tv On Contact with Chris Hedges RT July 1, 2017 8:29pm-9:01pm EDT
nature of the liberal class in a capitalist democracy how imperialism works as well as the reconfiguration of the american economy into an oligarchy system that makes war on the middle class this is part one of our conversation with professor chomsky in his office at mit. with chris hedges. so professor chomsky i wanted to ask you about the ten principles that are laid out in organized in the book requiem for the american dream which was based on the documentary that you did the ten principles of concentration of wealth and power and the first one you talk about is reducing democracy what i mean by that i should first come to the. construction of the ten principles is really the contribution of the editors it's there are quite affective console edition of hours and hours of interviews and
discussion which they were going to this for reducing the buck or so it means the gradual marginalization of the population in the. reduction of the role of the general population and decision making in the public arena which is. an expected. predictable consequence of the introduction of the transition to neo liberal principles in the seventy's and. there is basically two general phases of post-war u.s. socio economic history the first is was sometimes called regulated capitalism embedded liberalism of the fifty's and sixty's and very high growth period the utilitarian growth. moves towards social justice in the sixty's
a substantial increase in democratic participation people became really engaged in the public arena. all of this had various effects one effect was reduction befalling rate of profit which was critical second effect was people were coming to him to vote engaged in public affair this is what samuel huntington called an excess of democracy excess of democracy and in fact two very important. publications came out in the early seventy's both directed this they're interesting because they were opposite ends of the political spectrum but they basically came to the same conclusion with somewhat different rhetorical styles but one was the paul memorandum one thousand says it was all memorandum which should written by the late. corporate lawyer working for the tobacco corporation and later became the
supreme court justice under nixon he wrote a memorandum which was supposed to be confidential but it leaked to the u.s. chamber of commerce business group and in which he the rhetoric is quite fascinating he expressed the view of which is not uncommon among those who really own the world that see their control as being very slightly diminished and in the manner of a spoiled three year old doesn't get a piece of candy that means the world is coming to an end so you really have to read the rhetoric to appreciate the attack on the american free enterprise system he said the business world is under severe attack. ralph nader and herbert universities are right on the we're practically barely surviving you know. all of the. everything and significant in american life and then he says well look after
all we business men basically own everything we can we are the trustees of the universities we don't let these don't have to let these kids run wild the become we can constrain the media after all we have the power and calls for mobilization of the business world to defend ourselves be published in the blue print i mean for this corporate money the heritage foundation led who had a big impact on the growth of right wing think tanks much of the ideology for right so that's at the right end of the spectrum then you go to the other end of the spectrum basically the carter administration liberalism and the the people who staff the carter administration trilateral commission it's and just real democracies in europe japan and the united states basically liberal internationalists and they have
a publication called the crisis of democracy in the crisis of democracy is there's too much democracy in the one nine hundred sixty s. too many people who are usually passive and pathetic the way people are supposed to be started becoming engaged in the political arena pressing for their demands and so on the some that are sometimes called special interests meaning young people old people farmers workers in other words everybody except the corporate sector which is no mention there the national interest but these special interests are putting too much pressure on the state so we have to have more moderation and democracy people have to return to being passive in apathetic the american repertory you mentioned huntington resume the style referred to the. the
period when as he put it truman was able to run the country with the cooperation of a few will street lawyers and executives and then there was a crisis of democracy the kind of the one they very effectively of course succeeded in rolling back i want to go on to your next point about shaping idiology but you talk about the difference between madison and aristotle in that aristotle you know both of them understood that if there was inequality in the same way that john locke and bentham and others did that there would be tension between the rich and the poor madison calling for government to reduce democracy aristotle saying the solution which you obviously support is to reduce inequality and your second point shaping the idiology the we mention the power of them away mentioned the trilateral commission but specifically they targeted various segments of the society indoctrination of the young you talk about the way they actually
created architectural plans for ecologists so that large demonstrations would not be possible the use of student debt for debt peonage the destruction of public institutions talk about that process to reconfigure the idiology into a form of neo liberal and. i don't want to suggest to the commission lid these developments it was more or less an articulation of the liberal elite consensus on these issues and for that reason it's quite interesting so the phrase indoctrination of the young is there for is of the. consensus for is this is the institutions responsible for the indoctrination of the oem or failing their duty well that's an interesting way to describe educational institutions kind of like the old. comment on truman being able to run the country with corporate
corporate lawyers and so on but that's kind of the ideal there should be indoctrination students should not be free to think they don't put it this way who remains as they shouldn't be free to inquire think to challenge it just the kind of thing was that in a decent educational system young people would be encouraged to do and in the schools and universities but it's dangerous because they're questioning too many eternal verities including. that. there has to be elite domination and control this is expressed all through the history of how successful do you think looking back that they were successful well that it's not as i say they were expressing the they were articulating a consensus that led to many developments and it's been reasonably
successful so for example take the a kind of a business model begun to be imposed on colleges and universities there's been a tremendous growth of bureaucracy. tilting the balance from faculty control to bureaucratic control there's. there's been course char praise intuition which is has her strong disciplinary effect in the one nine hundred sixty s. a young person could say ok i'm going to take off your get involved in the antiwar movement than for the feminist movement or something that will come back and continue my life you can't do that if you have a burden of debt over here if you come out of law school thinking to be a public interest lawyer but i have to pay off two hundred thousand dollars and just have to go to a corporate law firm and absorbed into the culture and. many different ways there
are disciplinary effects imposed cutback of state state funding for state colleges for example has been very short you also talk about how suddenly critics of american empire or american capitalism got tarred with this ad he american it's you know any american isn't it a very interesting concept it's a concept that only exists and to alter and states so for example if someone in italy that is criticizing the bill is going to take over but then are accused of being. in the soviet union old soviet union you could be condemned for being a soviet in the brazilian military dictatorship you could be brazilian but aside from the united states i don't know of any other. none to tell a terror in authoritarian country with the concept you know exist it's
a very striking country concept if you're critical of policy you're anti american actually this is an interesting biblical origin the first use of this concept is actually. who was the. ultimate ultimate evil in the bible he called the prophet. elijah to him and asked him why he is a hater of israel meaning condemning the acts of the evil that's the basic concept authority if you challenge authority you're opposed to the society the culture the community and so on i went and we see that with trump and we'll come back in a moment with our conversation with professor noam chomsky. every
. period. and you get it on the old. according to. come along for the. eh i. rejected tonight as a comedy loser sold it not the frank by the corporate media would you go after the corporations that just lawyer live profit over people at every turn. redact it's not for me it's like medicine it's like a cancer joke from all the stress that the news puts you under redacted tonight is
a show where you can go to cry from laughing about the stuff that's going on in the world as opposed to just regular crying we're going to find out what the corporate mainstream media is not telling you about how we're going to filter it through some satirical comedic lenses to make it more digestible that's what we do every week hard hitting radical comedy news like redacted tonight is where it's at. play. ploughboy hard selling you on the idea that dropping bombs brings police to the chicken hawks forcing you to fight the battles but still look for new socks credits tell you that somebody gossip a tabloid lifestyle for the most important news today. the positive outlook has been telling you are not cool enough and let's not buy their products. listen. to all the hawks traveling along the border of walking slowly.
chris. welcome back to our conversation with professor noam chomsky so let's talk about principle number three redesign the economy. i suppose this would have taken off would you say in the one nine hundred seventy s. late began in the seventy's you see the first steps in the late carter administration and then reagan and what were they doing what did you see well this
is the so-called neo liberal shift to try to shift decisions from the public arena to what's called the market the market how do you define neo liberalism it's basically the idea is private is reduce the role of the public institution. deregulate to. permit the infect encourage the growth of financial institutions. network of policies of this kind as the ideology claims it's increasing freedom so actually increasing tyranny it means that instead of decisions and choices being made in the public arena where the public in principle has something of a role in the state to the degree that the state is democratic maybe an actual role shifting it to private tyrannies corporate sector mostly. pretty high they
monopolized all the gospel and that's when you get this imbalance between what you talk about the manufacturing sector and the financial sector you also have a normas growth of the financial sector so if you go to the fifty's and sixty's the regulated capitalism period banks were basically banks you know put your money in and let the people distort a business something like that from the early seventy's it shifted dramatically and to speculate huge increase in speculation and complex financial instruments by two thousand and seven before the latest of the crashers for which the financial sector was mostly responsible they actually had forty percent of course and this is an economy where a centrally you make money by manipulating money shift and that degree actually the in the one nine hundred ninety s. is when the decline of the manufacturing sector really begin it and this was
a specific policy it's a combination of trade policy and fiscal policy. go into the details but that's centrally was the high dollar policy the way in which the so-called free trade free trade agreements were structured led to these effects this is all part of the same system and it's had consequences one consequence is that for the majority of the population stagnation or the climate the. take a look at real wages they're not what you we should just talk to you to speak about this these free trade agreements in essence pushed the plight of the american worker downward because they had to be competitive with sweatshop workers and. that it was putting the working people of the world in competition right but not but allowing freedom of capital. and in fact high protection for little these
are not free trade agreements so the. what's called intellectual property rights is just a huge tax on the population it's massive increase in the patent rights which had never existed before means that. microsoft monopoly can be challenging the mega-corporations of the extraordinary rights and the effect of this is it's like a extremely high tariff what amount you talk about how workers can't but capital cat you know that and that the whole capitalism itself if you go back to adam smith based on the free circulation of labor that is the foundation of that's a trap and smith but there's nothing like that. but let me ask about that this was this created worker insecurity by design as in fact
the phrase growing worker insecurity is alan greenspan's kind of running. in the system as if it is head of the fed but when he was testifying to congress on the success of the economy he was running he attributed a large part of it to what he called growing worker insecurity saw as a good thing that's the implication because it keeps wages now it keeps people workers for asking for benefits it keeps inflation low and it breaks you know to keep profits and it makes it very hard to organize and he points out intelligently that this growing worker insecurity is so extreme that even when unemployment is down as it was in the late clinton years still the same conditions apply workers are just afraid unions are being destroyed and this is part of the. what was called
the great moderation the six economists the success of the neo liberal programs which had the effect that say by not one two thousand and seven before the crash a real wages were actually lower than they had been in one nine hundred seventy nine when the new liberal experiment began that's a very sharp change for actually one index of the change which is interesting is just taking a look at minimum wage which sets a kind of floor for wages during the first period regulated capitalism minimum wage track productivity which you expected it breaks in the one nine hundred seventy s. productivity and growth go up more slowly with somewhat minimum wage stays flat which means it actually reduces if minimum wage had continued today it would probably be something like twenty dollars an hour and that's just like the actual
reduction in real wages that's an indication of the nature of these highly praised socio economic policies and other effect was deregulation starts with with started actually in the late carter picked up with reagan and extended under clinton financial and that meant the beginning of crashes in the fifty's and sixty's there were no fanatic crashers the new deal regulation starting in the eighty's you start getting crash if to crash each one worse than the last the public bills and now. you know that's the nature of the system let me out let me move on to shifting the burden another shifting the burden. so that be. oligarchy kelly it's been specially fortune five hundred companies are not paying taxes and it and more of the responsibility for funding the nation
falls on the backs of the working poor and actually there's been a very sharp reduction in tax a sion of the wealthy since the fifty's in the fifty's and sixty's right through the new liberal period and all sorts of other devices have been developed so that the corporate sector can avoid taxes so they take the biggest company in the world . hugely profitable they have an office somewhere in ireland which is allegedly where they're based of course they're basically offshoring it's the offshore base they were just fine but i think something like thirteen billion dollars or something like that by the european union for tax evasion there but it means they're not paying it here and there's a lot of complaints from business of course about the high corporate tax if you look at the effective corporate tax what they actually pay for lower this is gives
rise to what you call the precariat the precariat is the growing worker insecurity the fact that you don't have the security of a stable job which is going to be continuing work which is going to be a guaranteed pension in the tennis for your children to go to college that's radically and you said that this system to quote were headed towards a cliff it's headed towards a cliff in many ways the worst cliff that we're heading towards is due to market systems there's a fundamental flaw in markets we have a very limited market there's massive state intervention but it's to some extent market principles prevail. in the market you don't pay attention to externalities to the effect of your transactions on others so if i sell you a core we make
a good deal for so but we don't pay attention to the fact that there's another car on the street there's more congestion more accidents more pollution others now there's one x. if if goldman sachs makes a risky transaction if they're paying attention to the cover of the risk to themselves or they did with subprime market they don't pay attention to what's called systemic risk that the whole system may collapse that's the public's brought on climate change as perhaps but now we have climate change that's an externality which is going to destroy us unless something is done and the position of the savage wing of american capitalism the republican party is quite striking they are really racing towards a precipice haven't you call it the most dangerous organization in world history was that there i think that's as i pointed out that's not religious statement but the question is is it true has there ever been an organization and history which
has dedicated itself to destruction of the possibility of organized human life that's actually what we're facing and they're pretty remarkable and the trumpet ministration has accelerated they have accelerated it but they're right there at the peak of the republican party shift take a look at the last primaries every single candidate in the republican primary either flatly deny that climate change is happening or all said maybe it is but we don't do anything about it one hundred percent the nihilism of the paris negotiations in this concluded december twenty fifth team were intended to reach a verifiable treaty. they couldn't. just keep the promises closer public and congress wouldn't permit the refund now november eight lists were great
he was just in space could pull the snow isolated in the world literally only saluted in racing toward the precipice while the rest of the world was trying to do something not enough but at least something to deal with the pro x. that was professor noam chomsky. thank you for watching join us next week for part two of our conversation with professor noam chomsky you can find us on our t. dot com slash on contact until next week.
the mission of news with you is to go to the people tell their side of the story our stories are well sourced we don't hide anything from the public and i don't think the mainstream media in this country can say that the rich. are to america has a different perspective so that we're not hearing one echo chamber that one stream media is constantly spewing. we're not beholden to any corporate sponsor no one tells us what to cover how long or how to say it that's the beauty of our t.v. america. we give both sides we hear from both sides and we question more that's. not letting anything get in your way and bring it home to the american people.
i think the average viewer just after watching a couple of segments understands that we're telling stories there are critics can't tell me you know why because their advertisers won't let them. in order to create change you have to be honest you have to tell the truth parties able to do that every story is built on going after the back story to what's really happening out there to the american what's happening when a corporation makes a pharmaceutical chills people when a company in the environmental business ends up polluting a river that causes cancer and other illnesses they put all the health risk all the dangers out to the american public those are stories that we tell every we can you know what they're working. people of got to know whether or not fair presenter support american people deserve to know it's difference at this point does it maybe must guard against the military
industrial war we shall never in the cold. war should know that. yes we do have a. future. all the world's a stage and all the news companies merely players but what kind of partners are into american play r.t. america offers more artsy american personal. many ways to use landscape just like to get real news they can see. backers sad active and in the end you could never you're on. so much parking for all the world's a stage all the world's a stage all the world's a stage and we are definitely
a place. i'm going to do just that and you're watching all of. us slashing. your launching and our team america got special report tonight and the stuff you install me is one of five basically everything that you think you know about civil society have broken down. there's always going to be somebody else one step ahead of the game. we should not be dismissed of the normalising mind. we don't need people that think like this on our planet. this is an incredibly tense situation.
israel targets a syrian artillery post off from malta sheldon's in the golan heights it's the fifth cross war to strike since last saturday. and huge crowds converge on central london call them prime minister to resign made to resign with the message one day will be swiping between so maybe seventy people believe me or they say it's becoming increasingly more obvious to me since i mean these people still missing the fleece of the salaries of these migrant crisis splits public opinion with rival launches held across the country over the influx of refugees. chile germinate chile it's going to be germany.