Valuetainment - Does Noam Chomsky Hate America？

00:00:00.160 Microsoft is a pure example of absolute tyranny.

00:00:05.040 The decisions are made at the top, they're handed down to the next level.

00:00:09.360 At the very bottom, you have the right to rent yourself to them.

00:00:13.760 As soon as you start deregulating, it moves towards monopolization.

00:00:17.760 That's the result of handing things over to the market.

00:00:20.880 That's the result of politicians being for sale.

00:00:23.440 But to sit here and say everything is the private's fault and everything good that

00:00:27.200 ever happened was because of the public and the government. That's extremely naïve to say that.

00:00:31.280 Classical liberals would have despised subordinating yourself to a master and most of your waking life.

00:00:38.080 That's the form of state capitalism that we have.

00:00:40.880 And I think we should move towards a system in which the classical liberal ideals are realized.

00:00:46.640 That's what your interpretation is.

00:00:48.560 So you continue to take the extremely naïve point of view, to use your word of talking about the individual.

00:00:57.680 What the public created.

00:00:59.440 Is it impossible for you to break out of this looking naively and refusing to look at the institutions in which they function?

00:01:13.360 So everybody in the world has heard of MIT, right?

00:01:16.000 I mean, think about when somebody goes to MIT and says, oh my gosh, he graduated from MIT.

00:01:19.520 But think about it, if somebody talked at MIT for 60 years, that's what my guest did today, Mr. Noam Chomsky, who also has written over 150 books.

00:01:32.400 He's a famed American linguist.

00:01:34.320 Some call him the father of modern linguists.

00:01:38.800 He's a philosopher, cognitive scientist, historian, social critic, political activist.

00:01:44.480 And with that being said, Professor Noam, thank you so much for being a guest on Valuetainment.

00:01:50.560 Glad to be with you.

00:01:52.240 So I got a lot of different notes and I'm trying to see what angle to take with you, but I'll get right into it.

00:01:56.480 If you don't mind taking a moment and for the few viewers that maybe don't know you, there's a lot of interesting ways people describe you.

00:02:04.800 You're described as the, you know, aligning with anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian socialism.

00:02:14.400 Can you just give us an idea about what some of your beliefs philosophically, politically, and economically are?

00:02:21.600 There was classical liberalism came to grief because it was undermined by the rise of capitalism.

00:02:31.840 But the basic ideas of classical liberalism, namely that people should be

00:02:40.640 not subjected to the domination of masters, should be free to determine their own fate, should

00:02:49.600 be worked together in association to make a better world.

00:02:54.400 All of this remained, but outside the framework of mainstream ideology.

00:03:00.400 And the libertarian socialism is the standard term in Europe for what is here sometimes called

00:03:10.160 anarchism, which tried to realize the ideas of the Enlightenment and classical liberalism.

00:03:19.120 Basically the idea that authority and domination are not self-justifying.

00:03:28.480 They have to justify themselves.

00:03:31.040 And if they can't, which is usually the case, they should be dismantled in terms of more free and

00:03:38.560 participatory societies.

00:03:40.880 So the great 19th century theorist of classical liberalism, John Stuart Mill, held that in industry

00:03:55.440 and the economy generally, the natural form to which a civilized society should develop is

00:04:04.560 self-management by associations of workers in production by people in community and so on without any arbitrary hegemonic authority.

00:04:19.760 Got it. So, you know, almost all of us who create our own set of beliefs, whether it's spiritual,

00:04:28.240 political, philosophical, economical, there's somebody that influenced us.

00:04:31.680 Whether it's, hey, I read Von Mises. Oh my gosh, great stuff. I'm a capitalist.

00:04:36.800 I read Ayn Rand. I totally get why I'm more like a libertarian. Or I read Karl Marx. The guy's got some

00:04:41.520 good arguments when you think about what's being done. You know, I read, who were some of the folks that influenced you the most?

00:04:47.760 Actually, the people who influenced me the most are people whose names will never be known. People on the

00:04:57.600 front lines of the struggles for justice and for freedom. Take, say, the American Civil Rights Movement.

00:05:07.760 If you ask about the Civil Rights Movement, the name that comes to mind is Martin Luther King, who was a great figure.

00:05:18.800 Highly respect him. But he would have been the first to tell you that he was riding on a groundswell that was

00:05:26.320 prepared by others, by young snake workers, whose names you don't know, who were riding freedom buses 0.87

00:05:36.560 in Alabama to try to encourage black farmers to dare to go to vote in the face of lynch mobs and

00:05:47.040 brutal sheriffs and so on. Many of them suffered. Some were killed. Those are the kind of people who

00:05:56.720 I think we should respect and honor. We rarely even know their names. And there are people like that

00:06:03.360 all over the world. Much of what they do is very inspiring. I can't find any higher inspiration than

00:06:10.800 that.

00:06:11.280 What books, maybe? And that was very helpful to share that because it makes me think. But

00:06:15.840 what books did you read as a young man coming up? Because it seems like a lot of your philosophy was

00:06:22.480 established very early on. And I know, you know, in one of your books, you talk about how you grew up as

00:06:27.680 a center leftist, more on like the FDR political type of a range where you were with your family. But what

00:06:35.040 books were they when you read and you said, this just makes a lot of sense? Why aren't people

00:06:40.560 understanding this? Were there any books that impacted you?

00:06:43.200 So many that I can't list them, but ranging across the spectrum. So ranging from when I was a young

00:06:54.240 teenager from Bertrand Russell's history of philosophy to hamflets by uneducated workers without people,

00:07:09.600 with peasants without formal education in Spain during the anarchist revolution, who recorded what

00:07:19.200 they were doing to collectivize their own villages and take control of their lives. Things that I was

00:07:26.560 picking up in anarchist bookstores in Fourth Avenue, New York, where I used to go as a young teenager.

00:07:37.520 So a whole range of things.

00:07:40.160 Got it. Who were you in high school? If you and I were 16 years old in high school together,

00:07:43.840 I'm sitting next to you. I go to school with you for two years. Who would have people said who

00:07:48.240 Noam was at 16, 17 years old? In high school? In high school. Who were you in high school?

00:07:56.080 In high school, I was sort of a loner, had a couple of friends. Some of them remained friends till

00:08:03.920 the end of their lives just a couple of years ago, but not many. Mostly I kept to myself and I was involved

00:08:10.800 in lots of intensive political activities in a different area. Most of my own direct engagements

00:08:21.280 in the time had to do with what was then the Zionist movement. Now it would be called anti-Zionist.

00:08:32.320 This is before the State of Israel was formed. We're talking about the early 40s.

00:08:37.680 And I was involved with groups that were working towards developing a

00:08:45.760 bi-national Arab-Jewish cooperative community based on working-class cooperation between

00:08:56.000 Palestinian and Jewish workers. That ideal bits and pieces of it were realized, but

00:09:04.640 most of it changed radically in 1948. But that was the main activities I was in then and in many ways

00:09:12.800 still am. That's lasted through my life. And if you ask about influences, a lot of the people who influenced

00:09:21.360 me were people writing in, at that time in Hebrew, people like great essayist Ahad Am, who was

00:09:32.560 committed to a form of what he called cultural Zionism, a Zionist recreation of a cultural center

00:09:42.400 in Palestine, which would reinvigorate Jewish culture for the entire diaspora, and who wrote

00:09:51.440 eloquently, in fact, that the incoming settlers will have to pay attention to the fact, they can't

00:10:00.320 ignore the fact that this country is settled, settled by Palestinians. We're going to live with them. 1.00

00:10:07.360 We're going to deal with them on an equal basis. We have to be integrated with them into the world that

00:10:15.120 we're creating. That's the turn of the century, 1900.

00:10:21.280 So you've been a true believer for a very, very long time, a true believer a very long time in your

00:10:26.960 philosophy. Can you remember when it was when your philosophies were core to the point where nobody

00:10:35.680 could change your mind on certain set of philosophies that you had?

00:10:38.480 I've never reached that point. We should always be open-minded, willing to listen to new ideas and

00:10:46.480 arguments. My own, I wouldn't even call it a philosophy, my own general points of view about

00:10:55.440 the nature of life were formed as early as I can remember. I grew up in the depression,

00:11:03.600 so there was really deep poverty. My own family, elsewhere, and those scenes stay with me.

00:11:12.160 miserable people coming to the door trying to sell rags, something like that. These are indelible

00:11:24.320 memories, and I've now seen it all over the world. That's the kind of place I gravitate to,

00:11:31.200 whether it's in southern Colombia or eastern Turkey or refugee camps in Lebanon or many other places where

00:11:40.160 it's going. Or right here in the United States. You don't have to go very far to see it.

00:11:47.120 Most of the world has only seen that in movies. You watch the movies, and the only way you can get

00:11:51.920 a depiction of what happened in the Great Depression is, let me go watch a movie, and maybe

00:11:55.120 I'll get an idea of it. I mean, I was born and raised in Iran, and I lived there for 10 years,

00:11:59.760 and the war happened between Iran and Iraq. I remember it clearly. And then going to Germany,

00:12:04.160 living at a refugee camp for a couple years, and seeing what that was like, a small little camp we had,

00:12:08.640 and then finally coming to the States. So living in Iran, I grew up watching folks going across the

00:12:16.480 street, protesting, flagellating their backs with a streak of blood on the ground, screaming out,

00:12:21.200 death upon America. I witnessed that as a kid for 10 years. Obviously not from the day I was born,

00:12:25.760 say from four years old, five years old, earliest memories. You would see that. And as a kid,

00:12:30.080 that kind of leaves a mark, kind of like what you saw on the Great Depression side. But there was also

00:12:34.640 another community that loved America and wanted to come to America for the freedoms it offered.

00:12:40.480 Everybody, I think, has a different definition of what America means to them. What does America mean to you?

00:12:46.400 It means many different things, ranging from some of the worst crimes in human history,

00:12:55.520 like the most vicious system of slavery that was ever created, which still its legacy is very much

00:13:04.160 with it, including the virtual extermination of the indigenous population at one extreme, at the other

00:13:13.360 extreme, breaking new barriers in popular democracy, developing the concept of we the people, which was a

00:13:26.320 revolutionary concept in the 18th century, moving on to protecting freedom of speech to a degree that's

00:13:36.960 that's unknown elsewhere. So a mixture of extreme horrors and exciting achievements.

00:13:46.560 Which achievements to you would you say are some of the best achievements America's had as a nation?

00:13:54.480 The pioneering from the 18th century of mass public democracy. It's been a struggle all the way.

00:14:06.640 The Founding Fathers were strongly opposed to it. The Constitution is an aristocratic doctrine which

00:14:15.760 seeks to marginalize the general public. But then come constant struggles, constant all through the years,

00:14:23.760 to try to provide some real meaning to the concept of we the people. When I talked about

00:14:31.520 snake workers in Alabama, that's one kind of contribution. When you talk about

00:14:39.760 young people from the Sunrise Movement occupying congressional offices today to try to get Congress

00:14:48.800 to move towards taking steps that will save the human species from self-destruction. That's another

00:14:58.800 kind of step. So you see these things all the way through history. If you like, it's a kind of sharp class

00:15:08.320 war being fought constantly. And you have both sides. It's not contradictions, they're opposing forces. And that's

00:15:17.520 the course of history. So you can see horrors. Iran is a case in point. You can take a look at 1.00

00:15:27.200 the memoirs of General Robert Heuser, who was dispatched by President Carter to carry out a military coup in

00:15:39.440 in Iran in 1979. You can see the blurb by Spigniew Brzezinski, Carter's national security advisor, who says,

00:15:52.080 I guess, then this vindicates him. If a military coup had been carried out, maybe killing who knows how many people,

00:16:02.720 we could have maintained the rule of the Shah, the U.S. imposed in 1953, overthrowing Iran's

00:16:11.440 parliamentary democracy. So you can see that. You can see other things.

00:16:16.720 Yeah. I mean, that, that, that was, so you, you were not supportive of what Carter did to not help

00:16:23.040 the Shah at a time where they kept saying, it's going to be all right. It's going to be all right. 0.96

00:16:26.000 It's going to be all right. And then obviously there was a fall of the Shah. You supported 0.98

00:16:29.840 the Shah, meaning you would have liked it to stay the way it was. 0.95

00:16:32.880 That's a different question. Once he was ousted, the question is, how should he be treated? I felt,

00:16:41.280 despite his enormous crimes, and they were terrible, he should be treated humanely. But that's a

00:16:47.760 separate question from the Carter Brzezinski plan to carry out a military coup. Actually, this was

00:16:56.880 described openly by Israel's de facto ambassador to Iran, who publicly announced in 1979 that Israel

00:17:11.840 had very close relations with the Shah, that what's needed in Iran is a bloody military coup,

00:17:20.160 which may kill 10,000 people, but that will suppress the uprising and restore the

00:17:26.880 tyrannical rule to the Shah. That's what they had in mind. Well, I'm opposed to that, but I'm in favor 1.00

00:17:34.560 of treating the tyrant humanely once he was ousted. Interesting. I mean, if you study it a little bit

00:17:40.800 deeper, I'm from there, so I put a little bit more time into that specific topic. It was also the 25-year

00:17:46.160 contract that oil between France, Germany, UK, and I'm sure you were this with US, where they were

00:17:52.320 not happy about the fact that the Shah was about to raise the prices, and 1979 was a specific year

00:17:57.200 when the prices was going to go up. So they had a private meeting in South or Central America to figure

00:18:02.720 out a way to make it. This strategy was four nations wanting to make sure he didn't stay in power the

00:18:07.280 way he did. So it was extremely strategic. But it's interesting to see the fact that you still want

00:18:12.800 the individual to be treated in a humane way. You know, if I read some of your books, like if I read

00:18:18.320 Who Rules the World, the book that you wrote, Who Rules the World, if I watch your documentary,

00:18:24.640 if I watch some of our interviews, if I go watch you and William Buckley have a debate, if I go watch

00:18:31.840 any of the stuff that you've done a lot of work, your catalog of work is very wide and very deep,

00:18:37.200 I don't get the most positive feeling about America. Almost if I had someone who was not

00:18:44.480 an individual who had spent a lot of time wanting to study the history of America, say I have 50

00:18:51.360 students here, and I have 50 students here, neither one of them have ever studied the history of

00:18:54.880 America. If I gave them your material to read and study for a year, I'm willing to bet most of them

00:19:00.640 after you would probably hate America. You know, a lot of the things that I read, it doesn't come

00:19:06.560 across as there is that love of what a great country America is. For you, and you make a lot

00:19:15.520 of good arguments in your books. I'm watching to see what your points are on this. Okay, this makes

00:19:19.280 sense. I see where he's going with this. Do you still, maybe it's not even still, do you think America

00:19:25.200 has or is ever been the greatest country in the world? There's no such concept as the greatest

00:19:32.560 country in the world, just as there is no greatest human being in the world. Countries have many

00:19:40.320 complex characteristics, some of them very outstanding, wonderful, others hideous.

00:19:49.280 So take some other country. Let's take Germany, some of the greatest thinkers, scientists,

00:19:58.320 artists in the world, the depths of human history as well. What's more, it flips quickly from one to

00:20:05.920 the other. You just can't make comments like that. I mean, is Germany, in the 1920s, Germany was regarded as

00:20:14.800 the peak of European civilization. And the sciences, philosophy, the arts, was regarded as a model of

00:20:22.720 democracy. In the 1930s, 10 years later, it was regarded as the depths of human history. Ten years later,

00:20:33.280 beginning of a return to what it once was. So what's Germany? What's England? England has an absolutely 0.78

00:20:41.920 hideous record of atrocities and destruction for centuries. Iran, in fact, is a case in point. 0.92

00:20:50.240 We know a lot about it. But Iran could have moved in the early 20th century towards democracy and

00:20:58.960 freedom. The British crushed it. When Iran tried to take control of its own energy resources in the early

00:21:07.840 50s, Britain tried to crush it by force. When they were unable to, they asked the big guy across the

00:21:16.400 Atlantic to come in and smash it for them. Okay, that's one side of Britain, not the worst by any

00:21:22.960 means. On the other side, it has, again, my favorite philosophers in history right in front of me. I have

00:21:30.800 a book about the friendship between Adam Smith and David Hume in the 18th century, two outstanding

00:21:40.880 figures, two of my famous figures in history. So that's another side of England. So what's your

00:21:47.120 attitude towards England? You can't answer. Just too many things. Same with every other place you can

00:21:53.520 think of. So I don't see any, except for people at patriotic rallies, I don't think you should ask

00:22:01.120 questions like, what's the greatest country? So would you be able to say, you know, 60 years

00:22:09.440 you've given to MIT, most of your life you've lived in America, you've been all over the world, would you

00:22:13.600 be able to say, I love my country, America? I don't love countries. Love is a relationship between

00:22:22.400 people. When you love countries, there's something wrong. Should you have loved Germany when it was

00:22:31.920 carrying out the Holocaust? Should you have loved Germany when it was at the peak of human civilization? 0.94

00:22:41.440 You care for people and the societies in which they live. I care for many societies, including this

00:22:49.440 one. But you don't love countries. Got it. At least I don't think you should.

00:22:58.160 I think there's an emotional connection sometimes with certain set of values

00:23:02.400 that one nation offers to you where the other one where you grew up and didn't. It's almost like a,

00:23:08.640 I'm not, I wasn't born here. I'm not a U.S. citizen. I can never run to be the president

00:23:12.480 here. Or maybe I can be governor or something like that. But this is not really where I was born.

00:23:17.360 But this country welcomed me with open arms and gave me an incredible life. And to compare it to

00:23:24.240 where I was raised at, I mean, you know, the worst day in America is still 10 times better than the

00:23:28.320 best day in Iran. So that's what I mean, where maybe for you, you had some kind of a love for the

00:23:32.880 country that, you know, gave me the opportunity to become the country. Sorry, the country didn't give

00:23:38.880 you the opportunity. Certain people within the country gave you the opportunity while preventing

00:23:47.600 others, victims of our own crimes, from having that opportunity. They gave you the opportunity

00:23:55.600 because you were a refugee from a country that was an official enemy. Okay. That's what they did. Take me.

00:24:05.360 My parents fled from Eastern Europe, horrible conditions, and did manage to get to the United States.

00:24:16.320 And they managed to create a good life for themselves, an even better one for me. Okay. On the other hand,

00:24:24.880 a couple of years after they fled from Europe, they happened to make it just before the First World War.

00:24:31.520 A few years later, in 1924, the United States passed a law, immigration law of 1924, which was aimed

00:24:42.480 particularly at Jews and Italians. I'm Jewish. The idea was to keep Jews and Italians away from the country 1.00

00:24:51.520 because they were not up there. We don't want that kind of rabble around. Well, that helped put most of 0.98

00:24:58.560 my extended family into the gas chambers. Okay. They couldn't come here because they were barred in the 1930s.

00:25:08.240 Jewish refugees continued to be barred, or virtually a few were let in, in the late 40s, when they were still in concentration camps,

00:25:21.520 but then desperately trying to get out. The United States wouldn't have them. Central Americans who were victims of 0.99

00:25:30.480 massive U.S. atrocities were being kept out right at this moment. They're being driven away from the border

00:25:37.840 when they flee from horrors that we created from the 80s. Okay. So it's a very mixed story. Sure. I'm

00:25:46.560 glad to have been able to come to the richest country in the world with advantages that don't exist anywhere

00:25:54.880 else, thanks to the extermination and expulsion of the native population. So yes, for me, that's very good. 1.00

00:26:03.840 Does that mean I love the country? No. I admire some things within it. I think we should despise other

00:26:12.160 things within it. And the same is true of every other country. Would you call yourself a pessimist or a

00:26:18.800 optimist? Well, when asked that, I always appeal to the slogan that Antonio Gramsci made famous. We should

00:26:31.040 have pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will. There's a lot of things that are wrong. That's

00:26:39.840 what we should concentrate on, trying to make them better. And we should be optimistic about the

00:26:45.600 power to do so, no matter what the obstacles. Yeah. It almost reminds me of, you studied

00:26:52.560 obviously a lot of philosophy. I'm assuming you also studied probably Stoicism with Seneca and,

00:26:56.800 you know, Marcus Aurelius and the whole, how Stoicism got started, what prior to it used to be called

00:27:02.960 cynicism. And a couple of guys are like, listen, I don't want to be part of this cynicism community.

00:27:08.640 It was a philosophy and, you know, Seneca kind of stepped away and says, I'm just going to go do

00:27:12.960 something else. And then boom, Stoicism got started into what it is today. But it was,

00:27:18.480 it was more of the mindset of, I can do something about my life to improve my life. Do you believe

00:27:23.760 the individual has the ability and the control and the responsibility and the ultimate level of

00:27:30.640 accountability to help improve their situation and their lives? Not just your own life, but to

00:27:36.080 improve the world for all of us. And those are, right now, the most urgent questions that have

00:27:45.680 ever faced the human species. After all, we might not like to think about it, but we have about a decade

00:27:56.000 or two to answer the question as to whether organized human life will persist on earth.

00:28:04.880 Nothing less than that. Very stark question.

00:28:08.880 How certain are you of that? To say a decade or two, that's a pretty extreme statement to say,

00:28:14.400 we only have a decade or two. Why do I say that? Yes, it's a fact. If we don't deal with the

00:28:23.760 increase of heating, the environment, we will reach tipping points which are irreversible.

00:28:33.520 Doesn't mean everybody's going to die tomorrow, but we'll be off on a course which will be unstoppable

00:28:41.680 and will lead to essentially the end of organized human life on earth, along with

00:28:48.480 millions of other species which we're destroying at the same time. I can't be certain about this,

00:28:55.040 but there's a very high probability of it. In fact, virtual unanimity among scientists,

00:29:02.880 that this is what's going to happen unless we take control within the next few decades.

00:29:08.880 So to say it's a fact, that's a pretty strong statement to say it's a fact. Fact means like,

00:29:15.600 you know, 100% we're going to be there and...

00:29:19.360 Nothing is a hundred percent.

00:29:20.720 Okay.

00:29:21.440 Okay.

00:29:21.840 Quantum theory is not a hundred percent.

00:29:24.000 Theory of relativity is not a hundred percent. In the empirical world,

00:29:29.760 you never have certainty.

00:29:31.120 You only have...

00:29:32.240 I'm just saying you said fact. I'm just repeating, you said fact.

00:29:34.640 So I think what you're saying, there's a possibility, but not necessarily factual.

00:29:38.720 Yes. But that's, there's a background understanding since the 17th century that in

00:29:46.000 the world of empirical fact, you never reach certainty. So when we talk about facts as we do

00:29:52.880 freely, we always mean it with that qualification in the background. We're not going to stop using

00:29:59.200 the word fact. Like it's a fact that if I take this coffee cup and I let go of it,

00:30:08.720 it's a fact that it'll fall to the ground. Though there in fact is a very slight possibility

00:30:14.400 that it'll rise to the sky. Okay. Happens to be the case. There's a spectrum of possibilities of

00:30:23.120 which the overwhelmingly high probability, so high that there's no need in the practical world to

00:30:30.320 consider anything else, is that it'll fall to the ground.

00:30:33.360 But there does happen to be a very minuscule possibility that it might go to the sky.

00:30:40.560 But when we talk about facts, we have that understanding in the background.

00:30:45.040 Yeah. I mean, I just never seen anything fall up and I've lived 42 years. I've had a hard time

00:30:49.920 seeing it. I mean, if things would have gone up and I would have jumped a little higher,

00:30:52.800 I would have been in the NBA today. So I'm hoping that was kind of favoring me,

00:30:55.520 but I couldn't jump more than 15 inches. So I could never go into the NBA. So factually,

00:31:00.800 some of this stuff, maybe I've got some work to do on. Actually, there is. Not that you would do

00:31:05.440 it, but it's just one of the things that could happen in the universe. It could happen in the

00:31:10.320 universe, but that's a could. That's not a fact though. But to say factually in the next 10 or 20 years,

00:31:16.400 that makes somebody sit there and say, two times two is four. That's a fact. Two times two is not

00:31:21.840 going to be five tomorrow. There's a possibility it'll be five tomorrow. That puts a lot of fear in

00:31:26.960 some folks who haven't, who haven't read as much as you have to say, to say the world,

00:31:31.680 you know, we're going in the direction with climate change in 10 or 20 years. That's a scary thought.

00:31:35.760 No, sorry. That's a misunderstanding. Every empirical fact that you can think of

00:31:43.200 has a possibility of being wrong. Whatever it is, that's been understood for centuries.

00:31:50.080 That's different. That could be your opinion, my opinion, research, who wrote it. It's not a matter

00:31:56.080 of opinion. By now, modern physics even explains it in some detail. So it doesn't mean we should stop

00:32:03.200 talking about facts. Of course we should. But we should talk about facts with a recognition always

00:32:10.320 barely possible, sometimes almost inconceivably small probability that they're wrong. So we continue to

00:32:17.200 talk about facts. So when I say it's a fact that this is going to happen, that means there's an

00:32:22.720 overwhelmingly high probability. And we know the factors and so on. If you want every statement

00:32:31.520 that's ever made to be added to this qualification, okay, I don't think that's a wise policy. We should

00:32:39.360 continue to talk about facts. Sure. No, I just think, you know, one of the reasons why we've gotten to where

00:32:46.560 we are in America, this is my opinion. This is not a fact. This is my opinion. I'm very comfortable

00:32:51.120 being wrong. I think one of the reasons why we've gone to where we are today in America as divisive

00:32:55.600 as we are is because both sides think everything they believe in is 100% factual. You know, this is

00:33:03.360 coming from a skeptical Christian. This is coming from a guy that grew up an atheist for 25 years.

00:33:08.800 And I'm sitting there debating all these different issues in the Bible. I'm like, wait a minute,

00:33:12.160 this doesn't matter. And I'm a math guy. So I understand what you're saying. I appreciate

00:33:16.000 that. But let's go to a different topic here. So let's talk about capitalism. Let's talk about

00:33:19.840 capitalism. We have different economical systems in the world. You know, no matter how much I study

00:33:25.040 what you say, you'll take shots at Obama. Then you'll take shots at Bush. Then you'll take shots at

00:33:30.400 Nixon. Then you'll take shots at Carter. Then you'll take shots at Trump. So it's not like you are

00:33:36.000 blindly, no matter what, only defending anybody that is on one side. You're not that. That's not you.

00:33:43.120 You're not a such and such person, such a perfect leader. He can never make a mistake. You don't come

00:33:49.680 from that. That gives you a lot of credibility as a reader to say, I'm actually interested to see what

00:33:53.280 he's thinking about it here. But if we look at economical systems, we've got capitalism, we've got

00:33:57.760 socialism, we've got communism. And then, you know, a couple other things. Marxism would be pretty much the

00:34:02.800 same as socialism, communism, a part of it. What do you think about? Like, when you think about

00:34:08.640 capitalism, out of all the systems that we've had, and the results that capitalism has created,

00:34:13.760 what are your thoughts on capitalism? Well, first of all, I have a different conception of the

00:34:20.400 various options in the world. You see many different kinds. I see one. Every society that's

00:34:28.720 functioning has some variety of state capitalism. Some elements of capitalism constrained by state

00:34:38.240 power. That's true of the United States. It's true of Britain. It was true of Russia under the so-called

00:34:45.280 communists. It's true of China. We can look at the different variants of state capitalism that exist.

00:34:53.920 I think they all have some advantages, many defects. Now, as far as my discussing Biden, Obama, Bush,

00:35:04.880 and so on, there are two kinds of... We have a certain... We have a finite amount of time and energy.

00:35:12.160 We can decide how to use it. One way to use it is to march in parades, praising the magnificence of our

00:35:20.560 leaders and countries along with a great mass of other people. It's a pretty useless activity,

00:35:28.240 in my opinion. The other possibility is to see what's wrong with existing societies and work to

00:35:36.720 try to change them. My feeling is that's where attention and energy should be devoted. So every one of

00:35:46.880 those figures that you mentioned did a lot of things that I think were very wrong, very harmful to others

00:35:53.840 and ourselves. And I think not just them, but the people around them, the social forces within which

00:36:01.680 they were functioning and so on. So I think the sensible thing to do is look at those and try to

00:36:06.880 improve and change them. If that gives an impression of being negative, yes, it's true. I think we should be

00:36:14.400 negative about things that ought to be changed. If you want to applaud, join the multitudes and the

00:36:22.160 parades and praise what's nice, fine. That's okay. It's not very worthwhile. You want to do it on July 4th,

00:36:29.440 okay, but not devoting your life to it. So we should emphasize on the wrong work that you do.

00:36:37.040 You're saying, so as a reader, you've written 150 books, so rather than looking at ideas you have in

00:36:42.160 your book that make sense, I as the reader should look at the things that's wrong about you,

00:36:47.760 not the things you write that's right about you. So that's kind of what you're suggesting.

00:36:51.520 If you're, if you have some special interest in me, say you're my mother, then you should be interested

00:36:59.280 in the things that I do that I shouldn't be doing. Okay. If you care about me.

00:37:06.320 But if not, but if not, I got to constantly be looking.

00:37:09.360 So if you care about the US, if you care about US society, if you don't care about US society,

00:37:16.000 just go march in a parade. If you do care about US society, you'll take a look at what you think

00:37:21.920 ought to be changed and improved. So what you're saying is, if I'm constantly looking at things

00:37:26.640 that are wrong instead of things that are right, I should, that to me means less celebration,

00:37:32.720 more being critical. So I should spend more time protesting than attending parades.

00:37:38.480 Not just protesting, trying to change. If you care about the society at all, you'll be concerned with

00:37:48.000 trying to change the things that are wrong, that hamper its development, that hurt the people in it,

00:37:55.840 and that are harming other people in the world. You'll be committed to changing those if you care

00:38:01.520 about the society. If you don't care about the society at all, you can march in parades.

00:38:08.240 Yeah. But you know, the, the, I mean, I get that. Okay, fine. Let's, let's continue with that. So

00:38:12.880 capitalism, what, what, what is, in your opinion, what is wrong with capitalism? Where do you see the

00:38:17.760 flaws and challenges in capitalism and what will be a better alternative than capitalism?

00:38:22.720 Well, first of all, since there is no capitalism, almost everything we have is an alternative to it,

00:38:29.280 everything in fact. If there were capitalism, it would probably self-destruct within no time. 0.81

00:38:37.280 That's why the business world, pretty much in charge, has always invariably called upon state power

00:38:46.320 to protect them from the ravages of the market and to subsidize them and to carry them through

00:38:54.000 the next stage to develop the next stage of the economy and so on. Why? Let's be quite concrete.

00:39:02.560 We're now using computers, the internet, satellites, microelectronics, so on. Where'd all that come from?

00:39:11.840 Mostly from public investment. You got a vaccine. Mostly from public investment? You mean the gut?

00:39:19.680 So, so most of the innovation we've had in America came from the government, not from the people?

00:39:24.400 Yeah. That's what you're saying?

00:39:25.840 Of course. I mean, I was at MIT in the 50s and the 60s when most of this was being developed. It was

00:39:33.440 being developed on public funds.

00:39:35.120 So, so that's a, that's, that's, that's, that could be an opinion that could not be necessarily

00:39:42.640 a fact, but that's another thing that could be an opinion because you and I are on a computer

00:39:46.800 right now invented by this guy named Steve Wozniak.

00:39:49.760 Well, let's take a look, take a look, take a look computers. They were developed for the risky,

00:39:56.640 creative hard work was done for decades, either in research universities.

00:40:06.240 Yeah, but they, they almost, they almost used the entire city's electricity. They had to have massive

00:40:11.840 towers to have a computer because in order to allow entrepreneurs.

00:40:15.760 Lots of electricity, which is coming from public funding overwhelmingly. So yes, if you look back

00:40:22.320 at it at all, most of it, just the creative hard general work is just done through public engagement.

00:40:31.360 Now you take a look at computers again in 1977, after about 30 years of development of computers,

00:40:39.680 mostly in the public sector. Steve Jobs was be able, able to make a personal computer that you could

00:40:47.200 sell in the market, Apple computer, what I'm using. And then the marketing, the development and so on,

00:40:55.280 was mostly transferred to the private sector. Now, it's more complex than this. So IBM, for example,

00:41:03.200 after learning how to switch from punch cards to modern computers, they learned that mostly in labs,

00:41:15.680 like the one I was working at at MIT, but they did advance to that point. Then they were able to develop

00:41:22.880 their own computer in the early sixties, stretch computer, fastest run around. Nobody could buy it,

00:41:30.320 was way too expensive. So it went to the public sector. It was bought by Los Alamos.

00:41:37.840 And then it was able to develop further. And so it continued. Same with the internet,

00:41:42.880 which was being developed right where it was in fact, in the late fifties, early sixties,

00:41:48.400 public funding. After about 30 years, 1995 or so, it was essentially handed over to private power,

00:41:58.240 largely privatized. That's the way a lot of the economy develops. It goes way back to the early 19th

00:42:07.120 century. 19th century, the main development in the country was railroads. That was the huge economic

00:42:14.960 development. They were much too complicated and extensive for private capital to deal with them.

00:42:22.720 So it was handed over to the Army Corps of Engineers. The mass production,

00:42:30.560 it's called the American way of manufacturing, which astonished the world, late 19th century,

00:42:38.400 quality control, replaceable parts, Taylorism in industry, all of this, which made things much more

00:42:47.600 efficient. It was mostly developed in government armoured and handed out, picked up and used by

00:42:54.480 private capital. Now I'm drawing the lines too sharply. You look at the whole thing,

00:43:00.720 complicated story. There's all kinds of interaction, but this is a large part of economic history

00:43:07.600 all the way through. That's why we always have state capitalism, along with protection of the masters

00:43:17.120 from market ravages. They don't want to face them. The reason we have huge financial institutions

00:43:25.600 is because the government insures them and allows them.

00:43:29.040 I don't disagree with that. That's the part with crony capitalism. I'm not with that. When the big banks

00:43:34.320 got bailed out and they got the checks in a way by Barack Obama or Bush or folks back in the day when

00:43:40.480 Reagan bailed out, I'm not the one that's sitting here saying, let's bail some of these companies out.

00:43:44.640 Because in my opinion, Professor, I don't think monopoly exists without the help of the government.

00:43:50.240 I don't think the monopoly exists.

00:43:51.360 It's quite the opposite. As soon as you start deregulating, it moves towards monopolization.

00:43:57.840 We've seen it. That's the result of handing things over to the market.

00:44:04.240 That's the result of politicians being for sale because their campaigns, they need money to raise

00:44:09.840 campaigns so I can go buy them because they're for sale. And they helped me create a monopoly

00:44:15.360 because I got a couple of people in my pocket. That's been going on for a while. There's a reason

00:44:19.600 why a lot of these bigger companies start off in different cities as headquarters. As they get bigger,

00:44:23.920 they put an office right in D.C. Because I got to go control some of the regulation and laws to

00:44:28.400 not allow the other smaller guy to compete with me long term.

00:44:31.840 You're looking at footnotes. The main thing is that when you begin to deregulate and hand things

00:44:40.000 over to the market, there's a tendency, strong tendency to move towards monopolization.

00:44:46.800 As the bigger fish eat the littler fish have more power that can under price.

00:44:52.400 We're not off page here because I've been on calls before where the FTC,

00:44:58.960 we were doing business with this one company. All of a sudden I get a call from FTC. They want to

00:45:02.480 have a call with us. Great. So we want your entire team to be on the call. Okay. What's this call

00:45:07.360 about? To go back to capitalism, that's why the owners and managers of the world, those who Adam Smith

00:45:16.480 called the masters of the universe, the owners of concentrated capital, that's why they have always

00:45:24.160 called on the state to rescue them from disaster. So going back to the original point, all over the

00:45:31.440 world, we have one or another variety of state capitalism. But why do politicians fall for that,

00:45:37.600 though? Why do politicians fall for that? Politicians can say, we're not bailing you out. Why do they bail

00:45:42.560 them out? The politician doesn't have to say, yes, we'll bail you out. No, we're going to let the

00:45:47.520 market decide how you do. Why would they bail them out? Sorry, why would they want? So you're saying

00:45:53.440 these masters of the universe that Adam Smith talks about, they almost always go to the public to

00:45:59.520 bail them out. But the public has the right to say, no, we're not going to bail you out. Why do they

00:46:03.760 keep saying yes? Because they have very few choices. If you're an individual and you say,

00:46:11.440 I don't like the monopoly of the Comcast and two or three, what are you going to do about it?

00:46:21.600 Well, no, I'm going to, the public is to sit here, but to sit here and say everything is the

00:46:27.360 private's fault and everything good that ever happened was because of the public and the government,

00:46:31.440 not the private. That's extremely naive to say that because you're then painting the picture of

00:46:36.880 the public and all the responsibility that they have to reject these ideas by this,

00:46:42.800 everybody's for sale. All the politicians are for sale. It's the opposite. I'm the one who's saying

00:46:49.520 the public can do a lot. That's what I've been saying all along. I'm writing about,

00:46:55.120 you asked me who I respect. It's the people on the ground who are doing things because they have the

00:47:01.200 options. So what do you think about the guy that worked at IBM and he was making 30 bucks an hour

00:47:08.000 and he works there and he's one of the public. He's one of the smaller guys and he leaves after

00:47:12.800 making $82,000. He doesn't like the way IBM does something, goes and starts his own company. He becomes

00:47:17.280 a billionaire. He went from being the public to being the top 1% of 1% of America. Is he now a bad person?

00:47:23.440 I am not talking about the choices that individuals make. These are the footnotes. If you want to be

00:47:33.440 totally naive about the situation system, take a look at the footnotes. If you want to pay attention

00:47:39.360 to the things that matter, take a look at the major institutional factors. We have a high concentration

00:47:47.920 of economic power, has enormous influence over the state. We have institutions based on a conception

00:47:57.600 that classical liberals would have despised, namely subordinating yourself to a master

00:48:05.040 and most of your waking life. Those are the fundamental principles on which the economy is based.

00:48:13.440 People have choices. They have options. Now let's be concrete about it. So when Reagan came in and

00:48:21.520 Reagan and Thatcher and launched the neoliberal revolution which transferred power even more than

00:48:31.200 normally to the hands of unaccountable private power, the first thing they did was to smash unions

00:48:39.920 for very good reasons. Unions are one of the ways in which people can get together to defend themselves

00:48:47.920 from the onslaught of private power. So if you want to move towards a world where power is in the hands

00:48:56.720 even more than usually of unaccountable private power, you want to eliminate this defense.

00:49:03.920 And there's been a continued onslaught against the possibilities for workers to organize and defend

00:49:10.720 themselves ever since then. It's a large part. And so yes, these are the concrete things that happen

00:49:17.520 in the world. Okay. I don't care about what some guy in IBM decides to do with his life. That's for him to decide.

00:49:24.640 Is that good? Is it good to highlight those stories where somebody who was a low wage, $15 an hour guy,

00:49:32.800 $30 an hour person went and changed his life and became wealthy and his dreams became a reality and

00:49:37.360 created 20,000 jobs. Should we recognize that and turn them into heroes in America?

00:49:43.520 Should we recognize it? Say Steve Jobs? Steve Jobs did a good job or Bill Gates of taking what had been

00:49:54.000 created mostly in the public sector by lots of people whose names you wouldn't even know unless

00:50:01.360 you haven't been working there for decades. They took all this and they turned it into something

00:50:06.960 marketable, which produced a lot of profit for themselves and some jobs on the side.

00:50:14.320 Some jobs on the side. You just say some jobs on the side, like maybe they created seven jobs.

00:50:19.120 Apple employs a lot of people. Microsoft employs a lot of, Walmart employs two and a half million

00:50:23.760 people. It's not some jobs. That's private. That's not necessarily the government.

00:50:27.520 That's right. Making use of what was produced by the general public. Okay. That's correct. There are

00:50:35.520 within the state capital. So what do we do? So if that's the case, what do we do? So I guess my

00:50:39.680 question for you would be, and the only reason I'm interrupting you, because you told me we started

00:50:44.080 off with technical difficulties. I thought we had more time, but you gave me a limited time. So I want

00:50:47.680 to maximize the time that we have together. So, so if that's the case, so what is a system? So it seems

00:50:54.320 like it's a sin for me to employ somebody in your eyes. Like if I employ anybody and pay them a salary,

00:51:00.880 it's a sin. So what's my alternative? What should I do to be holy where I'm not taking advantage in your

00:51:07.920 eyes, where I'm not taking advantage of somebody else? Because in your eyes, if the private, if the

00:51:12.480 private market hires and gives somebody a job, they're like a, they owned a person. But if the government

00:51:18.320 does it, they're being very virtuous. Not the government. You're eliminating the fact.

00:51:24.320 That it's the people who are doing it through the mechanism of the government.

00:51:29.680 It's the taxpayer who developed computers, the internet, your iPhone.

00:51:35.920 So what do we do though? So walk me through it. So one of the criticisms that we do,

00:51:40.320 what do we do? Yeah, exactly what John Stuart Mill talked about, what Abraham Lincoln talked about,

00:51:46.720 what all classical liberals talked about before it was destroyed, handed over the people who created it

00:51:53.520 should manage and control it. The management and decisions and control should be in hands of the

00:52:00.880 participants. You should change autocratic, tyrannical structures to democratic participatory ones.

00:52:10.240 Okay. Have you ever ran a company? Have I ever run a country?

00:52:16.800 Company? Okay. I've also never created relativity theory.

00:52:22.240 No, but if you've never ran it, but if you've never ran a company, what I mean by that is the

00:52:25.680 following. So I bring people smarter than me like yourself to be challenged. I like being challenged,

00:52:30.720 right? But on the company side to say, have the people who created it, run it.

00:52:37.120 The people who created it don't run it. They turn it over to managers who run it. They may make some

00:52:45.120 contribution or they may just go somewhere and live off the accumulated capital. But the fact is,

00:52:52.240 and the question is of the people who manage it, should they be appointed by a tyrannical authority,

00:52:58.800 which is unaccountable? Or should they be chosen by participation of the actual,

00:53:07.120 the people who actually take part in and run the place? Should they be able to participate and

00:53:13.680 control and decide how to manage and run it? That can be done extremely successfully.

00:53:18.720 Where has that been proven? Some of the most successful enterprises in the world are run that

00:53:26.160 way. Name us, give us five of them. Mondragon, for example, the huge conglomerate,

00:53:31.600 and the huge conglomerate. You're using the exception now. You're using the exception. It's not,

00:53:36.240 it's not most, it's less than 1% of 1% of companies. Yeah, that's right. Most of it is

00:53:42.400 government. Most of what happens is what I described. The taxpayer pays for the developed,

00:53:50.160 for the risky, hard, creative work. Particular individuals are able to exploit what has been

00:53:57.680 done at the public expense, turn themselves into tyrants who run things, sometimes for the benefit of

00:54:06.000 the population. That's called, that's the form of state capitalism that we have. And I think we

00:54:13.040 should move towards a kind of system in which the classical liberal ideals are realized. And people are

00:54:20.080 able to democratically participate in deciding how to manage and run their lives, including the

00:54:27.840 institutions in which they work. Professor, with all the respect- If you think they ought to be tyrannies,

00:54:32.160 fine. Say so. It's not, but that's what, that's what your interpretation is. You use words like

00:54:37.760 exploit. You use words as tyrant, tyrannic, tyrannical leaders. You use that. There's nothing.

00:54:45.680 But there's, there's a lot of people to sit there and say, you know, we also have folks that create,

00:54:50.720 these are no, many of these folks are noble human beings who took time away from their families at a

00:54:55.200 time to create a job and create a business that led to creating jobs for other people. 50% of jobs in

00:55:00.800 America today are created by small business owners. These people are not millionaires.

00:55:04.240 These are folks that maybe run a liquor store, maybe run a small market, maybe run a small shop,

00:55:08.640 maybe do some real estate locally. And they hire five people that work for them. They make 100,

00:55:12.320 200,000 dollars a year. That's half of America's employed by small business owners.

00:55:16.800 Are they tyrannical entrepreneurs and business? So you, you continue to take the extremely naive.

00:55:23.840 I think you're taking your word of talking about the individuals. I haven't said a word in criticism

00:55:31.600 about Steve Jobs or Bill Gates or any, somebody running a small store.

00:55:36.160 You said they use what the public created. You said they use what the public created.

00:55:41.200 They, and then they were able to create some jobs.

00:55:43.920 Is it impossible for you to break out of this looking at footnotes naively at the individuals

00:55:53.360 and refusing to look at the institutions in which they function? You take a look at the institution,

00:56:00.080 which to take a, take a business, take Microsoft. Microsoft is pure, a pure example of absolute tyranny.

00:56:11.280 The decisions are made at the top. They're handed down to the next level, go down to the bottom. At the

00:56:18.320 very bottom, you have the right to wrench yourself to them. That's what was abhorred,

00:56:25.040 not only by classical liberals, but by thousands of years of tradition. We've internalized it, and I don't

00:56:32.480 think we should. I think these institutions should be run democratically by the people who participate in

00:56:40.000 them, making use of the contributions that the general society, the general public, has made over

00:56:48.400 the years to create the technology that is now being appropriated to use in these ways. That's the issue.

00:56:56.880 That's nothing to do with individuals. Maybe the guy who runs it is the nicest guy in the world. Fine.

00:57:03.440 I'm talking about what the institution does. So let's take JP Morgan Chase, the world's biggest bank.

00:57:10.400 Maybe the guy who writes it, who runs it, is the absolute nicest guy in the world. He is

00:57:16.320 institutionally constrained to spend the money of JP Morgan Chase to destroy the prospects for human life

00:57:25.120 on earth. That's, if he doesn't do it, he'll be replaced by somebody else who will do it. That's

00:57:31.840 the nature of the state capitalist system. And if we're serious about the world, that's what we

00:57:37.440 ought to be looking at. Not whether this or that guy is a nice person. Noam, last question for you

00:57:43.600 before we wrap up. One of the, this is for us to wrap up the interview. A lot of people have asked,

00:57:50.400 I asked a question on Twitter and Facebook about Noam and you have thousands of fans who showed up

00:57:55.280 and oh my gosh, you know, you know, the, he's challenged the way of thinking on this challenge,

00:57:59.840 the way of thinking, thinking of this, but there were a few that would like to see a debate between

00:58:04.400 you and Thomas Sowell. Would you, would you be open to a debate between you and Thomas Sowell?

00:58:09.120 If there's any point to it, I've read some of his work. It doesn't look very interesting to me,

00:58:15.600 but if I could find time and if he could find time, we could set it up.

00:58:21.200 What if, what if I coordinated and I, if you do it, I'll buy a thousand copies of whatever book you

00:58:26.320 want me to buy and we'll give it away to the viewers. I think the viewers want to see the two

00:58:30.480 of you guys have a discourse. I think, I think the audience and the people who you care about the

00:58:34.400 most would win at the end of the day. If you think so, I could put it on the schedule, but you know

00:58:39.200 what the schedule looks like. Wonderful. If you're open to it, I think that'd be great because I think this

00:58:43.440 will be a way to even make your, make a stronger argument on what your beliefs are. The audience

00:58:48.320 will win. Your folks who believe in your philosophies will win if you address it with him.

00:58:53.440 Not with me, but somebody like Thomas Sowell, who was a, you know, a thinker like you as well. It'd be

00:58:58.560 wonderful to see the clash of the two ideas. Well, I've done that a number of times and I don't find

00:59:04.720 it very useful, but I could, I'm sure he feels the same way. We could try to put it in our schedule.

00:59:10.480 If you're open to it, I could get with his team and coordinate it. This will be wonderful that you

00:59:13.920 make the commitment. I'll be able to make that happen. Good. But don't remember, it won't be

00:59:18.400 till September, at least. Do you know my schedule? You know, I will have, I will have, I know he's

00:59:24.560 also extremely busy, but I will have the team get together and we'll do our best to figure out a time

00:59:29.280 that works for everybody. You know how long it took to schedule this? I don't know. You don't?

00:59:35.040 Well, your manager does. Okay. Yeah. You can ask him. Probably took years because these are very hard

00:59:42.320 to fit things in. So lots of things to do. I don't happen to find that of much interest. I think the

00:59:50.080 world would love the two of you on the big stage. Not the world, a tiny fraction of the world. I

00:59:54.880 think the world would love, we would learn, we would get smarter if you guys would do it. The

00:59:59.360 world, the people would win. But again, professor, thank you so much for your time. Appreciate you.

01:00:03.680 Wish you nothing but the very best. Thank you. So number one, if you do want to see the debate

01:00:07.840 between Mr. Thomas Sowell and Professor Noam Chomsky, go on Twitter, my handle, PatrickBedDavid. You got

01:00:13.040 their handles here as well. Share it on Twitter, get it out there and see if people want to see that debate

01:00:17.840 take place. I think the world would benefit. We're talking about 90 plus years of life experience to

01:00:22.640 discuss their own set of philosophies on economy, America, whatever else may be. I'm sure you want

01:00:28.400 to see it as bad as I want to see it. But what was your biggest takeaway from sitting down, you know,

01:00:32.240 listening to my debate within my conversation with a man who worked at MIT and taught for 60 plus years

01:00:37.680 and has written 150 plus books. And whether you agree with them or not, there's a lot of things that

01:00:43.360 he makes you think. And I'm so glad I did this interview. I was just thinking about right now,

01:00:47.200 what are the videos to send you to that's opposing idea of economically. I don't know why I only tend

01:00:52.080 to interview socialists or folks on the left on the economist side. But I did an interview with

01:00:58.960 Laffer a couple of years ago, but that's five years ago. So I would only drive you to two interviews.

01:01:03.200 If you enjoyed the interview today, I think you're going to enjoy my sit down with

01:01:06.400 Professor Richard Wolff. Forbes calls him the number one socialist voice in America. If you've

01:01:13.840 not seen this video, it's phenomenal. The other one was with a communist Slavoj Zizek. If you've

01:01:18.720 not seen this, he will definitely entertain you. Both of them are great. Again, if you,

01:01:24.160 if you're crazy like me and you enjoy topics like this, go check those two interviews out. Take care,

01:01:28.160 everybody. Bye-bye.

Valuetainment - May 21, 2021

Does Noam Chomsky Hate America？

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript