base that uh, seymour hersh, identified down in florida, there was a maritime headquarters has been for years. so the fact that, so what's going on is neither a sweetener, denmark or germany want to admit to the reality that it was the united states ended and the united states as they're trying to get away with it. as despite the fact that joe biden publicly promised he was going to destroy it, victoria newland was over the celebrated the former prime minister, at least at the time. so coarse key of poland was sending a congratulatory tweet to the by the administration. and theresa may the then acting, the prime minister, the u. k, stupidly set up and classified text message again, applauding. united states for it's carrie, you know, getting this done. so it's just the, you know, the high pock receive this things. it is uh they are trying to stone. busy busy

the russian delegation and it, but there was, there's a broader principle involved here. we suppose they have this international rules based order. and under that international rules based order, if there is a dispute, you've got to have as an objective standard for resolve that in this case, united states want to make up the rules so it suits itself. and when, when the rules would go against it, it wants to ignore it. that's what's going on here to stay with archie international up next on role to parks, on, on her guess, discussing the ballooning us that and how much longer the united states can exist on the assumption that the world owes it. a living by the

welcome to worlds, a part of living within your means is consider that furniture in many cultures with one notable exception the united states was public doubt girls roughly by a trillion dollars every 100 days. and the past is used to sustain the so called american dream, the amory of the whole world. but the benefits of these seemingly endless ballooning, a much less apparent validated police to ordinary people. how much longer would the

united states or rather the american, the leaves exist on the assumption that the world owes them a living will discuss that. i'm now joined by michael hudson and the american economist undistinguished research professor of economics at the university of missouri. professor hudson, it's great to talk to thank you very much for being available. that's good to be here. now i know that your academic interest on academic ambition is in exploring and writing a history of dat from seminarian times. throwing secret teeth are futile. you're up to the present that i'm sure that must have offered you a unique lance onto the american that which has cross 13 for trillion mark recently. do you see that primarily as an economic, as an ideological or perhaps as a psychological issue or do you see it as an issue at all on the surface? it's a, an economic issue. yes. and the logical because of the entire 19th century explained

why a death overhead was going to be crushing the economy. uh, already you know, under marks. uh uh and uh, the rest of the last of the 19th century people were saying, finance capital is both an unproductive as an economic bird. but it'd be getting around the 20th century. there was a whole illogical claim saying no finance is not over version uh the they finance stairs and the bankers earn their money is not on there and income is not i can uh, economic rent like adam smith and john stuart mill in the marks and all of the classical economies said that this debt an interest was unproductive. the ology was that everybody's productive. bowen's heart is productive by providing a service. and john stuart mill said, well, they get this income in their sleep, they don't work for it. so there is no real value. so the whole video and she of

economics changed a way from an analysis of that. and if you look at the and it goes through a ph, d, and the economics today in the united states, there was no discussion of debt. it was because of the work i did for chase manhattan and realizing that a lot of countries chance pay their debts just like that level salt isn't a problem. i work for the united nations for the united nations institute for training and research, saying a 3rd world can pay the deb. nobody wanted to discuss that. but mister and mr. hudson, professor hudson, the united states is not like any other country. the americans believe strongly in the exceptional is meant sometimes the thing american officials don't believe the rules and regulations or laws of nature doesn't apply to other countries, apply to them. what do you think? how do you understand the logic of the success of american administrations,

of last thing they, they don't grow so precipitously? why aren't they wore it as much as use them to be? the logic is quite simple. the americans say, yes, we're running out of a for a death, but we're never going to retain that though. if we run spend dollars and other countries, any other country would have to do value or the currency, or they'd have to raise their interest rates, or they couldn't keep running into tax. but america says, as long as we run into depth and provide dollars, these dollars end up in the hands of others central banks, and these are the central bank savings. so we spend dollars, that's their savings. you're right, and i are you the, i use never going to be cashed, so we don't have to worry about that. because if they wanted to, uh, withdraw from the dollar area, we'll just send them the army and we'll have a regime change until we get a friendly roseann change that just holds all of our data. so that doesn't matter. that's the attitude of the united states. that's what makes

a state exec shuttle nation. but in the past this way or full parade to at least serve the american people. there was a believe that in our every successive generation would have a better life than the previous one. investing nowadays, more and more middle income people are struggling to make ends need. and so for a while it's to be ignored or it could be sort of marginalized into sort of deplorable complaining. but it's a, it's a major issue and i believe it has to have some structural solutions. what those solutions could be in. well, you've, you've so say that the issue very clearly. that's exactly the issue. the people who are of the teenagers and people in their twenties that i don't have any chance of uh, have of being able to get a house or get a job as easily as i could back in my day 60 years ago. and the open president of

buying tells people the economy is doing just fine by and by are you people opposing me? this is why they were opposing them because they, they, it costs $50000.00 a year to go to college and say, and they have so much student that, that they can't afford to take out a mortgage to buy a house and they're wrong. so they're still living with some parents and the parents, so it well winter right but, but had to pay anything like that. uh. and the health care is, uh, so it more expensive than that ever was. so the people, the voters say just what you say, things like going down the hill and mr. vice and will say, it's wonderful for the offer to look at the stock market because of that. right. well, the wealthiest 10 percent are doing great for the for the 90 percent. that's what you described. it's like uh the situation is getting worse. well, those 90 percent, i tend to be very proud of that democratic system. can they actually change anything about the way the country structure is about the way that our economy is

functioning, given that they have elections this year? nobody was running for president, except i think jo style is a 3rd party and i go, it was talking about economic policies. they're all talking about military policies or israel and russia. it's uh, take the other many more or less, but nobody's talking a little economic policy and certainly not the economist as well. uh well, additions uh, very used to deflecting from uh, you know, real concerns of by projecting, you know, some scares onto all the countries. but as you mentioned, the americans are feeling the pinch already. how long do you think they will be able to sort of use foreign policy instead of talking and doing some real policies until other countries such as the bricks plus uh, china, russia, and ryan and the others decide that things don't have to be the slight there is an

alternative, and they create a whole set of alternative organizations to the united nations, the international monetary fund, world bank. there has to be an alternative. and one says, and alternative the whole world will gravitate to end up in the united states. so isolated itself is think, since isolating, russia, isolating china, isolating them. but it's isolated so many people that know it's left all alone. and all the rest of the people have to say is we can make our own world. we don't do well to. so i'm excited this is already happening. thanks to be yours own policy. i mean the policy of trying to sanction russia or isolated from the rest of the world . i think it clearly backfired against the united states. and i want to ask you about specifically about the russian in china because you called a, you've been critical of the u. s. foreign policy, and you called the united states a care agent. putting aside the moral considerations. what do you seeing

on the downside of a such a policy for its author is when the united states or the united states was trying to prevent the rest of the world from creating an alternative. the united states is trying to make its own rules. that's what it those the rules space order, but that's completely logs with the international law and the united nations and the rules. okay. international law again. so if the united states can cite tape, tape, training case pass is prevent other countries from getting together. at last the end crating. an alternative, most of the chaos is around the countries where the united states was trying to start a colored revolution. and in order to have a regime change to bring a friendlier, more, a pro, your west client oligarchy, into being linked argentina or brazil, or germany. that's the ideal go to a country who they want leaders of another country to be essentially representing

us interests, not the interest of the wrong country. and by pay us, you can prevent countries from spelling out oil, but is our own economic and social interest. but this policy clearly is not working with either russia in china. and i think both these countries are domestically asking themselves very different different the united states. and that they are very circumspect about that public, that they are very conscious about them and painting, economic and social stability about investing into the infrastructure about actually making sure that the people do not suffer. and that the living stand, there's a no decreasing precipitous way. i wonder if the united states is running a risk here of not only and not that shipping the, the desired goals for in both the goals, but also in antagonizing further antagonizing their own people as well. you can

recognize that the united states doesn't the united states as plan a retail other countries what to do, and they obeyed it but, and they don't have a plan b. suppose you worked for the state department, then you just said, uh what you're saying that other countries have their own interest of the, of their bosses would say, well, you're not a team player. if you don't, we have team a. if you don't think our team a is a plan, a is going to work that not a team player you don't belong in. the american doesn't have a plan be only a plan and the reality is a plan b. but they don't have that there is no room for reality and plan i am saying, you know where it's been, you know, it ain't a central nation. we can do whatever we want. but the, mr. hudson. uh, i think this is something that many people around the world are struggling to understand about the united states. you have so many universities, so many things. tanks about so many, so many research commissions and you know, when you,

yourself work on long term historical trans. i'm sure these people in the state department, they, they, they should have access to some of that literature. how call is the baby? they seem to be so ignorant that the only read literature that uh, agrees with their position. oh, j edgar hoover, the head of the fbi i in america called video laundry gold gratification. if you read the new york times or the washington post or the manger media, there's no discussion of this is $11.00 story and that's it. professor hudson, that we have to take a very short break right now, but we will be back in just a few moments. stay tuned. the

when i 1st moved to rush, one of the most amazing things i found was the most of metro. in fact, at the very 1st phrase that i ever learned and nothing was careful, doors are closing. so what makes this place so specially what secrets is of hiding to find out deep under the city with alexander pop up to the store and who studies the wonders of the moscow metro. the welcome back to the parts with mike co hudson, an american economist, undistinguished research, professor of economics at the university of missouri. now before the break, we talked about washington, beginning of

a flight with russia in china. and i opened here, here in the russia and increasingly saw in china that washington is waging a battle, not just with them, but with history a such that if it is trying to sort of, uh, turn the top and turn back the tide of history, which is objectively moving away from the uni paula world, i wonder, what do you think about that? that is not working. the united states tried to impose sanctions on russia. that's the best thing the, the could have happened to russia. because the sanctions on russia, against agriculture, against the other items mo, made russia fetus produce a phone. so as on agriculture, and now, so the major grain export or it's, it's no longer dependent on the united states in europe, for manufacturers, for consumer goods. it's making a song, so the buy is set telling the rest of the worlds don't trade with russia,

adult trade with china. they force these countries to save. all right, we won't depend on the united states, we're going to stop ex, importing from them. and you just have a, the german foreign minister go to china and say, while going china by uh, the more goods from europe today, you're exporting to us more than we're exporting to you. and china said, well, you, you follow the american sanctions. you won't export computer trips tools, you won't export computer chip making machinery to us. you won't explore the nice thing that the united states says can help work. it will feeding people can help the, the feed phone charged the euro bang, the united states sanctions and you will trade with us. so there's, there's nothing they that america, your american bosses will let you export to a. so that's a new problem to take it up with your bobby with united states, not with us. so actually rusher. yeah. in china, over in the driver. so, you know,

they can say if you want sections against the, then we're just not going to trade with you. about m k, but at all. and america is completely dependent on russia and china for many roller carols, even for the engines. for us rockets that go to the moon is dependent on russia. all the rest you're asked to say of either of all or nothing. you know, we're happy to send you what you need, if you will give us what we need by figuring out what to do there. they have other people to trade with it now, but i think it's not only china or russia, i think the majority of the world wants to, you know, develop its economy productively, wants to be respected, wants to be treated fairly in economy and politics. why is it so difficult for, for the west to understand that, i mean it's not in the economic issue anymore. it seems to be like some the see that psychological question that for some reason

a decision makers in the west cannot understand. like you need to talk to people with respect so that they tribute in the same way that the americans understand that very well. they understand what the rest of the world wants. they don't want to have. they said they want other countries to be dependent. and one of the ways they hold other countries then dependency and prevent of attempt rates from doing what they want is there's in the norm, us us dollar debt owned by the global cells and by other countries in the united states and via the international monetary fund. can keep saying, well, we will create a currency crisis for you. it will be uh, out of the, of the dollar to the in order for other countries to do what they want. they have to withdraw from the us or but, and that means we're not paying the us dollar debt. this down a debt was almost an act of war. it was an act of financial award against them by

lending the money for the i am of really only to their plans. oh my god keeps lending the money. and that the on the condition that they privatize and sell off their public domain, their basic infrastructure, their uh, oil and binding rights, their lam america wants to take their wells fargo. and donald trump made of declare, he said in any deal we make were any country america as to when they're going to be of the losers? that's almost verbatim what he said. then the other countries don't want that deal where they're going to be the losers. then they're going to have to group together and just say that though it has to go knock that paying the dollar that's we're not going to export what you tell us to export. we're going to grow our own so that we're going to follow the chinese and russian computer system. so we don't have to be part of the, of the computer systems and ship a chip, send the media that the,

the us has all of us spyware in. we can go our own way, but the world is breaking apart and the end of those sections and the united states doesn't want to say it, because i've had the same type of realize of going down the hill and it can exploit that is that's they want to keep the game going of taking and taking as long as they can, as well. but sooner or later reality, we'll check on them. and as you said, it seems to be a pretty broad trend of countries choosing to you know, side way or, or sideline american regulations. not because they, you know, prioritize, rush or china, but because they prioritize that own national interest. now if that trump growth, what alternatives would the west have? i mean, can the west sustain itself within its own cam doesn't have enough resources, doesn't have enough infrastructure enough capital enough acu man. and now strategy

to exist within its own bubble. no cap because united states, as the industrialized has moved all of its industry to foreign countries, is dependent on raw materials from other countries. is there is such a high debt overhead in the united states. the incident depend on it. so you'd have many of the corporations and the banks go insolvent and bankrupt. so no, the west tab except that the united states and just one big war that's taken 3 years. it's one the war against europe in germany. it's made germany in europe completely independent. then so it's going to depend on your opinion purchases of the arms through nato. european purchases of american gas and other german firms are moving to the united states so they can get an expensive energy, some firms and moving to china. but you're europe as a dense on your end,

it's all going to look like last the end. the bowls and countries declining population declining industrialization, but all of this, so they're all of this decline of your will be a flow individualist over new list though, is very strong. now, because the l, the money is leaving europe for the united states. so it's not a go for a while, it's going to always go on longer than yes. i know, professor hudson, i know that you have served as a consultant to many governments and international organizations. if i were to ask you to give some advice to, let's say, developing nations on how to talk to the united states. because the american style of negotiating can be very intimidating. but as you pointed out, you know, those countries also have some leverage right now. they have some alternatives. how would you advise them to conduct the, you know, relations with the united states in the fair manner and not in an adversarial manner, but then the self serving and fair manner will realize in the 1st place that america

is a paper tiger. and if you look at on america waged on economic war against russia since 2020, to look at how it strengthens russia. look at america's war against china. our strengths of china. yes. ok to be america's enemy. just don't try to be as friend. you can, you can both say it in the american orbit and with a new civilization was 85 percent of the world's population showing that 85 percent and work together. and there's no way you can work in the united states without the united states trying to exploit, you know, now we have only a few minutes left them in this time i want to ask you about what's going on in gaza. you recently rolled up some 50 years ago when you were working with the hudson institute. there were some number, some must subs, agents who were being trained with you and you suggested that one of them currently serves as the main advisor through the is really prime minister benjamin. that's

now court and you know, who is the run? yeah. and he suggested that's what is happening in the region right now. your heard being discussed the half a century ago. what exactly was it? all of this is plan to be at the end and the israel was supposed to play the role of leading local revolutions. they at that time and they didn't have isis and the terrorist groups, the funk, they thought that the front of the yeah. the enemy of the chaos and them may, it was going to be but lucas down. so and so beginning at that time the ca begin to move, it's the agents end of the loop to stem, hoping that that would work against the ramp. but now that you advise us, you have a israel playing. the role is managing isis, and that's working is america's foreign legion. so america is recruiting these uh well hobby. uh, sort of crazies and they're staring them against syria. they're staring them

against russia and all along its borders. well, what's happening and goes, that's up. it's been already, it's very unpopular in america. most americans are against the war. uh and you can, there's a huge propaganda look out for the universities are expelling students and professors to say that does the palestinians are human beings, obviously president by and knows that he cannot be re elected as well. uh, waging a genocide in palestine. now the question is in the newspapers says by it and this towing and then yeah, hope don't attack around. but most of the syria 8, most of the national security council has wanted to attack a ram for the last 10 years. that's always been the plan. so the question is, is by and saying all of this, so to me for a show to make it up here is this america won't help is real if there is

a fight or is america trying to tell me nothing. yeah. ok. you know, between us, go ahead and do it and then we'll come and then we'll have the final fight against around that. so nobody, no. so what's the 1st that are hats? and the one thing that i'm sure you, you may know is whether america or israel for that matter, have resources for that kind of 5. because it's one thing to sound the and you know, some military aid to ukraine or even to israel, but to wage a war against a major country that has powerful allies not only in the region, but also around the world. that's quite a different that they taking they may want. oh they want, but do they have the resources to carry it out? that's the whole point. the resources are m, i 6 and in england and let's say uh the american. all right, so uh the thing is they do attack around you can be absolutely certain the united states, us behind them, 100 percent. that is have, and that's why i around says,

we understand that the united states as the enemy, the israel, of course, israel's, if it attacks us, is the enemy. but we're going to retaliate against the united states themselves into waves. number one against the american troops. it occupied erect the syria number 2, sinking a ship in the state of our moves. this is what we were talking about 60 years ago. if you have a site that shift in orleans, uh, the oil uh, from a 70 or 80, it cannot be export. and you will have an oil prices store. uh, you can imagine that this has got a nose for us yet. oh, out of all this. and that's, that's really the question or ran doesn't really have to fight back is real and america. that's all it has to do is 2nd ship and to remove this and uh, there goes the price structure and the inflation in the united states in europe. well, i assume she can sooner or later come home to roost. and that may be the outcome of

the policy that the united states has perceived pursuit for so many think it, we have to leave it there. professor hudson, thank you very much for your time. perfect traveling, man. and thank you for watching cope's this here again, on the world's a part of the of the

the, the world's largest food and beverage company is cut up and a scandal facing allegations of selling it healthy or baby to the western nations. even some developing countries with alternatives packed with sugar the french president says 0 if it is in danger and must not act as a us vassal. the same week as the us secretary of state spoke for the you about his relations with china during his trips to beach, i have gathered on democracy where the hind me for a weekly time and a how mosse hostage video provokes reaction from is rarely society, which fills the streets of tel aviv demanding prime minister. netanyahu make a deal with them aust released all.