7:57
that would exclude China. Okay, this was another one of these uh ideas that
8:04
belongs in the dust bin of history and it did never materialize. But the list
8:10
goes on. We should stop exporting uh technology. We should uh break
8:16
relations. We should increase our military uh bases around China’s
8:23
rimlands. we should do uh other things uh restrictions on investments uh trade
8:29
barriers. Why? Because America needs to be number one. So we have to do whatever
8:34
we can to harm China’s economy. Now
8:40
today I was just reading uh the typical columnists of uh the Washington Post and
8:47
the New York Times and Financial Times and every one of them treats China like
8:53
an enemy just naturally we have to prepare for war. They’re an enemy. Uh we
9:01
have to be smarter in our trade policy than Trump because uh China’s going to take an advantage. Everything is not
9:08
about American interests or American well-being or the American people. It’s
9:14
about this game. Like it’s a board game. So you ask me
9:20
why do we hate China? Because we were told to starting 10 years ago because it
9:27
became the strategy of the United States to harm China. By the way, how do you
9:34
think Chinese officials and government and business feel about this? That another country is overtly aiming to
9:43
harm them. Is that conducive to to peace, to goodwill, to normal behavior,
9:51
to the security of the United States of America? Of course not. We’re provoking
9:58
and but it’s so clear from this article. People should read it. So this this is
10:03
the the basic point and I’ve I’ve been I just have to add I’ve been
10:09
visiting China since 1981. So uh 44 years I I’ve toured all parts of the
10:17
country. I’ve studied Chinese history extensively. I’ve published about China.
10:23
I’ve written uh very extensively about the Chinese reforms. China is not an
10:30
enemy. China is not doing anything to threaten American security. There is no
10:36
reason for the United States to view China’s well-being as harmful to
10:41
America’s interest. Nor did China’s rise hurt the United States. But our
10:48
political system is so broken that if major parts of the US benefit, but one
10:55
part, say the industrial Midwest, say in Ohio or Indiana hurts, we don’t have a
11:02
policy to help those people. Our policy is to attack China, even though the
11:08
overall relationship is mutually beneficial. So, by the way, every day
11:14
there’s a drum beat of war right now. on our side. Uh I was in China, by the
11:20
way, recently uh just a couple of weeks ago. They just look on in amazement.
11:28
What is going on in your country? What is it? What is this hostility? Why does
11:33
the president fulminate every day about us? That’s what they ask. I wish the
11:40
president listen to you. I wish the Congress could listen to you. Professor Sax, two months ago, the Secretary of
11:47
Defense, who has his own issues, was in Japan and was threatening China.
11:52
They’re all threatening every day. And I and these incredibly awful columnists, Max Boot today, I’ll
12:01
name names in in the Washington Post. It’s it’s just pure wararmongering. Now,
12:06
of course, he supported every war we’ve been in because that’s our columnists. They’re just wararm mongers. But the
12:13
next war they want is with China. Good luck with that. What is the what is the
12:19
matter with our country? Can we just get along with somebody? Is there any reason from an economic
12:25
perspective? One of your other fields of expertise, Professor Saxs, that we can’t
12:31
just have an open trading policy with China. They can sell us what they want and we can buy what we want and we can
12:37
sell whatever they want to buy from us. Of course. And when they out compete us in certain areas like they are doing
12:44
right now in electric vehicles, it’s because the United States has no policy
12:51
that you know Trump just pul pulled the plug literally on electric vehicles and
12:56
on and on the incentives and so forth. Okay, we handed China the world market
13:03
for electric vehicles and then we say, “Oh, they’ve got over capacity in electric vehicles because they’re
13:10
selling electric vehicles all over the world.” Then we have to put up tariff barriers because we have no sensible
13:17
industrial policy whatsoever. And so this this is uh not China’s
13:23
fault. China is just diligently following the future, developing new
13:30
efficient energy sources, 5G technology, open-source AI, fourth generation
13:38
nuclear power. I toured factories recently, incredible integration of
13:45
artificial intelligence systems and robotics in highly sophisticated solar
13:51
module factories. Incredible what I saw. Yeah. And we complain. They’re just
13:57
doing a good job in manufacturing. What What is Trump doing? Trump is attacking
14:03
the universities, cutting uh the research budgets, uh driving scientists
14:10
from the United States to China or to other parts of the world, and then
14:15
whining about all those terrible things the other countries are doing to us. All that unfairness.
14:22
Well, Professor Saxs, President Trump shoots the messenger. If you’re the
14:28
director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the statistics are bad for a month and you reveal them and he
14:34
doesn’t like what you reveal, even though what you revealed is based on an algorithm, you’re fired.
14:40
That’s the mentality we’re dealing with. But, by the way,
14:45
Trump Okay, that’s that is like a 5-year-old. I I don’t I don’t like the
14:50
news. So I uh just throw everything into turmoil. But what’s amazing is not that
14:57
that we might have expected. What is amazing is the silence in Washington.
15:04
This is this is how our country is supposed to be that you get a month of
15:11
bad data and then you fire the person in charge of the Bureau of Labor
15:16
Statistics. And by the way, there always are revisions to the data. This is a
15:23
core and systematic and scientific part of how to measure a complex $30 trillion
15:31
economy. But what struck me first was the silence. Where are the Congress
15:37
people saying, “No, we can’t run a country on the the most shoddy whims.”
15:44
But then the chairman of the council of economic adviserss comes out and defends
15:50
the firing of the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Yes,
15:56
honestly, we are completely destroying our institutions before our
16:03
eyes. The only word that characterizes
16:08
Washington, and I’m I’m speaking beyond Trump himself, is pathetic. Nobody
16:15
speaks the truth. No one says that this completely erratic and dangerous
16:22
behavior is very uh damaging to our
16:27
national security. We had the president shooting off about
16:33
nuclear this and that in the last few days. Just unbelievable. Here’s what he
16:38
said. And and this is in in response to a tweet based on the highly provocative
16:44
statements of the former president. Chris, can you put it up?
16:50
Based on the highly provocative statements of the former president of Russia, Dimmitri Medvidev, who is now
16:56
the deputy chairman of the security council of the Russian Federation, I have ordered two nuclear submarines to
17:02
be positioned in the appropriate regions. Just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than
17:09
just that. Words are very important and can often lead to unintended consequences. I hope this will not be
17:15
one of those instances. Thank you for your attention to this matter. talk about being being uh foolish with words.
17:23
Why would you do this and why would you announce it? And why would you provoke another nuclear power that has three or
17:29
four times the number of nuclear submarines that we do? And and the reason that this
17:39
unbelievable uh posting occurred was in response to a
17:45
posting by Medved which was in response to an ultimatum delivered by Trump to
17:54
President Putin that if you don’t have a ceasefire in 10 days, I impose the
18:01
sanctions on all countries in the world that are dealing with you. Ultimatum to Russia rather than actual
18:12
diplomacy. Good luck with that
18:17
ultimatum. An ultimatum. You know, the problem is Trump is of course he has no
18:24
attention span, maybe no understanding, no knowledge of what he’s doing.
18:30
But the fact of the matter is there’s no diplomacy taking place right now because
18:36
the war in Ukraine that he promised to end in 24 hours, which by the way could
18:42
have been ended in 24 hours, not on the basis of an ultimatum or declaring you
18:48
must have a ceasefire, but on the basis of solving the underlying issue that led
18:55
us to this war. And this war, as every
19:01
analyst you talk to says, and as everyone who has looked clearly into
19:07
this, understands, came because we pushed NATO up to
19:12
Russia’s borders. because we overthrew a government in Ukraine so that that new
19:21
government would support NATO because the government we overthrew wanted neutrality which is a no no in American
19:28
eyes and because the United States resisted every attempt at diplomacy to
19:35
avoid the war and then to end the war. We absolutely threw out the agreement at
19:42
the UN called the Mins 2 agreement that would have avoided this war telling the Ukrainians you don’t have to abide by
19:49
the UN security council and an agreement that the Ukraine itself had signed
19:55
and then when there was a peace agreement reached just about to be reached in April 2022
20:02
the US government told the Ukrainians no you fight on we don’t want you neutral
20:08
We want you on our side. No neutrality. So Trump now gives an ultimatum that
20:16
doesn’t get to any of the root causes of this conflict. Of course, the ultimatum
20:22
is not going to be uh observed, but he’s giving an ultimatum to a nuclear
20:27
superpower. But more than that, he’s telling China, India, Brazil, and all
20:33
the other countries of the world that the United States demands that they stop
20:39
trading with Russia as well. Well, fancy that. You think that’s going
20:45
to work? That the United States that the president of the United States can just
20:50
dictate to the whole world what to do? No. That is not how conflicts are
20:58
resolved. That’s not how diplomacy works. That’s not, and this is the most
21:04
important point, that’s not how American security is achieved. Trump is driving
21:11
America into the greatest insecurity that we have had
21:16
in decades, certainly since uh the worst moments of the Cold War, if not worse
21:22
than that right now. by this obstreporous uh vituprative
21:28
uh unstable non or anti- diplomacy that we’re
21:35
engaged in. Sit and talk and resolve serious issues like grown-ups.
21:42
Not this shooting off in the most provocative
21:49
possible ways. But again, I have to emphasize Trump does it.
21:56
It’s disgusting and it’s shocking. But in Washington, no one says anything else
22:02
because it’s as if the rest of the constitutional order has disappeared in the United States. Professor Saxs, did
22:10
the United States government in the past uh two weeks announce that it had just
22:16
completed the delivery of nuclear weapons to NATO countries?
22:22
I I can’t tell you uh actually I can’t tell you authoritatively
22:28
uh and and I don’t know authoritatively uh on such a a crucial question but I
22:34
know you have many interlocators who can give a an authoritative answer. I appreciate uh your cander there.
22:41
Tomorrow’s New York Times uh has an article by the uh New York Times bureau
22:47
chief in Jerusalem. It’s highly critical of Prime Minister Netanyahu, but the
22:54
opening line is so curious. When Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli
23:00
Prime Minister, led the country to a military victory over Iran in June,
23:08
what military victory over Iran in June is the New York Times talking about?
23:15
Every day I decide to cancel my subscription to the New York Times and
23:22
every day I pull back just because I I need at least to see the foolishness so
23:28
that I understand what others are hearing. Of course, there was no
23:33
military victory. We are in a much deeper crisis than we were before the
23:39
so-called 12-day war. The IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, was
23:47
pushed out of Iran. There is no diplomacy. You see, everything judge is coming from
23:56
the basic point that the American delusion and it’s not just Trump,
24:03
although he has his particular way. the American delusion,
24:10
let me just add say Lindsey Graham or Richard Blumenthal, but it’s everywhere
24:16
that the United States can dictate all terms to all of the rest of the world.
24:24
And that is true whether it’s in Iran, this 12-day war, we bomb when we want,
24:29
we make demands of diplomacy when we want. uh or uh true in Ukraine or true
24:38
uh visav China or true visa v India’s trade with Russia you name it you know
24:45
the the the one leader in the world who said it most clearly just very
24:52
succinctly because he’s a brilliant leader and communicator is Brazil’s
24:57
president Lula who said very matterof factly
25:02
we don’t need an emperor. And he was referring, of course, to all
25:09
the threats that Trump had made against Brazil. Uh
25:15
Trump telling the independent Brazilian judiciary uh to stop a a court case, if you can
25:23
imagine. And uh Lula said we don’t need an emperor, but we have
25:31
we have we have an emperor right now and we don’t have a constitutional order. Uh
25:36
and uh we have growing crises all over the world. and and the the biggest
25:44
culprit is a supine Congress that does
25:49
nothing, lets the president impose taxes, looks the other way, doesn’t complain about anything. As you pointed
25:55
out earlier, the silence from Congress, I I just don’t uh I just don’t get it.
26:02
We we used to know of senators who were personalities and would speak to the
26:09
country and uh actually advise the
26:14
nation about the right way forward. We had debates in Washington, sometimes
26:21
very heated debates, but sometimes very illuminating debates. We have nothing
26:27
right now. We have executive orders where one person declares emergencies.
26:37
We have silence from the Congress as if it doesn’t exist at all. We have a
26:45
Supreme Court that basically fades its eyes and turns away and lets this
26:52
destruction of the constitutional order proceed. We have uh spokespeople
27:01
completely unqualified, knowing nothing,
27:07
opining on uh the gravest matters of international
27:13
relations because they’re they’re in the White House
27:20
without any responsibility. I’m I don’t even want to name names. It’s so ugly the things that have been coming out of
27:27
the White House in in in the last few days and the idiocy of it of people who
27:32
know nothing about the world except that they’re making the world far more
27:37
dangerous every single day. Not to raise your blood pressure, but I
27:42
believe that shortly before we came on air, the Israeli government announced
27:48
the um firing of the attorney general of Israel, who was the principal prosecutor
27:53
of Netanyahu. Now, this will obviously go before the Israeli Supreme Court, and there’ll be another uh Israeli
28:00
constitutional crisis. Uh yeah whether Israel survives all of this
28:07
we don’t know because it is in the process of self-destructing undermining
28:13
the most most basic legitimacy of the state in an orgy of murder uh in an orgy
28:19
of genocide uh where the ministers of the government have
28:26
left any even slightest compunction about talking about genocide openly And
28:33
uh the United States is completely complicit in this completely. And again,
28:40
Trump’s our president, so he’s complicit in it. But it goes far beyond Trump. It is the uh completely compromised
28:48
American political class.
28:55
Mike Huckabe, my former colleague at Fox News. every
29:00
time you turn around there’s somebody that used to work at Fox being given a significant position uh in the
29:06
government was allowed to visit Gaza and of course the person he spoke to was
29:12
healthy, happy, well-dressed and said all the right things to him and he came
29:17
on and uh and repeated that I don’t know how any of this ends. Uh Professor Saxs
29:23
Trump has only been in office for uh eight months. I share every one of your
29:28
uh criticisms against them except that people are dying dying horrible horrific deaths and
29:36
nothing seems to come of it. What will come of Great Britain, France, Canada, a
29:44
few other countries, I think Spain, maybe Portugal recognizing a Palestinian state. I don’t think anything until the
29:51
UN Security Council does it. Am I right? Well, we have right now 150 countries
29:57
that have recognized the state of Palestine. They represent uh around 90%
30:05
of the world population. I need to do an update of the arithmetic, but basically
30:12
90 plus% of the world population says there needs to be a state of Palestine
30:18
alongside the state of Israel. There was a declaration by the Arab countries
30:24
saying that Hamas would be disarmed, that there would be a normalization of
30:31
relations on the basis of a state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel. Uh, of
30:39
course, Israel rejected that. This is what’s important for everybody to
30:44
understand. Israel is not looking for peace. Israel
30:49
is looking for domination. This government and much of Israeli
30:56
society is absolutely content on mass murder and on ethnic cleansing so that
31:03
Israel retains control over 100%
31:09
of what was uh the so-called British mandatory Palestine. In other words, uh
31:15
the land that Britain in its typical imperialistic way promised to everybody,
31:23
to the Arabs, to the Jews, to the French, to everybody. Uh and uh the
31:30
Zionists said, “We’ll take it all.” And they don’t want peace based on two
31:36
states. They want everything. And since there just happened to be some millions
31:42
of Arabs living there, they’re just going to have to leave or starve to death or be killed or submit to a
31:51
parttheid rule. That’s all that’s going on. There is no attempt at in the United
31:58
States and or Israel to actually make peace. But for
32:06
90% of the world, what’s happening is ab abhorrent. And for most of American
32:13
citizens who of course play no role in our government in foreign policy whatsoever, no voice, no say, no
32:22
reflection of our attitudes, we are revolted by Israel’s
32:29
extraordinarily uh cruel
32:36
I don’t I I lose the words, but it is a genocide and and and and and just to say
32:43
we’re it’s two countries now and you ask will something come of this yes in the
32:50
end there will be a state of Palestine how many people die beforehand is the
32:55
real question but there absolutely will be a state of Palestine there is a question will there be a state of Israel
33:00
because if Israel is so shockingly
33:06
disgustingly brazen in this mass murder How is Israel going to go on among the
33:14
community of nations? That’s the real question. Here’s Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia who
33:19
agrees with you and regrettably Secretary of State Marco Rubio who does
33:25
not. Chris, back to back two and three. The the international community, including the United States, made a
33:31
promise in 1947 that there would be a state of Israel and a state for Arabs,
33:37
Palestine, in this space. One promise has been met. Nearly 80 years later, one
33:42
promise has not been met. More than a hundred nations have done a recognition. They’ve said, “Look, we need to meet the
33:48
promise that the international community made.” But it needs to be conditionsbased. And I think the most
33:53
important condition is recognizing a Palestine when they are able to
33:58
peacefully coexist with their neighbors, including Israel. And so as I read what the nations are saying, it’s not a an
34:06
immediate recognition, no questions asked, in September. It’s establishing conditions um that when they are met,
34:13
Palestine would be recognized. The UK is like, well, if Israel doesn’t agree to a ceasefire by September, we’re going to
34:18
recognize the Palestinian state. So if I’m Hamas, I say, you know what, let’s not allow there to be a ceasefire. If
34:24
Hamas refuses to agree to a ceasefire, it guarantees a Palestinian state will be recognized by all these countries in
34:30
September. So, they’re not going to agree to a ceasefire. I mean, it’s so clumsy.
34:36
It It’s hard to know whether these people like Rubio are so dense that they
34:43
don’t understand anything or so vulgar that they obuscate everything. But
34:50
Rubio’s not working towards a twostate solution. No. What’s his complaint? Do your diplomacy.
34:57
That’s your job, Mr. Secretary of State, do your diplomacy,
35:04
but you’re not doing any diplomacy. So, who are you to say what other
35:09
countries should do? Because you and your administration is not engaged in
35:14
diplomacy. It’s engaged in war. War is not diplomacy.
35:20
Diplomacy is finding a way to peace. What are you doing, Mr. Rubio, to find a way to peace and a two-state solution?
35:27
Nothing. So every word that Rubio utters is
35:33
either this measure of how dense he might be or how much he wants to
35:40
obuscate the most basic point that we are complicit in a genocide and do not
35:47
find words for diplomacy which 150 other countries have easily
35:54
recognized. And by the way, that’s 150 that have recognized Palestine. More than 180 have repeatedly voted for
36:03
Palestinian right to political self-determination at the UN year after
36:09
year. That I know the count because I’ve done the arithmetic. It’s 95%
36:15
of the world population. Do you think that the arguments that you’ve made are even articulated in the
36:23
White House? No, I think the uh
36:29
militaryindustrial state which runs our country
36:35
lives in a delusion of being all powerful and
36:42
thinking that whenever there’s resistance all they have to do is escalate more arms, more military, more
36:50
war so that they can dictate. This has been like this for a long time. Again, I
36:56
don’t find anything particular with Trump except how obnoxious things are put. But Biden was terrible.
37:04
Trump won same way. Obama terrible.
37:10
Bush terrible. Bush Jr. This is why none of these problems get solved. It’s not
37:16
just that Trump’s not solving them. The military-industrial state, as
37:21
Eisenhower told us, took over our country by the mid 1960s, probably with
37:28
the coup in which President Kennedy was assassinated. And since then, we don’t have public
37:36
opinion on foreign policy. We don’t have American security interests. We just
37:41
have war. And the war is based on a delusion that we’re the most powerful so that we can dictate terms to everyone
37:48
else. So no, I don’t think that these arguments are discussed or debated because there is no discussion or debate
37:55
in Washington. None. By the way, there’s an article today of
38:00
some senators saying how unhappy they are in the Senate and they say there’s no debate in the Senate anymore. There
38:08
isn’t. I used to work in the Senate a long time ago, 5 uh uh 52 years ago. Uh when I was
38:18
a kid, uh I saw real debate. There’s no debate right now. So no, the things
38:24
we’re discussing, they’re not discussed at all. They’re too arrogant and too ignorant even to have the discussion.
38:32
Professor Saxs, even when you’re angry, you are over-the-top articulate and so
38:38
informative. Thank you very much for uh all of this. I didn’t mean to raise your blood pressure, but God bless you. Thank
38:45
you for your understanding and your ability to explain that understanding to all of us. And we’ll look forward to
38:51
seeing you again soon. See you next week. Thanks a lot. Byebye.
38:56
Fabulous. Coming up tomorrow, Tuesday, at 8 in the morning, Ambassador Charles
39:02
Freeman at 2 in the afternoon, Aaron Monte at 3 in the afternoon, Colonel Karen Quowski. Judge Npalit for judging
39:09
freedom.
39:16
[Music]
39:26
[Music]
oooooo
@tobararbulu # mmt@tobararbulu
Two Subs Move—Something Big Is Coming | Prof. Jeffrey Sachs https://youtu.be/uZwRaWeGha4?si=9-GfnqsHiofSbWvm
Honen bidez:
Two Subs Move—Something Big Is Coming | Prof. Jeffrey Sachs
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZwRaWeGha4)
Transkripzioa:
0:00
up until 10 years ago and then a conscious decision was made to move to
0:05
hostility. Uh this was uh actually a contrived
0:11
move to try to stop China’s successful
0:17
economic development. The origins of of it are that from the 1970s
0:24
to around uh 2010, China was viewed as uh both a
0:32
constructive partner, a trade partner and geopolitically
0:38
helpful to the United States for quite a while. Remember when Richard Nixon went
0:44
to China, uh the idea was a kind of triangulation that there was the US cold
0:51
war with the Soviet Union by the US warming up with China. This would help
0:58
to put more pressure, it was thought, on the Soviet Union. So it was an instrumental idea that the US would get
1:05
closer to China. Starting in 1978, China undertook remarkable economic
1:14
reforms, arguably the most successful economic reforms in world history
1:19
because China went from being an impoverished economy in 1978
1:26
uh to being one of the most successful dynamic arguably uh currently the most
1:33
successful economy in the world today during a period of just a bit over 40
1:40
years. Uh now during that time US China economic and political relations were
1:48
good for most of the period actually a lot of Americans were making a lot of
1:54
money by selling things to China or making investments in China or
1:59
integrating Chinese companies into global supply chains. And uh America on
2:05
the whole benefited enormously from uh China’s economic growth. Though some
2:12
places in America faced intense import competition from China and suffered but
2:18
others boomed. California boomed no question as a result of the growing US
2:25
China trade. probably uh places in the industrial Midwest were hit by the
2:33
increase in competition from China. But net net uh the US China relations were
2:40
very positive. Now, starting around 2010, uh, American strategists, I use that. I
2:48
think it’s a euphemism because I think they’re idiots basically, as as you know. I don’t think that they’re
2:54
strategists at all. But anyway, who’s the president uh in this time
2:59
period? That’s Obama. But it doesn’t matter. This is another point of American foreign policy. All this idea that, oh,
3:06
we’ll see if it’s Clinton or Bush Jr. or Obama or Trump one or Biden or Trump 2.
3:14
This is not actually how foreign policy works. It’s the Pentagon, the CIA, the
3:20
deep state, the militaryindustrial complex. And starting around 2010, uh
3:26
these strategists said, “Oh my god, China’s too successful. We need to do
3:32
something.” In 2015, a very uh interesting article, horrible on one
3:39
level, because I think it’s foolishness to the maximum, but insightful also to
3:46
the maximum, was written by a former colleague of mine, Ambassador Robert
3:51
Blackwell, who was a professor at Harvard, then a senior US diplomat, and
3:57
another leading specialist, Ashley Telus. And the paper in 2015 was written
4:02
for the Council on Foreign Relations. You could put a link to it because I I
4:08
believe it’s openly uh available. And it
4:13
declares bluntly that America’s goal or its grand strategy is primacy. In other
4:21
words, the grand strategy of the United States is to be number one.
4:26
and China’s rise, these authors say, is a threat to America being number one.
4:34
They don’t say China’s evil. They don’t say China’s done something terrible. They don’t say uh that China is a a
4:42
threat to US national security or prosperity. They say that China’s
4:47
success is a threat to the American grand strategy of being number one.
4:55
Okay, if you’re in a high school clique, maybe that’s your goal. If you’re
5:01
grown-ups in a in a world uh where there are dangers of nuclear war, where you
5:10
need cooperation, where there’s mutual gains from trade, the idea that being number one is a meaningful idea when
5:18
you’re 4% of the world population. And the idea that the success of another country is harmful to you because
5:27
they’re successful, not because of what they’re doing, but because of their successful
5:32
is, to my mind so mind-bogglingly wrongheaded.
5:38
But that became the core of American policy. And in this very interesting paper, which I really would like people
5:45
to read with their own eyes because it’s incredible, says we must stop China.
5:52
It’s no longer in our interest for China to be successful. And they list all the
5:57
things we should do. For example, one of the incredibly stupid ideas was we
6:04
should have a trade arrangement for the US and Asian countries that excludes
6:09
China. It’s like uh kids on a you take a map, we put an X over China, but we
6:16
trade with all the others. Not noticing that all the others have their main trading partner, China. But Obama really
6:24
tried to do that. He tried to launch something called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which was a trade group
6:31
that would exclude China. Okay, this was another one of these uh ideas that
6:38
belongs in the dust bin of history and it did never materialize. But the list
6:44
goes on. We should stop exporting uh technology. We should uh break
6:50
relations. We should increase our military uh bases around China’s
6:57
rimlands. we should do uh other things uh restrictions on investments uh trade
7:03
barriers. Why? Because America needs to be number one. So we have to do whatever
7:09
we can to harm China’s economy. Now
7:14
today uh I was just reading uh the typical columnists of uh the Washington
7:21
Post and the New York Times and Financial Times and every one of them
7:26
treats China like an enemy. Just naturally we have to prepare for war.
7:33
They’re an enemy. Uh we have to be smarter in our trade policy than Trump because uh China’s going to take an
7:40
advantage. Everything is not about American interests or American
7:46
well-being or the American people. It’s about this game.
7:51
Like it’s a board game. So you ask me why do we hate China? Because we were
7:58
told to starting 10 years ago. Because it became the strategy of the United
8:04
States to harm China. By the way, how do you think Chinese officials and
8:10
government and business feel about this? That another country is overtly aiming
8:17
to harm them. Is that conducive to to peace, to goodwill, to normal behavior,
8:26
to the security of the United States of America? Of course not. We’re provoking
8:32
and but it’s so clear from this article. People should read it. So this this is
8:38
the the basic point and I’ I’ve been I just have to add I’ve been visiting
8:44
China since 1981. So uh 44 years I I’ve
8:49
toured all parts of the country. I’ve studied Chinese history extensively.
8:56
I’ve published about China. I’ve written very extensively about the Chinese
9:02
reforms. China is not an enemy. China’s not doing anything to threaten American
9:08
security. There is no reason for the United States to view China’s well-being
9:14
as harmful to America’s interest. Nor did China’s rise hurt the United States.
9:22
But our political system is so broken that if major parts of the US benefit,
9:28
but one part, say the industrial Midwest, say in Ohio or Indiana hurts,
9:36
we don’t have a policy to help those people. Our policy is to attack China,
9:42
even though the overall relationship is mutually beneficial. So, by the way,
9:48
every day there’s a drum beat of war right now. on our side. Uh I was in China by the
9:55
way recently uh just a couple of weeks ago. They just look on in amazement.
10:02
What is going on in your country? What is it? What is this hostility? Why does
10:08
the president fulminate every day about us? That’s what they ask.
10:14
I wish the president could listen to you. I wish the Congress could listen to you. Professor Saxs, two months ago, the
10:21
Secretary of Defense who has his own issues was in Japan and was threatening China.
10:27
They’re all threatening every day. And I and these incredibly awful columnists, Max Boot today, I’ll
10:35
name names in in the Washington Post. It’s it’s just pure wararmongering. Now,
10:41
of course, he supported every war we’ve been in because that’s our columnists. They’re just wararm mongers. But the
10:47
next war they want is with China. Good luck with that. What is the what is the
10:53
matter with our country along with somebody? Is there any reason from an economic
11:00
perspective? One of your other fields of expertise, Professor Saxs, that we can’t
11:05
just have an open trading policy with China. They can sell us what they want and we can buy what we want and we can
11:12
sell whatever they want to buy from us. Of course. And when they out compete us in certain areas like they are doing
11:19
right now in electric vehicles, it’s because the United States has no policy
11:26
that you know Trump just pull pulled the plug literally on electric vehicles and
11:31
on and on the incentives and so forth. Okay, we handed China the world market
11:38
for electric vehicles and then we say, “Oh, they’ve got over capacity in
11:43
electric vehicles because they’re selling electric vehicles all over the world.” Then we have to put up tariff
11:48
barriers because we have no sensible industrial policy whatsoever.
11:55
And so this this is uh not China’s fault. China’s just diligently following
12:02
the future, developing new efficient energy sources, 5G technology,
12:09
open-source AI, fourth generation nuclear power. I toured factories
12:16
recently, incredible integration of artificial intelligence systems and
12:22
robotics in highly sophisticated solar module factories. Incredible what I saw.
12:30
Yeah. And we complain. They’re just doing a good job in manufacturing. What
12:35
What is Trump doing? Trump is attacking the universities, cutting the research
12:41
budgets, uh driving scientists from the United States to China or to other parts
12:48
of the world, and then whining about all those terrible things the other countries are doing to us. All that
12:55
unfairness. Well, Professor Saxs, President Trump shoots the messenger. If you’re the
13:02
director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the statistics are bad for a month and you reveal them and he
13:08
doesn’t like what you reveal, even though what you revealed is based on an algorithm, you’re fired.
13:14
That’s the mentality we’re dealing with. But, by the way,
13:20
Trump Okay, that’s that is like a five-year-old. I I don’t I don’t like
13:25
the news. So I uh just throw everything into turmoil. But what’s amazing is not
13:31
that that we might have expected. What is amazing is the silence in Washington.
13:39
This is this is how our country is supposed to be that you get a month of
13:45
bad data and then you fire the person in charge of the Bureau of Labor
13:51
Statistics. And by the way, there always are revisions to the data. This is a
13:57
core and systematic and scientific part of how to measure a complex $30 trillion
14:06
economy. But what struck me first was the silence. Where are the Congress
14:12
people saying, “No, we can’t run a country on the the most shoddy whims.”
14:19
But then the chairman of the council of economic adviserss comes out and defends
14:25
the firing of the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Yes,
14:30
honestly, we are completely destroying our institutions before our
14:37
eyes. The only word that characterizes
14:43
Washington, and I’m I’m speaking beyond Trump himself, is pathetic.
14:49
Nobody speaks the truth. No one says that this completely erratic and
14:56
dangerous behavior is very uh damaging to our national security. We had the
15:04
president shooting off about nuclear this and that in the last few
15:10
days. Just unbelievable. Here’s what he said. And and this is in response to a
15:16
tweet based on the highly provocative statements of the former president.
15:21
Chris, can you put it up? Based on the highly provocative
15:26
statements of the former president of Russia, Dimmitri Medvidev, who is now the deputy chairman of the security
15:32
council of the Russian Federation, I have ordered two nuclear submarines to
15:37
be positioned in the appropriate regions. Just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than
15:43
just that. Words are very important and can often lead to unintended consequences. I hope this will not be
15:49
one of those instances. Thank you for your attention to this matter. talk about being being uh foolish with words.
15:58
Why would you do this? And why would you announce it? And why would you provoke another nuclear power that has three or
16:04
four times the number of nuclear submarines that we do? And and the reason that this
16:13
unbelievable uh posting occurred was in response to a
16:20
posting by Medved which was in response to an ultimatum delivered by Trump to
16:29
President Putin that if you don’t have a ceasefire in 10 days, I impose the
16:36
sanctions on all countries in the world that are dealing with you. Ultimatum to Russia rather than actual
16:46
diplomacy. Good luck with that
16:51
ultimatum. An ultimatum. You know, the problem is Trump is, of course, he has
16:58
no attention span, maybe no understanding, no knowledge of what he’s doing.
17:05
But the fact of the matter is there’s no diplomacy taking place right now because
17:11
the war in Ukraine that he promised to end in 24 hours, which by the way could
17:16
have been ended in 24 hours, not on the basis of an ultimatum or declaring you
17:23
must have a ceasefire, but on the basis of solving the underlying issue that led
17:30
us to this war. And this war, as every
17:35
analyst you talk to says, and as everyone who has looked clearly into
17:41
this, understands, came because we pushed NATO up to
17:46
Russia’s borders. because we overthrew a government in Ukraine
17:53
so that that new government would support NATO because the government we overthrew wanted neutrality which is a
18:01
no no in American eyes and because the United States resisted every attempt at
18:08
diplomacy to avoid the war and then to end the war. We absolutely threw out the
18:16
agreement at the UN called the Mins 2 agreement that would have avoided this war telling the Ukrainians you don’t
18:22
have to abide by the UN security council and an agreement that the Ukraine itself had signed
18:29
and then when there was a peace agreement reached just about to be reached in April 2022 the US government
18:38
told the Ukrainians no you fight on we don’t want you neutral We want you on our side. No neutrality.
18:46
So Trump now gives an ultimatum that doesn’t get to any of the root causes of
18:54
this conflict. Of course, the ultimatum is not going to be uh observed, but he’s
19:00
giving an ultimatum to a nuclear superpower. But more than that, he’s telling China, India, Brazil, and all
19:08
the other countries of the world that the United States demands that they stop
19:14
trading with Russia as well. Well, fancy that. You think that’s going
19:19
to work? That the United States that the president of the United States can just
19:25
dictate to the whole world what to do? No. That is not how conflicts are
19:32
resolved. That’s not how diplomacy works. That’s not, and this is the most
19:38
important point, that’s not how American security is achieved. Trump is driving
19:45
America into the greatest insecurity that we have had
19:51
in decades, certainly since uh the worst moments of the Cold War, if not worse
19:57
than that right now. by this obstreporous uh duperative
20:03
uh unstable non or anti- diplomacy that we’re
20:09
engaged in. Sit and talk and resolve serious issues like grown-ups.
20:17
Not this shooting off in the most provocative
20:23
possible ways. But again, I have to emphasize Trump does it.
20:30
It’s disgusting and it’s shocking. But in Washington, no one says anything else
20:37
because it’s as if the rest of the constitutional order has disappeared in the United States.
20:44
Professor Saxs, did the United States government in the past uh two weeks
20:49
announce that it had just completed the delivery of nuclear weapons to NATO
20:55
countries? I I can’t tell you uh actually uh I
21:00
can’t tell you authoritatively uh and and I don’t know authoritatively
21:06
uh on such a a crucial question but I know you have many interlocators who can
21:11
give a an authoritative answer. I appreciate uh your cander there. Tomorrow’s New York Times uh has an
21:19
article by the uh New York Times bureau chief in Jerusalem. It’s highly critical
21:25
of Prime Minister Netanyahu, but the opening line is so curious.
21:32
When Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, led the country to a
21:38
military victory over Iran in June, what military victory over Iran in June
21:46
is the New York Times talking about? Every day I decide to cancel my
21:55
subscription to the New York Times and every day I pull back just because I I need at least to see the foolishness so
22:02
that I understand what others are hearing. Of course, there was no
22:08
military victory. We are in a much deeper crisis than we were before the
22:14
so-called 12-day war. uh the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency was
22:21
pushed out of Iran. There is no diplomacy. You see, everything judge is coming from
22:30
the basic point that the American delusion and it’s not just Trump,
22:38
although he has his particular way. the American delusion,
22:45
let me just add say Lindsey Graham or Richard Blumenthal, but it’s everywhere
22:50
that the United States can dictate all terms to all of the rest of the world.
22:58
And that is true whether it’s in Iran, this 12-day war, we bomb when we want,
23:04
we make demands of diplomacy when we want. uh or uh true in Ukraine or true
23:12
uh visav China or true visav India’s trade with Russia you name it you know
23:19
the the the one leader in the world who said it most clearly just very
23:26
succinctly because he’s a brilliant leader and communicator is Brazil’s
23:32
president Lula who said very matterof factly
23:37
we don’t need an emperor. And he was referring, of course, to all
23:44
the threats that Trump had made against Brazil. Uh
23:49
Trump telling the independent Brazilian judiciary uh to stop a a court case, if you can
23:58
imagine. And uh Lula said we don’t need an emperor, but we have
24:06
we have we have an emperor right now and we don’t have a constitutional order. Uh
24:11
and uh we have growing crises all over the world. and and the the biggest
24:18
culprit is a supine Congress that does
24:23
nothing, lets the president impose taxes, looks the other way, doesn’t complain about anything. As you pointed
24:29
out earlier, the silence from Congress, I I just don’t uh I just don’t get it.
24:36
We we used to know of senators who were personalities and would speak to the
24:44
country, right? and uh actually advise the nation
24:50
about the right way forward. We had debates in Washington, sometimes very
24:56
heated debates, but sometimes very illuminating debates. We have nothing
25:02
right now. We have executive orders where one person declares emergencies.
25:12
We have silence from the Congress as if it doesn’t exist at all. We have a
25:20
Supreme Court that basically shades its eyes and turns away and lets this
25:27
destruction of the constitutional order proceed. We have uh spokespeople
25:36
completely unqualified, knowing nothing,
25:42
opining on uh the gravest matters of international
25:48
relations because they’re they’re in the White House
25:55
without any responsibility. I’m I don’t even want to name names. It’s so ugly the things that have been coming out of
26:01
the White House in in in the last few days and the idiocy of it of people who know nothing about the world except that
26:09
they’re making the world far more dangerous every single day.
26:14
Not to raise your blood pressure, but I believe that shortly before we came on air, the Israeli government announced
26:22
the um firing of the attorney general of Israel, who was the principal prosecutor
26:28
of Netanyahu. Now, this will obviously go before the Israeli Supreme Court, and there’ll be another uh Israeli uh
26:34
constitutional uh crisis. Uh yeah whether Israel survives all of this
26:41
we don’t know because it is in the process of self-destructing undermining
26:48
the most most basic legitimacy of the state in an orgy of murder uh in an orgy
26:54
of genocide uh where the ministers of the government have
27:00
left any even slightest compunction about talking about genocide openly And
27:08
uh the United States is completely complicit in this completely. And again,
27:15
Trump’s our president, so he’s complicit in it. But it goes far beyond Trump. It is the uh completely compromised
27:22
American political class.
27:30
Mike Huckabe, my former colleague at Fox News. Every
27:35
time you turn around, there’s somebody that used to work at Fox being given a significant position uh in the
27:41
government was allowed to visit Gaza. And of course, the person he spoke to
27:46
was healthy, happy, well-dressed, and said all the right things to him, and he
27:51
came on and uh and repeated that. I don’t know how any of this ends. Uh
27:56
Professor Saxs, Trump has only been in office for uh eight months. I share every one of your uh criticisms against
28:04
them except that people are dying dying horrible horrific deaths and
28:11
nothing seems to come of it. What will come of Great Britain, France, Canada, a
28:18
few other countries, I think Spain, maybe Portugal recognizing a Palestinian
28:23
state. I don’t think anything until the UN Security Council does it. Am I right?
28:29
Well, we have right now 150 countries that have recognized the state of
28:34
Palestine. They represent uh around 90%
28:40
of the world population. I need to do an update of the arithmetic, but basically
28:47
90 plus% of the world population says there needs to be a state of Palestine
28:52
alongside the state of Israel. There was a declaration by the Arab countries
28:59
saying that Hamas would be disarmed, that there would be a normalization of
29:06
relations on the basis of a state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel. Uh, of
29:13
course, Israel rejected that. This is what’s important for everybody to
29:19
understand. Israel is not looking for peace. Israel
29:24
is looking for domination. This government and much of Israeli
29:30
society is absolutely content on mass murder and on ethnic cleansing so that
29:38
Israel retains control over 100%
29:43
of what was uh the so-called British mandatory Palestine. In other words, uh
29:50
the land that Britain in its typical imperialistic way promised to everybody,
29:58
to the Arabs, to the Jews, to the French, to everybody. Uh and uh the
30:04
Zionists said, “We’ll take it all.” And they don’t want peace based on two
30:11
states. They want everything. And since there just happened to be some millions
30:16
of Arabs living there, they’re just going to have to leave or starve to death or be killed or submit to a
30:26
parttheid rule. That’s all that’s going on. There is no attempt at in the United
30:33
States and or Israel to actually make peace. But for
30:40
90% of the world, what’s happening is ab abhorrent. And for most of American
30:48
citizens who of course play no role in our government in foreign policy whatsoever, no voice, no say, no
30:56
reflection of our attitudes. We are revolted by Israel’s
31:04
extraordinarily uh cruel
31:10
I don’t I I lose the words but it is a genocide and and and and just to say we’re it’s
31:19
two countries now and you ask will something come of this? Yes. In the end
31:24
there will be a state of Palestine. How many people die beforehand is the real
31:29
question. But there absolutely will be a state of Palestine. There is a question, will there be a state of Israel? Because
31:35
if Israel is so shockingly,
31:40
disgustingly brazen in this mass murder, how is Israel going to go on among the
31:48
community of nations? That’s the real question. Here’s Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia who agrees with you and
31:56
regrettably Secretary of State Marco Rubio who does not. Chris, back to back
32:01
two and three. The the international community, including the United States, made a
32:06
promise in 1947 that there would be a state of Israel and a state for Arabs,
32:11
Palestine, in this space. One promise has been met. Nearly 80 years later, one
32:16
promise has not been met. more than a hundred nations have done a recognition. They’ve said look we need to meet the
32:22
promise that the international community made but it needs to be conditionsbased and I think the most important condition
32:29
is recognizing a Palestine when they are able to peacefully coexist with their
32:35
neighbors including Israel. And so as I read what the nations are saying it’s not a an immediate recognition no
32:42
questions asked in September. It’s establishing conditions um that when
32:47
they are met, Palestine would be UK is like, well, if Israel doesn’t agree to a ceasefire by September, we’re going to recognize a Palestinian state.
32:53
So, if I’m Hamas, I say, you know what, let’s not allow there to be a ceasefire. If Hamas refuses to agree to a
32:59
ceasefire, it guarantees a Palestinian state will be recognized by all these countries in September. So, they’re not
33:04
going to agree to a ceasefire. I mean, it’s so it it’s hard to know whether these
33:11
people like Rubio are so dense that they don’t understand anything or so vulgar
33:19
that they obfuscate everything. But Rubio’s not working towards a twostate
33:25
solution. No. What’s his complaint? Do your diplomacy. That’s your job,
33:32
Mr. Secretary of State. Do your diplomacy. But you’re not doing any diplomacy.
33:39
So who are you to say what other countries should do? Because you and
33:44
your administration is not engaged in diplomacy. It’s engaged in war. War is
33:50
not diplomacy. Diplomacy is finding a way to peace. What are you doing, Mr. Rubio, to find a
33:57
way to peace and a two-state solution? Nothing. So every word that Rubio utters is
34:05
either this measure of how dense he might be or how much he wants to
34:12
obuscate the most basic point that we are complicit in a genocide and do not
34:19
find words for diplomacy which 150 other countries have easily
34:27
recognized. And by the way, that’s 150 that have recognized Palestine. More than 180 have repeatedly voted for
34:36
Palestinian right to political self-determination at the UN year after
34:42
year. That I know the count because I’ve done the arithmetic. It’s 95%
34:47
of the world population. Do you think that the arguments that you’ve made are even articulated in the
34:55
White House? No, I think the uh
35:02
militaryindustrial state which runs our country
35:08
lives in a delusion of being all powerful and
35:15
thinking that whenever there’s resistance all they have to do is escalate more arms, more military, more
35:22
war so that they can dictate. This has been like this for a long time. Again, I
35:28
don’t find anything particular with Trump except how obnoxious things are put. But Biden was terrible. Trump won
35:37
same way. Obama terrible. Bush terrible. Bush Jr. This is why none
35:46
of these problems get solved. It’s not just that Trump’s not solving them.
35:51
The military-industrial state, as Eisenhower told us, took over our country by the mid 1960s, probably with
36:01
the coup in which President Kennedy was assassinated. And since then, we don’t have public
36:08
opinion on foreign policy. We don’t have American security interests. We just
36:14
have war. And the war is based on a delusion that we’re the most powerful so that we can dictate terms to everyone
36:20
else. So no, I don’t think that these arguments are discussed or debated because there is no discussion or debate
36:27
in Washington. None. By the way, there’s an article today of some senators saying
36:34
how unhappy they are in the Senate and they say there’s no debate in the Senate
36:39
anymore. There isn’t. I used to work in the Senate a long time ago, 50 uh uh 52
36:48
years ago. Uh when I was a kid, uh I saw real debate. There’s no debate right
36:54
now. So no, the things we’re discussing, they’re not discussed at all. They’re too arrogant and too ignorant even to
37:02
have the discussion. Professor Saxs, even when you’re angry,
37:07
you are over-the-top articulate and so informative. Thank you very much for uh
37:13
all of this. I didn’t mean to raise your blood pressure, but God bless you. Thank you for your understanding and your
37:19
ability to explain that understanding to all of us. And we look forward to seeing you again soon.
37:24
See you next week. Who auto?
oooooo
@tobararbulu # mmt@tobararbulu
Something HUGE Is Coming – No One’s Ready | Prof. Jeffrey Sachs https://youtu.be/iGtFdYGOz_Y?si=M3vBNwJu1P6sLCp6
Honen bidez:
Something HUGE Is Coming – No One’s Ready | Prof. Jeffrey Sachs
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGtFdYGOz_Y)
Transkripzioa:
0:00
Of course, Washington is a bit divided.
0:05
There are hawks that for the last 35 years have been intent on undermining
0:13
Russia, dividing Russia, even regime change in Russia. NATO enlargement was
0:20
part of that program. And uh it’s gotten us into a lot of trouble because Russia
0:28
does not want to be subordinated to the United States and it resents uh more
0:34
than resents it regards uh this hawkish US approach as a direct uh and immediate
0:44
threat to Russian security. I frankly don’t blame them in that view. I’m a
0:49
critic very much of this uh uh deep state US approach which has been pretty
0:56
consistent. Supposedly Donald Trump wanted to do something
1:03
different. uh and I say supposedly because to this moment it’s not sure uh
1:11
whether uh he understands really wants to do something different has the
1:18
capacity to do something different and will stand up to what clearly remains uh
1:24
the hawkish deep state part of the American political scene. But Trump came
1:31
in on the ostensible idea of ending the Ukraine
1:37
war. There were statements made informally that yes, NATO enlargement
1:44
was a provocation. We can see Russia’s point of view, but those statements were
1:50
never made into US policy to this moment. Uh Trump has never given a
1:56
speech to the American people explaining we’re going to do something different.
2:01
Uh Trump has sent uh his envoy Steven Witoff to Moscow. They’ve talked with
2:10
the Russians. It looked to me promising a few months ago and then Trump changed
2:15
his line. He’s also sent this old man, General
2:22
Kellogg, who definitely reflects the mainstream of uh the uh
2:29
militaryindustrial scene in the United States. And this comes to your specific
2:34
question, what is the US asking? What is Russia responding? And where is uh the
2:43
real American policy at this moment? Uh
2:48
the Russians to start there are very clear. They say this war came about
2:54
because of uh actions that threaten Russian security. And the way to end the
3:01
war is to resolve those underlying causes of this war. And number one is
3:09
NATO enlargement. Number two, by the way, is the US participation in uh the
3:17
uh choosing the regimes of Ukraine. The US is deeply involved in uh in Ukrainian
3:25
politics to a disgusting extent. And the US played a direct role in the coup in
3:34
February 2014 that overthrew Victor Yanukovic, the president of Ukraine who
3:40
wanted neutrality rather than NATO. So the Russians are saying look these are
3:47
the root causes uh of this war. We have to have a security architecture that
3:54
this doesn’t continue. The US side uh
4:00
has varied over time. Uh for a while the US hawkish side said keep fighting.
4:08
Russia will collapse. Uh it will collapse because of the economic sanctions. It will collapse because of
4:14
US weaponry. It will collapse because Putin is politically weak in Moscow.
4:19
These were all wrong assessments. I think one can even be stronger and say they were delusional assessments. But
4:26
they were in in they were wrong. When Russia started to win on the
4:32
battlefield, the hawkish side said ceasefire is the answer. Freeze the
4:39
conflict. The Russians said, “Well, freeze the conflict just means we have the momentum right now. You want us to
4:46
stop the advance and when uh your side strengthens, you’ll start the war again
4:51
because you won’t get to the core issues.” The United States never answers
4:56
that challenge publicly. Uh the Europeans are beyond pathetic in their
5:04
public rhetoric. So this is part of the idiocy of global events that serious
5:11
issues are raised but they’re not responded to in a serious way. But the Russians are saying, “What do you mean
5:16
ceasefire? We want to get to the root causes.” up until this moment,
5:23
after an initial uh
5:28
seeming progress on getting to root causes, Trump reversed, went to the
5:35
ceasefire, then he went to the unconditional ceasefire within 10day
5:41
approach. This is how India got into this tariff business. uh and um then
5:49
suddenly two days ago there’s an announcement of the meeting between uh
5:54
Trump and uh Putin. What does it mean? Uh well, nobody knows I think really
6:01
what it means. But one idea is the hopeful idea is that Witoff made uh real
6:10
uh uh statements of awareness of root causes
6:17
and readiness to agree on resolving the root causes of the war.
6:24
That’s the optimistic side that maybe Trump is coming back to what seemed to
6:29
be the initial course. The pessimistic side is well it’s just another meeting
6:36
and Trump’s going to do whatever he does afterwards and Russia’s going to maintain its position and nothing will
6:41
come of it. That’s certainly possible also. Uh so I don’t feel that we uh
6:48
understand uh on the inside why suddenly
6:54
this uh summit meeting is taking place.
6:59
If I had to guess, I guess that the Americans signaled uh some reality this
7:06
time around. This would be the best news. Uh what’s interesting is that on
7:12
the surface Trump is still ma well on the surface I should say visa v Russia
7:18
Trump has said well I don’t know whether we’ll continue to make uh this demand
7:24
for a unilateral ceasefire unconditional ceasefire we’ll see what Putin says but
7:32
at the same time incredibly he’s punishing India in the proc in the process of of saying you have to stop uh
7:41
purchasing oil from Russia and the tariffs are going into effect and this
7:48
is already having major ramifications for global politics just within hours.
7:56
All in all, I think the United States is incoherent in its foreign policy. I’m
8:03
not very optimistic about Trump in general because I don’t think he has an attention span longer than 15 minutes
8:10
and uh I don’t know whether they can make peace because of Trump’s limitations but I
8:18
could say they should make peace and Russia is actually on the right side of this which is uh stop the NATO
8:26
enlargement. It never should have happened. uh address the issues of the territories. Crimea is of course never
8:34
going back uh to uh Ukraine under all of the history and the circumstances, but
8:40
there is the scope for ending this war and it should be ended uh and it should be ended by addressing the fundamental
8:48
reasons for the war. How powerful do you think is the military industrial complex and the
8:54
whole u NATO infrastructure given some people are arguing now that uh Europe
9:00
has decided to subsidize NATO fully. I mean the all the aids that dried up
9:06
after President Trump came to power has been fully replenished by more than replenished by Europeans mostly the
9:12
Nordic countries um and and and Germany. um
9:17
how much of an incentive or how much of a a a pressure is coming coming out of
9:23
NATO uh and and and the military-industrial complex to uh not normalize relationships between United
9:30
States and Russia in in terms of uh core fundamental
9:36
power. Donald Trump could end the war, tell NATO that enlargement is not going
9:43
forward and uh accomplish that. Uh Europe could not sustain the war effort
9:51
even if it decided it was in its interest to do so. And at the same time,
9:58
Trump would have to manage this politically in a pretty uh sophisticated
10:05
and consistent way because he’d face opposition all over the place, starting
10:11
inside the United States, inside the Congress, uh with senators like uh most
10:20
notoriously Lindsey Graham and and Richard Blumenthal, but a lot of senator
10:25
tors who are basically uh part of the military-industrial complex. They’re on
10:31
the armed services committee. The mindset in Washington is war all the
10:39
time. Uh and so a president has to change that mindset. Now, could Trump do
10:45
so? First, constitutionally, yes. If he says we’re stopping, the US will stop.
10:54
He has the responsibility of foreign policy. Congress can’t wage a war over
11:01
the United States president’s head. And for this reason, if the president
11:07
does his job, yes, he has the authority to do this, could he win the politics on
11:13
this? Yes. because the American people as a public opinion, as an electorate,
11:21
has no interest in this war at all. Uh they’re sick of it. Uh they don’t want
11:27
anymore. His Trump’s MAGA base uh was told the war is going to end quickly.
11:34
The early rhetoric from JD Vance and from others was this war is going to end
11:39
quickly. So it’s not that Trump would face push back from the broad
11:45
electorate. The push back would be from inside the militaryindustrial complex.
11:51
Then comes Europe. Yes, the Europeans are basically wanting
11:57
the war to continue. I think this is profoundly wrongheaded from their point
12:05
of view, from their from Europe’s interests. uh Europe’s interest is actually
12:11
open normal relations with Russia because Europe and Russia are
12:17
complimentary economies. They do well when they trade with each other. They
12:22
both hurt when the trade is sundered. Although Europe hurts even more. It’s
12:28
the western appendage of Eurasia. Russia can turn to India. It can turn to China.
12:34
can turn to uh other places whereas Europe actually is in in fact more
12:41
dependent on Russia than Russia is on Europe. So I think the Europeans get it
12:47
wrong but they are a pressure group. Uh they think it’s good that Ukraine is
12:53
fighting Russia because they think well that’s less chance that Russia will be
12:59
on our border. This is primitive by the way. Russia is not going to invade
13:05
Europe, doesn’t have the means, the reason, the motivation, uh would not
13:10
face the dangers, would and all the rest. But the Europeans have been on
13:15
this harder line. Now, as I said, they do not have the capacity to overrule the
13:22
president of the United States. They have a capacity to raise the political pain for Trump. charges of appeasement,
13:30
charges of being soft on Russia, those count to some extent uh in American
13:36
politics, and they’ll make those charges, and they have in the past uh months. But could they really
13:44
continue the war without the United States? The whole idea is laughable. Uh even with the United States, the war is
13:51
not going to be uh won. Russia’s going to win the war on the battlefield. So
13:56
given all of this, it’s up to Trump. If he acts presidential, that’s a big if,
14:03
but if he acts presidential, the war will end. I want to ask my next question on um
14:10
let’s say international economic governance and I want to enter that through the so-called uh tariffs
14:17
um economic warfare. I think tariffs is a bit misleading here because if you carefully follow it, I mean the deal
14:24
with Indonesia, Professor Jiggos has written about is the US is bringing uh in all kinds of things to the table.
14:30
Investment rights, patent rights, digital customs, even quality control, uh etc., etc. In South Africa, they
14:38
would use, you know, their grievance about the Palestinian case or this absolutely ridiculous idea about uh
14:45
white genocide. In Brazil they are using this prosecution thing or you know anything that you don’t like yeah can
14:52
literally be brought to the table and then in the garb of tariffs and trade deficit you can arm twist nations. I
14:58
think the big question that comes to uh uh that most nation states are uh
15:04
contemplating on is uh what is this global economic governance uh uh given
15:09
the United States uh the the chief mafia is acting uh uh on his behalf and there
15:16
seems to be no collective uh platform to resist. I mean yes there are breaks
15:21
there is the WTO mechanism that president Lula has now said we’ll draw but we know how these things play out.
15:27
So what are your thoughts about what is what what is this doing to uh north
15:33
south relationship in particular? I think uh basically uh at the
15:40
fundamental level uh the United States is becoming uh more economically
15:47
isolated and less uh economically relevant and competitive. So I regard
15:54
this as America shooting itself in the foot, not dominating the world or
16:01
extending its hegemony. Yes, it’s true Europe bowed down to the US uh and made
16:09
this asymmetric agreement. Several other countries did as well. They want to keep
16:16
access to the US markets. They want to please Donald Trump. But you know it
16:22
doesn’t it doesn’t strengthen the US economy doesn’t make the US economy more
16:28
competitive uh it doesn’t raise the uh international role of the US it
16:36
diminishes it and the real attack uh
16:41
well it’s it’s across the board so the US has lost friends everywhere lost respect everywhere broken the
16:48
international trading system uh under WTO everywhere. But this is really aimed
16:55
at the big countries. This is aimed at the bricks. It’s not an accident that the high and punitive tariffs are
17:03
against the big countries because ultimately this is about power and uh
17:10
it’s about Trump’s idea that he wants to limit the power of the big countries
17:18
especially China but as I always said to Indian friends don’t worry you’re next
17:24
don’t side with the United States you’re just next in line and I think I’ve been proved right on that sadly. But the
17:32
truth is if you go after Brazil, uh, Russia, India, China, and South Africa,
17:41
you are going to be the one to pay the cost, not those countries because the
17:47
bricks are going to become even more integrated economically. The shift to
17:54
local currency payments will accelerate. The internationalization of the renmanb
18:00
will definitely accelerate. India’s announcement today though I don’t know
18:05
all the details but the announcement that it’s cancelling military purchases from the United States that will get
18:12
notice in Washington. Uh and if if that’s really the case that’s strategic
18:19
from America’s point of view. Uh and what India is doing is absolutely
18:24
correct. What I see is that within 48 hours uh of these punitive tariffs and
18:33
the threats and the 25% extra tariffs on uh India and the
18:39
punitive tariffs on Brazil that it’s actually bringing the bricks diplomacy
18:45
to a higher level. Everyone’s been in touch with everyone else. Prime Minister Modi is going to see President Xi soon.
18:53
I know that president Lula has spoken with the prime minister Modi and with
18:58
the Chinese leadership. There’s a lot of diplomacy underway right now. That’s
19:05
good. Uh it accelerates the move to a multipolar world.
19:10
My bottom line is that the US is accomplishing nothing serious and
19:16
constructive over the longer term. Certainly not for the world economy but not even for the US economy or for US
19:24
geopolitical uh power. I think it’s a it is a
19:32
absolutely going to hurt the United States in future years.
19:38
China is at the center of a lot of what the United States is doing. Of course,
19:44
although the axe has fallen on many other nations, but but but but China is definitely the key target. Um I wonder
19:52
if you could just share a few thoughts about what do you think is the future of
19:57
USChina relationship and uh a particular question would be uh what do you think
20:04
uh would happen in the Taiwan strait? How uh how volatile is the situation?
20:10
And we have of course seen recently the DPP’s attempt to recall 24 legislators from you know dismiss the KMT
20:16
legislators which some people are reading as a fatigue within Taiwan about this identarian uh concept of anti-China
20:25
rhetoric but others also say that this doesn’t have a lot to do with that it’s most basically on uh local issues. Uh
20:31
but Taiwan is sitting at a very dangerous uh positions. uh we are seeing
20:36
Philippines being included in this uh missile uh reigns and so on. Um please
20:43
share your thoughts on on that. Yes, fundamental point uh US uh grand
20:51
strategy is US hijgemony. Uh and uh this is the starting point for everything
20:57
we’re talking about. The US aims to be number one. Uh supposes that it is
21:04
number one. uh plans to stay that way. Uh it’s a lot of delusion. Uh it’s a lot
21:11
of anacronism, but it is the American idea. China is the number one threat to
21:19
American hijgemony. China says no, we don’t want a hegeimon and no, we don’t
21:25
submit to US threats or demands. uh and
21:31
this view of China as the threat or the enemy is about 15 years old now. For
21:40
almost 40 years, uh China was basically
21:46
viewed as supportive of US hijgemony as a counterweight to the Soviet Union or
21:52
as a counterweight to Russia. uh but uh never by the way is a country in uh for
22:00
its own interest but always how does it serve us uh uh hegemonic aspirations
22:08
starting around 2010 uh the American elite came to view China as a an
22:15
unexpected threat. How did China develop so fast? Uh how did it gain this
22:21
technological edge? This was all a surprise. It wasn’t as necessarily a surprise to
22:28
an economist looking at this, but it was a surprise to the American elite. By 2015,
22:34
the containment doctrine had pretty much set in on Washington, meaning we need to
22:40
take active steps to stop China’s further rise. And there’s an article
22:47
that I often cite published by Robert Blackwell and Ashley Telis uh at the
22:54
Council on Foreign Relations in March 2015
22:59
uh called a new grant strategy towards China uh which outlined the need for
23:06
containing China’s rise and it listed all the things that are taking place
23:12
right now as part of the US strategy, new trade system, trade barriers,
23:20
technology export bans, building up the military uh along China’s
23:26
rimlands and so forth and it spelled it out 10 years ago and th those policies
23:33
are being followed right now. Of course, it has not stopped China’s rise. the US
23:40
can’t stop China’s rise. But this remains the basic idea. Uh and uh
23:48
within that context, Taiwan plays a a special role uh partly
23:57
a substantive role because of the importance of Taiwan in the US
24:05
semiconductor supply chain uh with TSMC. uh and partly a historic and symbolic
24:13
role uh that Taiwan was America’s ally. Uh the US has invested politically in
24:23
so-called defending Taiwan. And so the Taiwan issue has been central to USChina
24:31
relations going all the way back to normalization of relations starting in 1971-72.
24:39
The US said, of course, as part of its normalization with the PRC, there’s one
24:47
China uh and Taiwan is part of it. But the US also maintained
24:53
some right uh self-proclaimed to defend Taiwan and to call for peaceful
25:00
resolution of the tensions across the Taiwan Straits.
25:05
What has happened in the last 10 years is that the US has become more strident
25:12
uh in uh in in saying that it would it defends Taiwan and at the same time of
25:19
course Taiwanese politics moved much more towards
25:26
an open declaration of secession or independence uh under the DPP and this
25:33
has raised tremend tremendous tensions because if there were to be a unilateral
25:39
declaration of independence and and the rhetoric of the Taiwanese DPP is close
25:44
to that. It’s not exactly that, but it’s close to that. Um, this would possibly
25:50
trigger a war between China and the United States. The details remain to be
25:56
seen, but it’s very threatening. China, that is the PRC, will not let uh Taiwan
26:04
declare independence, much less to have independence. That’s out of the question. But even to declare
26:10
independence would be a a cause of war. Uh and by the way, Americans should
26:16
remember Fort Sumpter uh and December 1860 and the Declaration of Independence by
26:23
the American Confederacy. It did not go well. uh it led to a civil war uh that
26:30
was devastating for the United States. Uh so this is the situation across the
26:38
Taiwan Straits. It’s very fraught. American politicians are
26:44
stupid. Many just a large number. Uh
26:49
they’re provocators. They’re bombastic. They like uh the uh
26:55
they like to be in the news. They like to fly to Taipei uh to uh show their
27:01
support. All of it in my view adds up to the potential of Taiwan becoming the
27:08
Ukraine of East Asia. And by that Ukraine declared that it intended to
27:16
join NATO. By the way, it only declared that after the US installed a government that would say that thing. But when
27:24
Ukraine declared that, it made itself the battleground of a war between the US
27:31
and Russia. And if the Taiwanese leaders take that step or if the United States
27:38
does something very provocative in the extent of the militarization
27:44
of its support for Taiwan, there could be an open conflict which would be devastating. Absolutely devastating.
27:51
horrendously threatening to the world. We have the uh Gaza reoccupation plan.
27:58
This has come at a time when there is enormous not just uh settler violence, settler and military violence in the
28:04
occupied West Bank but also expansion of the settlement areas in Ewan near uh uh
28:10
uh Malia Dumim and so on. Um, is it fair to assume that a long occupation of Gaza
28:18
is to continue and there is no uh uh uh ceasefire given Washington has given
28:24
complete green signal to Israel to do whatever it likes? Well, I think we’re at a uh another uh
28:32
moment of truth. First of all, uh Israel is starving uh 2 million people right
28:38
now. So, we have a genocide underway. uh in front of our eyes. Uh it’s absolutely
28:46
revolting, shocking, unacceptable, disgusting, and sanctioned
28:53
uh and and and supported, I should say, just to be clear, by the United States.
28:59
Supported. The US is complicit in this in many many ways including directly
29:06
arming and financing Israel till this moment as a genocide is playing out.
29:14
Almost all the world is a gasast. Almost all the world has voted repeatedly in
29:20
the UN General Assembly for the two-state solution. There was a meeting at the end of July at the UN, a high
29:28
level meeting for the implementation of the two-state solution, saying that
29:34
Israel’s occupation of Palestine is illegal. Israel must return to its
29:39
borders, which are of the 4th of June 1967. There must be constituted a state of
29:47
Palestine. That was the outcome declaration on uh at the end of July. It
29:53
has the support of more than 180 countries. The only ones that oppose it
29:59
actually are Israel, the United States, Argentina, Paraguay, Micronia,
30:07
Nau, uh Papu Nag Guina, and I think maybe Vanuatu on some votes, but
30:14
basically it’s the US and Israel standing against the rest of the world.
30:19
95% of the world’s population says two-state solution. Israel, return to
30:25
your borders and let’s get on with it. So, this is the situation. And now
30:31
Israel is saying they will occupy uh Gaza uh and Gaza City. It’s horrendous.
30:38
This is a rogue state uh completely in violation of international law in every
30:45
way and committing massive war crimes and crimes against humanity before our
30:51
eyes. It needs to be stopped. The questions uh are first uh can the 180
30:59
plus countries of the world that know this somehow implement this even though in a
31:07
formal sense the US has a veto in the UN security council but the overwhelming
31:13
sentiment of the world is that this needs to stop. Israel could be suspended
31:18
from the UN General Assembly. Israel could be sanctioned in many ways.
31:24
Countries could end their diplomatic relations. They could put on blockades not just of weapons but of or embargos
31:32
not just of weapons but of other kinds of trade. But genocide should not go on
31:37
before our eyes. Second question is would the United States ever change its
31:43
position? And here uh as in many other areas, American public opinion is rather
31:51
decisively now on the side of the Palestinians. Uh maybe 65 35 roughly
31:58
speaking. Uh it’s a massive change of American public opinion uh over the last
32:05
3 years. So uh the politicians are running against American public opinion.
32:12
That’s not so rare on many issues. In the United States, we have a almost
32:19
it’s it’s a very flaky political system. It does not represent uh public opinion
32:25
or even American interests, but um this is at least notable for politicians.
32:33
But the political class is still deeply uh in the hands of the Israel lobby uh
32:41
to an extent that I find rather shocking. Actually, I have to say I’m
32:46
often naive about these things, but I still find it hard to believe that until this moment, uh, almost all of the
32:53
Congress and the White House and the military-industrial state are st
32:59
standing against the whole world community and on the side of genocide right now. So, this is this moment.
33:07
We’re about to come to the annual general assembly meetings at which
33:13
France, Britain, and a number of other countries will, according to what
33:19
they’re saying, uh, despite heated US pressure, recognize the state of
33:25
Palestine. Um, and, um, I think all of the politics will heat up. As for this
33:32
very specific announcement that Israel plans to occupy Gaza worldwide there’s
33:38
been an outcry and I’m hoping that the Arab world uh the organization of
33:44
Islamic cooperation France and uh Saudi Arabia which are the co-chairs of the UN
33:51
General Assembly uh meeting on the two-state solution will step up and say
33:57
no you are not occupying Gaza that is out of the question. It’s against international law. It’s against the UN
34:04
General Assembly and that they would put in place an alternative.
34:10
I had been thinking about asking a question on AI but we are uh out of time. Would you allow me to ask a final
34:16
question? A quick question. Okay. Um uh so I I’ve always wanted to ask you about AI given uh you are an
34:23
economist and you think about development and AI is kind of so central to our life in so many ways for the
34:30
labor market for you know high-end technology there is a lot of geopolitical rates are on critical
34:36
minerals which are so central to AI military technology so my question to you is what should national governments
34:43
particularly in the global south that lacks technology and people relatively poor are people who lack good education.
34:50
How should they be prepared to live under this age of AI?
34:55
Well, AI is going to pervade every economy and every sector. Uh so it’s
35:03
going to be key for rich and poor economies alike. uh India in particular
35:12
has great technical capacity and it has already put uh a lot of the economy onto
35:19
the digital space with a lot of benefit in my view uh in uh all sorts of
35:26
payments inclusion and efficiencies of systems and governance and so forth and
35:31
it should plan to incorporate AI. my own view which takes us far field. I’d like
35:38
to see India and China cooperate on this much more closely. uh China is doing a
35:45
fantastic job in AI and one of the notable points for China in order to
35:51
compete with the uh you know the the big US tech is that China’s gone open source
35:59
and this is a fantastic tactical approach or even strategic approach one
36:05
could say but it fits very well partnership with India as well because
36:11
this could create a massive platform form which basically outruns a lot of
36:17
the US proprietary big tech AI systems. So just one tactical point would be
36:25
India and China aligning on an open-source AI. Both sides would have a huge amount
36:32
to add both in technical capacity. India brings a lot of English language data
36:40
and flow to this for hundreds of millions of people which would be a huge
36:45
benefit for China also. So this would go both ways. Um
36:51
AI raises a a host of very interesting subtle uh uh unsolved
36:59
issues and just to mention them uh first the tool can accelerate development
37:06
massively. So I’m sure that AI and digital more generally can dramatically
37:13
democratize and expand education at all levels. And since education is so
37:19
fundamental, all universities can be online. Uh all schools can have
37:25
individual avatar tutors for students. We can do a huge amount to improve
37:32
education through these tools themselves. Uh and I’m doing all my teaching online these days, by the way.
37:39
But then I have a global a global classroom in effect. Um and so
37:45
there’s ways to use the technologies I think that will be great for leaprogging. Uh AI will solve huge
37:53
problems in health care especially where there are no doctors. Uh there will still be diagnostics
38:01
monitoring and all sorts of procedures that otherwise would have been out of
38:07
reach and completely impossible. And one can go through each sector. Now at the
38:13
same time the downside is where are the jobs going to be and uh this is a an
38:20
interesting question. Will we all become students and people of leisure because
38:25
the machines are going to do uh what needs to be done. It it’s kind of an extreme scenario but
38:32
there’s a a smidgen of truth to it. Um but then who owns the machines and how
38:37
are poor countries going to be part of that? I have to tell you having uh
38:43
worked on this and thought about this the answers are not clear quantitatively
38:49
uh we don’t really understand anyone who says they can give you the scenario of this I don’t believe it uh because we
38:56
don’t really know how this will play out countries should absolutely plan on
39:06
rapid incorporation of AI into public services into governance into key
39:12
sectors of the economy whether it’s agriculture, mining, manufacturing and so forth and uh being as much part of uh
39:23
and having the physical infrastructure to take advantage of this is key. uh so
39:31
India needs to get into robotics also even though it seems premature in a way
39:36
there you know in a country of 1.5 billion people this is the economy that
39:42
is going to evolve quickly um and uh
39:47
those who delay in this I think will find themselves falling farther and
39:53
farther behind professor Norman Finkelstein once told me that Chad GPT has severed his
40:00
relationship with his students. Have you faced any such problem with your students?
40:05
Oh, that’s interesting. Uh I’m because he would say that this is a chat
40:10
GPT written answer and that that has severe uh implication for their
40:17
relationship. I still like a zoom when we’re looking each other in the eye. So I still I I’m
40:23
having more conversations with more students all over the world than ever before. Uh, so that’s not exactly AI,
40:29
but it is digital and I like that because I’m getting a fun chance, as I
40:36
said, to teach in a global classroom. We’ll leave it there. Professor Sax, thank you so much for your time and this
40:42
was a lovely conversation. Absolutely wonderful to be with you. I hope we can do it again.
oooooo
Geure herriari, Euskal Herriari dagokionez, hona hemen gure apustu bakarra:
We Basques do need a real Basque independent State in the Western Pyrenees, just a democratic lay or secular state, with all the formal characteristics of any independent State: Central Bank, Treasury, proper currency1, out of the European Distopia and faraway from NATO, being a BRICS partner…
Euskal Herriaren independentzia eta Mikel Torka
eta
Esadazu arren, zer da gu euskaldunok egiten ari garena eta zer egingo dugun
gehi
MTM: Zipriztinak (2), 2025: Warren Mosler
(Pinturak: Mikel Torka)
Gehigarriak:
MTM klase borrokarik gabe, kontabilitate hutsa da
oooooo
1 This way, our new Basque government will have infinite money to deal with. (Gogoratzekoa: Moneta jaulkitzaileko kasu guztietan, Gobernuak infinitu diru dauka.)
