Ralph welcomes journalist Chris Hedges to talk about his new book "A Genocide Foretold: Reporting on Survival and Resistance in Occupied Palestine." Then, Ralph speaks to David Swanson of World BEYOND War about what his organization is doing to resist this country’s casual acceptance of being constantly at war.
To focus on another subject for a moment, I received an email today from Public Citizen with this news:
"We have major breaking news in one of our lawsuits to stop the Trump regime’s attack on the federal government.
On Friday afternoon, a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — and must undo the actions already taken to dismantle it — while the case proceeds."
Public Citizen can use your support, if you can afford it. There is hope.
So what are all you intellectuals going to do to beat Trump at his own game plan ,,I know all of you have had great lives for the most part living off the dole of the American public, publishing great books ,, even a few best sellers, and collecting nice salaries from our great but now hardly affordable colleges and universities and more ,,, we have all heard Bernie's stories about all the rich having all the money..( until Bernie clued us in we didn't know that ?) and of course those excellent 78 + phycological profiles of Trump our illustrious leaders misguided behavior patterns. For starters I suggest to learn how to "talk down or sideways" to the new generation of kids ( the last 20 years ) . Because your audience,old geezer's like myself are on the way out and we don't count,, We won't be able to grade your papers or read your books or view your , satillte down links in the future because we won't be around .
Kids today are really not interested in sports like basketball, football , golf or understanding , or reading your books ,,, only if they can make a little doe ray me beting on the out come of " something ? ",. provided they don't take to much time out from playing their "community" video or phone games .
Kids know they are going to be competing with the latest A I programs or robots to get the next real job ,,,if they want one ? .
So where does the Trump game fit into all this ? Learn how to manipulate the trump customers to buy or learn from you , give them something they can bet on and win ?
So what are those new jobs or careers the kids are going to really want ? It's not going to be working 12 hour days in a steel mill,, or assembling I phones or cars like they do in China ..as trump suggests .
I maybe be wrong Trump's game plan looks like an American recession to a world wide depression,,,
My bet is if we give the kids all the tools and courage to come out on top and we will all be winners,,, regardless of county or nationality .
I hear, underneath it all, your pain. I was recently watching Prof. Richard Wolff, economist. He said that the actions of Trump seem to be leading to recession. It may be intentional because in a recession, there are fewer jobs availalble and more people needing them, and the employer is in a position to lower wages and increase demands, which enriches the corporate employer class of people who already have wealth. This is one of Trump's main objectives in my opinion, along with his cut backs in federal jobs and services to hollow out government services and their benefits from the inside. (I did read, though, that people had to be reinstated due to a lawsuit. I'm not clear yet on the details.)
I agree with your conclusion: Young people are our future. They need a good education, as well as all the tools and help we can provide. Then we will all be winners because young people will be equal to solving the problems facing us.
Nancy, a lot of this is related to the conversation Eric and I were having in the RNRH comments for last week's episode regarding actual meanings of government efficiency, deficit spending, full employment, neoliberalism, monetarism, and so forth. I'm not sure if Wolff mentioned it or not since I believe he did talk about it many years ago (I don't listen to Wolff often), but it is important to remember that unemployment is always a conscious decision by the federal government. The government could always hire the unemployed and use that labor productively until the private sector is in a better position to hire the labor. Such a job guarantee program not only maintains national and individual productivity, but it is also a buffer against inflation as it stabilizes labor prices.
As opposed to the sentiment in Don's initial post, there is always work which needs to be done and technological advancements will not eliminate the need for work. So, with that in mind, it is very concerning that very few progressives, much less anyone else, is bring up the issue of full employment here in modern times. It was frequently talked about prior to the 1970s and it was a major element of the civil rights movement. Mr. Nader's austerity fear mongering last week was rather shameless and is an example of the artificial barriers many progressives employ to make important policy areas such as full employment harder to achieve. This is why I made the criticisms I did made last week.
When I was a kid growing up, my father, a history lover, taught me what could be the most fitting rule for finding answers in the chaotic times we live in: “Look for common denominators”.
And there are common denominators in the various threats, political chaos and wars of conquest we are seeing around the world, especially the Russian, Chinese, Israeli and American expansionist intentions.
It has happened before after WW II, when the allies divvied up the world regions amongst themselves, especially the oil producing countries. Not direct occupation, but areas of influence. The only “guest” in that conspiracy, that had to be accommodated was the Zionist movement.
Today, the driver behind the expansionism is survival, resources, like water, productive land and security against a turbulent unpredictable nature, caused by climate change and overpopulation.
We must look forward and protect against mass deaths and murder, which will surely happen in the next decade.
Human life has lost most of its value already, and images of violent murder are a daily feature on every screen.
Ralph Nader Radio Hour is one of the best along with Chris Hedges for honest reporting on the situation we are living in.....I joined JVP 2 wks after Oct. 7th as a non jew.....and have found their daily 1/2 hr of sending emails and phone calls to our Congress persons helpful but my Senators have not changed their pro Israel position.............I will now look into World Beyond War..too......
These are excellent conversations. ALL of them. The reality that the lack of public education and awareness has lead to this social condition that we are presently. The general lack of interest by youth in universities to stand up for social causes is disappointing. The idea to think and always Question Authorities! Should be the main point of departure to think independently.
I am also hurting for the Venezuelan residents here who were deported to El Salvador in the most abject captivity. It was done in a rush that ignored judicial orders not to deport and ignored proceeding with due process to establish the facts and evidence (if any).
The court is standing up to this behavior of the administration. I believe this is an injunction against deportation again without due process, which stops this for now against a repeat. Also, I believe there is a court date now for a hearing in which Justice Department officials must provide evidence for their claims in ignoring the ruling of the judge, which could result in contempt charges, once evidence is presented establishing motives.
I have hope because there is a lot of push back now.
I’m so grateful for all of your dedication and work informing us, Chris, and I’m waiting to receive it shortly (pre-ordered). In order to understand what’s happening in our time we need to become the best students we can be, of so many subjects and disciplines—it is overwhelming! But never before have we had so much access to good information as well as bad information that helps orientate us. There is a lot of hopelessness, but I think there is a lot of fight too.
Per the many comments regarding Iran in the broadcast, please know that the Trump regime has, in the past week, moved HALF of our B-2 Stealth bomber fleet to the island of Diego Garcia. It is the base used for staging attacks on the Middle East.
Make no mistake, something is in the works VERY soon. The cost of a deployment of this size runs in the hundreds of millions -- and this is not being done without a clear intent.
I hope and pray it is not true, but please prepare your minds for an immanent attack on Iran.
Here at home, sentiment is RAPIDLY growing against the Trump regime. He's pulled the nomination of Stefanik -- her NY seat no longer safe. What does a president do when their ratings are falling? ... They start a war.
Chris Hedges is always incisive as a former war correspondent and well-versed in the intricacies of failed US foreign policies and war making. Jeffrey Goldberg is a Netanyahu ally and hardcore zionist, I wonder why David Swanson would ascribe any merit to him. Clearly Walz was lying with the other Trump people about how Goldberg was included in the chat.
Rep. Jim Himes finally held some townhalls after not having one for years recently. I found it to be more a gathering of dyed in the wool Democratic Party loyalists than the type of rigorous policy discussion as it could have been. Why so much fear by Himes, Blumenthal and Murphy to not hold regular townhalls? The one with Himes had law enforcement and cancel culture people wall to wall ready to leap on anyone who could be Maga! For a US politician to actually be shot would make them an instant martyr!
Jim Himes said at our local townhall, the Dems. need to show some humility and try to be less judgmental. The "cancel culture" is their creation that has done a lot of damage. I know a lot of people in and out of my family who will cut people off if they show independence on political issues. They should show real passion for real progressive issues in the face of the reckless Trump and Maga forces, but not get sidetracked by DEI and similar issues.
About 4 years ago, I proved that social equity measures the substantive due process of procedural due process. This is a corollary of Coase's Theorem. Constitutional due process can be put on software, and AI will ensure it is user friendly.
* Law schools, totally reliant on the heuristics of memorizing procedures and memorizing the (wrong) opinions of justices in the hope of inferring substantive due process, will have to offer 1 year of classes and then 1-2 years of very applied work. Why? Asking a lawyer about legal theory is like asking a real estate agent about the structural integrity of a building.
* Judicial review is not an implied power. John Marshall assumed what he was trying to prove.
* Each time a judge (justice) claims personal jurisdiction, and then decides if they have subject matter jurisdiction, they are replacing constitutional law with case law. Each time they guess incorrectly, and that is frequently, it is ex post facto law and not constitutional.
* John Locke's 2nd Treatise of Civil Government argues that no rational creature would prefer society over a 'state of nature' with the expectation of being worse off. Yet we are expected to choose society when our rights (whether a judge has subject matter jurisdiction) are being determined, endogenously in the system.
* Sir Edward Coke, one of the oiliest prosecutors in British history, and a chief judge of the Star Chamber, notices that thing were not good when just a citizen, so he penned the Petition of Right (1628). Then John Locke in 1690, and Thomas Jefferson in 1776 with declaring rights come from laws of nature and nature's God.
* Rights are exogenously determined, except if judicial review.
* John Roberts is the problem, and the 8 minions of SCOTUS, rather than Trump.
* Marbury v Madison (1803) involved a tautology, so Marshall could rule in the specific case, but cannot extrapolate that to saying the judiciary decides what is constitutional.
* With the 6 justices on the circuit, each deciding whether cases arise under the constitution, the legal system would have collapsed in 20 years.
* Instead, Congress decided and judges had to act accordingly. If Congress was wrong, the executive branch was the 1st check and balance, and if both failed, then jury nullification. There was also redressing grievances against the government and voting out the offending Congressmen at the next election.
** Example: Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, to include not being enforced, or juries nullifying under the argument that telling the truth about government officials was not sedition, as well as the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, and finally the vote of 1800.
While David Swanson may be correct that the new Dem strategy is the same as the old Dem strategy his challenge to the Dems is the same old strategy that hasn't worked for decades.
It is good that he wants the Dems to admit that the big money campaign contributions are legalized bribery and the Dems should refuse to take them but then wants the Dems to make the contributions criminal and legislate public financing of elections both of which would require changing the constitution.
The rest of his list will not happen until the first problem is solved.
Here is my challenge to David Swanson and Ralph.
You seem to think that the big money politicians will change the constitution and pass public financing legislation if people let them know they want this through protest and letter writing even though the big money politicians have already said they will not do this when they took the legalized bribes. Even if this strategy that hasn't worked for decades were to suddenly start working it would still take at least ten years to get the constitution changes made to make passing the legislation possible. This strategy would still require enforcement by citizens requiring the politicians to make these promises to get people to vote for them.
I think we can do it in less than ten years by demanding that the politicians do not take big money in 2026 and enforcing it with our votes. The people leading the politicians.
After all, Ralph has said that politicians want our votes more than big money.
My challenge is to poll listeners which strategy they think would work better and work faster. Voting in 2026 for politicians that take big money and promise to change the constitution and pass public financing legislation some time in the future or demanding that politicians do not take big money in 2026 and enforcing that demand with our votes?
It wouldn't hurt to make good on your statement on Washington Journal (10-24-2018) when you said you would have me on the radio hour to discuss this strategy so listeners can be fully informed when comparing the two strategies.
To focus on another subject for a moment, I received an email today from Public Citizen with this news:
"We have major breaking news in one of our lawsuits to stop the Trump regime’s attack on the federal government.
On Friday afternoon, a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — and must undo the actions already taken to dismantle it — while the case proceeds."
Public Citizen can use your support, if you can afford it. There is hope.
So what are all you intellectuals going to do to beat Trump at his own game plan ,,I know all of you have had great lives for the most part living off the dole of the American public, publishing great books ,, even a few best sellers, and collecting nice salaries from our great but now hardly affordable colleges and universities and more ,,, we have all heard Bernie's stories about all the rich having all the money..( until Bernie clued us in we didn't know that ?) and of course those excellent 78 + phycological profiles of Trump our illustrious leaders misguided behavior patterns. For starters I suggest to learn how to "talk down or sideways" to the new generation of kids ( the last 20 years ) . Because your audience,old geezer's like myself are on the way out and we don't count,, We won't be able to grade your papers or read your books or view your , satillte down links in the future because we won't be around .
Kids today are really not interested in sports like basketball, football , golf or understanding , or reading your books ,,, only if they can make a little doe ray me beting on the out come of " something ? ",. provided they don't take to much time out from playing their "community" video or phone games .
Kids know they are going to be competing with the latest A I programs or robots to get the next real job ,,,if they want one ? .
So where does the Trump game fit into all this ? Learn how to manipulate the trump customers to buy or learn from you , give them something they can bet on and win ?
So what are those new jobs or careers the kids are going to really want ? It's not going to be working 12 hour days in a steel mill,, or assembling I phones or cars like they do in China ..as trump suggests .
I maybe be wrong Trump's game plan looks like an American recession to a world wide depression,,,
My bet is if we give the kids all the tools and courage to come out on top and we will all be winners,,, regardless of county or nationality .
Good luck America have a great day my friends
I hear, underneath it all, your pain. I was recently watching Prof. Richard Wolff, economist. He said that the actions of Trump seem to be leading to recession. It may be intentional because in a recession, there are fewer jobs availalble and more people needing them, and the employer is in a position to lower wages and increase demands, which enriches the corporate employer class of people who already have wealth. This is one of Trump's main objectives in my opinion, along with his cut backs in federal jobs and services to hollow out government services and their benefits from the inside. (I did read, though, that people had to be reinstated due to a lawsuit. I'm not clear yet on the details.)
I agree with your conclusion: Young people are our future. They need a good education, as well as all the tools and help we can provide. Then we will all be winners because young people will be equal to solving the problems facing us.
Nancy, a lot of this is related to the conversation Eric and I were having in the RNRH comments for last week's episode regarding actual meanings of government efficiency, deficit spending, full employment, neoliberalism, monetarism, and so forth. I'm not sure if Wolff mentioned it or not since I believe he did talk about it many years ago (I don't listen to Wolff often), but it is important to remember that unemployment is always a conscious decision by the federal government. The government could always hire the unemployed and use that labor productively until the private sector is in a better position to hire the labor. Such a job guarantee program not only maintains national and individual productivity, but it is also a buffer against inflation as it stabilizes labor prices.
As opposed to the sentiment in Don's initial post, there is always work which needs to be done and technological advancements will not eliminate the need for work. So, with that in mind, it is very concerning that very few progressives, much less anyone else, is bring up the issue of full employment here in modern times. It was frequently talked about prior to the 1970s and it was a major element of the civil rights movement. Mr. Nader's austerity fear mongering last week was rather shameless and is an example of the artificial barriers many progressives employ to make important policy areas such as full employment harder to achieve. This is why I made the criticisms I did made last week.
I appreciate your comment
When I was a kid growing up, my father, a history lover, taught me what could be the most fitting rule for finding answers in the chaotic times we live in: “Look for common denominators”.
And there are common denominators in the various threats, political chaos and wars of conquest we are seeing around the world, especially the Russian, Chinese, Israeli and American expansionist intentions.
It has happened before after WW II, when the allies divvied up the world regions amongst themselves, especially the oil producing countries. Not direct occupation, but areas of influence. The only “guest” in that conspiracy, that had to be accommodated was the Zionist movement.
Today, the driver behind the expansionism is survival, resources, like water, productive land and security against a turbulent unpredictable nature, caused by climate change and overpopulation.
We must look forward and protect against mass deaths and murder, which will surely happen in the next decade.
Human life has lost most of its value already, and images of violent murder are a daily feature on every screen.
There is a method behind all this madness.
Ralph Nader Radio Hour is one of the best along with Chris Hedges for honest reporting on the situation we are living in.....I joined JVP 2 wks after Oct. 7th as a non jew.....and have found their daily 1/2 hr of sending emails and phone calls to our Congress persons helpful but my Senators have not changed their pro Israel position.............I will now look into World Beyond War..too......
These are excellent conversations. ALL of them. The reality that the lack of public education and awareness has lead to this social condition that we are presently. The general lack of interest by youth in universities to stand up for social causes is disappointing. The idea to think and always Question Authorities! Should be the main point of departure to think independently.
Trump doesn't see Palestinians as human beings.
My heart is broken for all victims of terrorizing.
We must each be willing to die for freedom or none of us will ever be free🤷🏽♂️
I am also hurting for the Venezuelan residents here who were deported to El Salvador in the most abject captivity. It was done in a rush that ignored judicial orders not to deport and ignored proceeding with due process to establish the facts and evidence (if any).
The court is standing up to this behavior of the administration. I believe this is an injunction against deportation again without due process, which stops this for now against a repeat. Also, I believe there is a court date now for a hearing in which Justice Department officials must provide evidence for their claims in ignoring the ruling of the judge, which could result in contempt charges, once evidence is presented establishing motives.
I have hope because there is a lot of push back now.
Both Ralph and Chris are heroes of mine; I’m always happy to see them together even given the topic.
I’m so grateful for all of your dedication and work informing us, Chris, and I’m waiting to receive it shortly (pre-ordered). In order to understand what’s happening in our time we need to become the best students we can be, of so many subjects and disciplines—it is overwhelming! But never before have we had so much access to good information as well as bad information that helps orientate us. There is a lot of hopelessness, but I think there is a lot of fight too.
Dear Team:
Per the many comments regarding Iran in the broadcast, please know that the Trump regime has, in the past week, moved HALF of our B-2 Stealth bomber fleet to the island of Diego Garcia. It is the base used for staging attacks on the Middle East.
Make no mistake, something is in the works VERY soon. The cost of a deployment of this size runs in the hundreds of millions -- and this is not being done without a clear intent.
I hope and pray it is not true, but please prepare your minds for an immanent attack on Iran.
Here at home, sentiment is RAPIDLY growing against the Trump regime. He's pulled the nomination of Stefanik -- her NY seat no longer safe. What does a president do when their ratings are falling? ... They start a war.
Chris Hedges is always incisive as a former war correspondent and well-versed in the intricacies of failed US foreign policies and war making. Jeffrey Goldberg is a Netanyahu ally and hardcore zionist, I wonder why David Swanson would ascribe any merit to him. Clearly Walz was lying with the other Trump people about how Goldberg was included in the chat.
The foreign policy crisis centered around doing Israel's bidding continues to be critical. Katie Halper is covering this well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBZePjt5na4&t=2371s Other interviews are scary, where it looks like Trump will leverage the deal with Russia to attack Iran: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ2gyFWRVEY&t=689s
The Dems. have failed on many fronts. As much as I find Trump and his rhetoric very wicked, Biden and the Dems. did not take the Russia-Ukraine issue seriously as Jeffrey Sachs has shown. Both the GOP and the Dems. failed in the pandemic to address core health issues and the terrible side effects of the mRNAs as Alex Berenson and so many others have shown. The reports of all NGOs that have increased greatly in the last couple decades were not addressed nor the staggering budget deficits, nor the Israel lobby and all the money they spend in what is essentially state terrorism. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/ed-dowd-fears-short-deep-recession-coming-doge-exposes-mind-shocking-fraud-propped-bidens?fbclid=IwY2xjawJWJ7tleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHRkFmfXSizTD0Z7uY9RKIhVIW-r1xGae8Nb2vWFD0_Jl-P5_MwjAWVbP-g_aem_hq5YEvD8mim7DBweMFSrMA
Rep. Jim Himes finally held some townhalls after not having one for years recently. I found it to be more a gathering of dyed in the wool Democratic Party loyalists than the type of rigorous policy discussion as it could have been. Why so much fear by Himes, Blumenthal and Murphy to not hold regular townhalls? The one with Himes had law enforcement and cancel culture people wall to wall ready to leap on anyone who could be Maga! For a US politician to actually be shot would make them an instant martyr!
Jim Himes said at our local townhall, the Dems. need to show some humility and try to be less judgmental. The "cancel culture" is their creation that has done a lot of damage. I know a lot of people in and out of my family who will cut people off if they show independence on political issues. They should show real passion for real progressive issues in the face of the reckless Trump and Maga forces, but not get sidetracked by DEI and similar issues.
About 4 years ago, I proved that social equity measures the substantive due process of procedural due process. This is a corollary of Coase's Theorem. Constitutional due process can be put on software, and AI will ensure it is user friendly.
* Law schools, totally reliant on the heuristics of memorizing procedures and memorizing the (wrong) opinions of justices in the hope of inferring substantive due process, will have to offer 1 year of classes and then 1-2 years of very applied work. Why? Asking a lawyer about legal theory is like asking a real estate agent about the structural integrity of a building.
* Judicial review is not an implied power. John Marshall assumed what he was trying to prove.
* Each time a judge (justice) claims personal jurisdiction, and then decides if they have subject matter jurisdiction, they are replacing constitutional law with case law. Each time they guess incorrectly, and that is frequently, it is ex post facto law and not constitutional.
* John Locke's 2nd Treatise of Civil Government argues that no rational creature would prefer society over a 'state of nature' with the expectation of being worse off. Yet we are expected to choose society when our rights (whether a judge has subject matter jurisdiction) are being determined, endogenously in the system.
* Sir Edward Coke, one of the oiliest prosecutors in British history, and a chief judge of the Star Chamber, notices that thing were not good when just a citizen, so he penned the Petition of Right (1628). Then John Locke in 1690, and Thomas Jefferson in 1776 with declaring rights come from laws of nature and nature's God.
* Rights are exogenously determined, except if judicial review.
* John Roberts is the problem, and the 8 minions of SCOTUS, rather than Trump.
* Marbury v Madison (1803) involved a tautology, so Marshall could rule in the specific case, but cannot extrapolate that to saying the judiciary decides what is constitutional.
* With the 6 justices on the circuit, each deciding whether cases arise under the constitution, the legal system would have collapsed in 20 years.
* Instead, Congress decided and judges had to act accordingly. If Congress was wrong, the executive branch was the 1st check and balance, and if both failed, then jury nullification. There was also redressing grievances against the government and voting out the offending Congressmen at the next election.
** Example: Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, to include not being enforced, or juries nullifying under the argument that telling the truth about government officials was not sedition, as well as the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, and finally the vote of 1800.
How can we join the small group of people that are outside the
on Capitol Hill !!! That should be made known and made into a larger protest ! Would really like to know !
😓 😣 🤕
While David Swanson may be correct that the new Dem strategy is the same as the old Dem strategy his challenge to the Dems is the same old strategy that hasn't worked for decades.
It is good that he wants the Dems to admit that the big money campaign contributions are legalized bribery and the Dems should refuse to take them but then wants the Dems to make the contributions criminal and legislate public financing of elections both of which would require changing the constitution.
The rest of his list will not happen until the first problem is solved.
Here is my challenge to David Swanson and Ralph.
You seem to think that the big money politicians will change the constitution and pass public financing legislation if people let them know they want this through protest and letter writing even though the big money politicians have already said they will not do this when they took the legalized bribes. Even if this strategy that hasn't worked for decades were to suddenly start working it would still take at least ten years to get the constitution changes made to make passing the legislation possible. This strategy would still require enforcement by citizens requiring the politicians to make these promises to get people to vote for them.
I think we can do it in less than ten years by demanding that the politicians do not take big money in 2026 and enforcing it with our votes. The people leading the politicians.
After all, Ralph has said that politicians want our votes more than big money.
My challenge is to poll listeners which strategy they think would work better and work faster. Voting in 2026 for politicians that take big money and promise to change the constitution and pass public financing legislation some time in the future or demanding that politicians do not take big money in 2026 and enforcing that demand with our votes?
It wouldn't hurt to make good on your statement on Washington Journal (10-24-2018) when you said you would have me on the radio hour to discuss this strategy so listeners can be fully informed when comparing the two strategies.
The Kurkus review? What is that?