On Friday, August 6th, Winnipeggers joined in a Lanterns for Peace Ceremony to mark the 76th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These ceremonies are held each year to help keep alive the memory of these attacks so that current generations understand we must never allow nuclear weapons to be used again.

This year, the focus was on the role of youth in the global campaign for nuclear weapons abolition, with speeches from the young activists responsible for convincing Winnipeg City Council to support the United Nations nuclear weapons ban.

Speakers included Avinashpall Singh and Rooj Ali who, in June, succeeded in persuading the City of Winnipeg to support the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons as part of the youth-led International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons Cities Appeal.

Winnipeg is now one of 15 Canadian cities to support the ban. Thus far, 86 countries have signed the treaty; Canada’s federal government refuses to support it.

Winnipeg Lanterns For Peace was sponsored by

  • Peace Alliance Winnipeg
  • Japanese Cultural Association of Manitoba
  • Council of Canadians-Winnipeg Chapter
  • Winnipeg Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
Speakers at Winnipeg Lanterns for Peace 2021 (l-r): Yuhito Adachi, Yūko Nozoe, Junko Bailey, Terra Rybuck, Rooj Ali, Avinashpall Singh, Shiven Srivastava, (missing: Denanie Ashley Persaud) Photo: Paul S. Graham

There are many parallels between the struggles of Palestinians and the indigenous peoples of the Americas. Chandni Desai and Ali Abunimah reflect on some of these in this presentation.

Chandni Desai teaches at the University of Toronto. Her research and writing focus on Palestinian resistance culture and the politics of internationalism. A community organizer who works for justice in Palestine, she hosts the Liberation Pedagogy Podcast.

Ali Abunimah is director of The Electronic Intifada, an independent nonprofit publication focusing on Palestine. He is the author of “One Country, A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse” and “The Battle for Justice in Palestine.”

This presentation is part of a longer discussion in a webinar sponsored by the International Manifesto Group entitled “Palestine, Unifier of All Struggles” that was held July 11, 2021. Video of the entire webinar will be available at the YouTube channel of the Geopolitical Economy Research Group.

Canadian mining companies dominate the sector in many parts of the world. Largely unregulated, they are able to profit from weak protection for the environment, workers, indigenous peoples and human rights in many countries.

Two-thirds of the value of Canadian mining assets is overseas, in 96 countries, and the Toronto Stock Exchange is home to almost half of the world’s mining corporations. Despite the efforts of activists in Canada and around the world, some of Canada’s best known companies are implicated in environmental destruction and shocking human rights abuses.

In this webinar, hosted by Peace Alliance Winnipeg, Catherine Coumans, of Mining Watch Canada, talks about the struggle to make Canadian mining companies accountable.

Ban Killer Drones

Posted: May 2, 2021 in Peace, War
Tags: ,

Peace Activists in the United States have launched a campaign they hope will result in an international ban on weaponized drones. Their new website will tell you more than you want to know about the deployment and lethal effects of these airborne killing machines. It also has suggestions for action and a petition you can sign that calls on the US government, the United Nations, and all the countries of the world to act on this issue.

There is a tendency among Canadian peace activists to see this as primarily a US problem, given that country’s well publicized drone assassination campaign that has resulted in at least 16,901 people killed and 3,922 wounded in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen in recent years.

However, according to Project Ploughshares, as many as 102 countries use drones for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and 35 have weaponized drones. Drones are not only deployed to spy on or kill “enemies” but are also often used against dissidents within their respective countries.

Canada has two models of drone aircraft that it uses for surveillance and is planning to acquire weaponized drones in the next couple of years.

Having observed Canada’s sorry record as Washington’s poodle and willing participant in US and NATO military campaigns in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, I have no doubt that these new weapons will not be used to defend Canada. Arguably, Canada’s armed forces were last used in the defence of the country in 1945 and barring a couple of peacekeeping missions, our wars since then have been aggressive ones fought to extend the reach of western capital.

So, please join the international campaign in whatever way makes sense to you, but as well, cast a critical gaze on your own country’s military programs and speak out however you can.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has embarked on a dangerous plan to expand its reach and military strength by the year 2030. Not only does this increase the risk of world war, it promises to rob even more of the precious resources that member states would have available for social programs (or mitigating climate change, or heavens, tax cuts for working people!)

Speaking at a recent webinar organized by Peace Alliance Winnipeg, Tamara Lorincz detailed the magnitude of NATO’s plans and explained what this means for Canada. She also described some of the ways Canada’s peace movement is resisting increased military spending and other toxic aspects of Canada’s foreign policy.

Tamara is a PhD candidate in Global Governance at the Balsillie School for International Affairs (Wilfrid Laurier University). She is on the board of directors of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space and on the international advisory committee of the No to NATO Network. She is a member of the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace and the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom.

On Feb. 27. 2021, Peace Alliance Winnipeg hosted a webinar entitled “The New Cold War, Canadian Foreign Policy and Canada’s Peace Movement.”

It featured presentations by:

Radhika Desai, a Professor at the Department of Political Studies, and Director, Geopolitical Economy Research Group, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. She is the author of Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire and numerous other books and articles on political and geopolitical economy and world affairs.

Yves Engler, a Montréal-based activist and author who has published 11 books on various aspects of Canadian foreign policy. His latest book is titled House of Mirrors — Justin Trudeau’s Foreign Policy.

Tamara Lorincz, a PhD candidate in Global Governance at the Balsillie School for International Affairs (Wilfrid Laurier University). She is on the board of directors of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space and on the international advisory committee of the No to NATO Network. She is a member of the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace and the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom.

The webinar was moderated by Glenn Michalchuk, chair of Peace Alliance Winnipeg.

While the quality of the presentations was first rate, the audio quality of Radhika Desai’s presentation was less than optimal. Don’t let that dissuade you from listening. What she has to say makes it well worth the effort.


If you feel inspired to get involved in changing Canada’s foreign policy for the better, here are some organizations that could use your energy.

Peace Alliance Winnipeg

Geopolitical Economy Research Group

New Cold War

World Beyond War

“Personal message from Norman Cohn, president and co-founder with Zacharias Kunuk of Kunuk Cohn Productions, co-founder of Isuma Distribution International and IDI’s website IsumaTV.”

This Saturday, one day before 120 million viewers will watch the SuperBowl live from Tampa, another live television event will unfold in Pond Inlet in the Canadian arctic that maybe a few thousand people worldwide will be lucky enough to watch.

All day, from 9 in the morning until 9 at night, with short breaks for coffee, lunch and dinner, a continuous stream of Inuit men and women, elders and youth, unilingual and bilingual, will step up to a microphone to say what they think and feel about being bulldozed – by the gigantic multinational Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation, their own Canadian government, their own Nunavut government and their own Inuit Organizations – to surrender their land, wildlife, culture and human rights in order that those bulldozers make an uncountable profit at their personal expense.

Production still from Ataatama Nunanga (My Father’s Land).

I have seen something like this before and can tell you, without hyperbole, that you should not miss it. Unforgettable testimonies at similar hearings in 2012 are among the most astounding scenes in a film we made in 2014 called Ataatama Nunanga (My Father’s Land), another show only a few thousand people worldwide ever have seen. This film is on iTunes in thirty countries subtitled in six different languages if you want to preview Saturday’s show in a ‘historical context.’

But this Saturday’s show WILL BE LIVE, happening while and if you watch, from a hamlet in the arctic wilderness to wherever you are; and on Live Television as dramatic and compelling as the Senate Watergate Hearings were live in 1973, as other-worldly and surreal as the Moon Landing live in 1969 and as hypnotically horrifying as the Twin Towers hit, burning and finally collapsing Live on Television the morning of September 11, 2001.

Ugavut TV: “the world’s newest, smallest and most obscure TV network”

Instead of being hyped like Sunday’s Super Bowl by weeks of advertising before being televised by networks around the globe, this Saturday’s Pond Inlet Testimony will appear on Uvagut TV, the world’s newest, smallest and most obscure TV network, launched just two weeks ago with no outside funding by a small Inuit non-profit, Nunavut Independent Television Network (NITV), and the Inuit media arts collective ISUMA, both operating out of Igloolik, Nunavut for the past thirty years. And no advertising. The only way people will know they can watch this is if we tell them. I’m telling you now so you can pass it on.

Uvagut TV is Live on Shaw Direct satellite channel 267 nationally; Co-op cable channel 240 in Nunavut and NWT; FCNQ cable channel 308 in Nunavut, northern Quebec; and online with English or Inuktitut audio feeds.



Winnipeg, April 24, 2019: Dimitri Lascaris speaking at a forum on Canada’s mistaken policy regarding Venezuela. Photo: Paul S. Graham

Canada’s Green Party is electing a leader to replace Elizabeth May, and the highly qualified, intelligent people who have stepped up are an impressive lot. When I think of how depressing it must be for my American friends to have to choose between Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumb in their presidential election, I am doubly happy to be a Green, in Canada, with so many excellent choices to make regarding the leadership of my party.

My choice in this race is Dimitri Lascaris. Many people will know him because of his excellent reporting for The Real News. I first encountered him in connection with Palestinian solidarity work and I’ve recorded him many times on my YouTube Channel.

Dimitri is intelligent, energetic, articulate, principled and progressive. He has an outstanding track record of speaking truth to power and winning. As a lawyer, he has fought dozens of environmental, securities, and human rights class action lawsuits. In 2012, Canadian Lawyer Magazine named him one of the 25 most influential lawyers in Canada. He has participated in many popular movements, helping to organize protests and petitions and providing pro bono legal support. He has also served as the Justice Critic for the Green Party of Canada and the Parti Vert du Québec.

His understanding of the key issues of the day is both broad and deep. His eco-socialist vision is well articulated in his leadership platform, and so, I have quoted from it below.

“The climate emergency requires us to reorganize our society and its relation with nature. Our current arrangements burden the earth with growing economic and social inequities. Human societies must be reorganized for sustainability, restoring the commons while leaving ample scope for well regulated and appropriate private enterprise, large and small, particularly family owned and local firms.” Read more.

Foreign Policy
“We imagine our foreign policy has promoted peace, human rights and democracy. However, first as part of the British Empire and then in close alliance with the United States, Canada has historically created and reinforced relations of domination in the world order, leading to ecological damage, wars and human rights violations. In today’s multipolar world, such a policy is more dangerous than ever. We propose its replacement by a foreign policy that genuinely promotes peace, full disarmament, sustainable development, human rights, and democracy.” Read more.

“Economy and ecology are inextricably intertwined. To mend our relationship with the earth, we must wrest power from private corporations and bring the economy under democratic control so that it meets human needs without exceeding the limits of our planet.” Read more.

Workers’ Rights
“Workers’ rights, both individual and collective, have deteriorated; high-quality jobs have been replaced by precarious and part-time work with few benefits and no pensions; and large corporations prey on small businesses and workers. Workers deserve a positive work environment, high wages, and freedom from discrimination.” Read more.

Justice and Police Reform
“In theory, Canadians have equal rights. In practice, they do not. . . . Ultimately, our legal system does not fulfil the basic function of a justice system: to provide citizens with security, dignity and compassion. To create an equitable society, there are seven areas of reform we need to address.” Read more.

To read the entire platform and get more information about Dimitri, follow this link.  You can also watch him in a Zoom webinar on Wed., September 2nd at 7:30 PM Central Time. To participate in this webinar, follow this link.

Help build an eco-socialist future
We face enormous problems in Canada, and world-wide. The old parties and their tired solutions will not meet the environmental, economic and social policy challenges we face. Indeed, they are to blame for many of the problems we face and more of the same is unacceptable. We need political leadership that is capable of getting to the root of the problem and articulating bold, radical policies.

I believe the Green Party has many of the policies we need to secure a sustainable future for Canadians. Under the leadership of Dimitri Lascaris, the GPC will promote the progressive eco-socialist alternative that is missing in Canadian politics.

If you are not a member of the Green Party of Canada, please consider becoming one in order to support Dimitri’s candidacy. If you decide to do so, please join by September 3, 2020 to be eligible to vote in the Leadership Election.

Membership in the Green Party of Canada costs only $10. Donations to Dimitri’s campaign of up to $500 qualify for a tax rebate of 75%. So a donation of $500 costs you only $125. A donation of $400, only $100, and a donation of $100, only $25. Please remember, small donations also help because every bit counts. So, please do what you can help Dimitri win this critical campaign.

You can become a member, and make a donation if you wish, by following this link.

Dimitri is a leader who demonstrates integrity, courage and empathy. I like him and trust him. Greens need him; Canada needs him.

Please act today.






This marks the 10th year of my YouTube channel. You can watch more than 350 videos here, but as it is the season to reflect on the past year, here is some of what I saw, through my unabashedly lefty lens, in 2019.

Winnipeg Central American Migrant Caravan Benefit Concert
Jan. 4, 2019: The Benefit Concert for the Central American Caravan was held on Friday, Jan. 4, 2019 in Winnipeg’s historic Ukrainian Labour Temple, with proceeds going to the Mennonite Central Committee (Canada) to support its work with Central American migrants.

Trudeau & Trump: #HandsOffVenezuela
Jan. 26, 2019: Members of the Venezuela Peace Committee and Peace Alliance Winnipeg rallied in Winnipeg outside the building the houses the United States Consulate to protest the actions taken by the Canadian and US governments to destabilize Venezuela.

Winnipeggers say: Hands Off Venezuela!
Feb. 23, 2019: The Winnipeg Venezuela Peace Committee joined in an international day of action in solidarity with the people of Venezuela and the democratically elected government of Nicolas Maduro.

How you can support Venezuela
Feb. 23, 2019: Speaking at a Venezuela solidarity rally in Winnipeg, Alan Freeman, of the Venezuela Peace Committee, explains what you can do to support the people of Venezuela and their democratically elected government against foreign intervention.

Winnipeg Labour Solidarity with Palestinian Workers
March 16, 2019: Palestinian postal worker Imad Temiza, as well as CUPW and CUPE members who have recently returned from delegations to Israel and Palestine, discuss the challenges faced by Palestinian workers.

André Vltchek: NATO, Canada & Western Imperialism
April 3, 2019: The North Atlantic Treaty was signed on April 4, 1949, giving rise to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or NATO. To mark the occasion, a public forum on the role of NATO was held featuring André Vltchek, a Russian-born American political analyst, journalist, and a filmmaker.

Peace Alliance Winnipeg Annual Meeting Report
Peace Alliance Winnipeg, of which I am a member, held its annual general meeting on April 13, 2019. PAW’s chair, Glenn Michalchuk, reports on some of the highlights and challenges of the past year.

Radhika Desai – How We Work for Peace in Venezuela
April 24, 2019: Radhika Desai wraps up a Town Hall forum in Winnipeg entitled “The West’s War on Venezuela” with an explanation of how and why the Venezuela Peace Committee contributes to peace in Venezuela.

Dimitri Lascaris – Manufacturing Consent to a Coup against Venezuela
April 24, 2019: Journalist Dimitri Lascaris speaks to a Town Hall forum in Winnipeg entitled “The West’s War on Venezuela” about the myths perpetrated by western governments and media to support a coup against Venezuela’s democratically elected Maduro government.

The West’s War on Venezuela – Why Canada is Wrong
April 24, 2019: Canada’s decision to seek regime change in Venezuela along with the US and other Western countries, the anti-Maduro bias prevailing in the mainstream Canadian and western news media and the potential for the confrontation between western powers and others, such as Russia and China, are the key issues that were discussed in a public forum at the University of Winnipeg.

Henry Heller’s Marxist History of Capitalism
April 29, 2019: Henry Heller shows that capitalism has always been a double-edged sword, on one hand advancing humanity, and on the other harming traditional societies and our natural environment. He makes the case that capitalism has now become self-destructive, and that our current era of neoliberalism may trigger a transition to a democratic and ecologically aware form of socialism.

Dennis Lewycky: Magnificent Fight – The 1919 Winnipeg General Strike
May 2, 2019: On the 100th anniversary of the Winnipeg General Strike, Dennis Lewycky launches his new book on the topic, appropriately titled “Magnificent Fight: The 1919 Winnipeg General Strike.”

Barbara Perry: Assessing the Far Right in Canada
March 14, 2019: Is Canada’s extreme right growing? How dangerous are they and where do they live? These and other questions are discussed by Dr. Barbara Perry, who has researched and written extensively on right-wing extremism.

1919: A Graphic History of the Winnipeg General Strike
May 12, 2019: One century on, the Winnipeg General Strike remains one of the most significant events in Canadian history. A new book, 1919: A Graphic History of the Winnipeg General Strike, marks the centenary of this epic struggle.

The Winnipeg Labour Choir celebrates the 1919 Winnipeg General Strike
May 15, 2019: One hundred years ago, workers in Winnipeg’s building and metal trades were negotiating with their employers for the right to collective bargaining, better wages and improved working conditions. Talks were going nowhere so, on May 15, 1919, the Winnipeg Trades and Labor Council called for a general strike. Within hours, 30,000 men and women, many of whom were not union members, left their jobs. Winnipeg was shut down and the shock waves were felt across the country.

38th Winnipeg Walk for Peace
June 22, 2019: Peace Alliance Winnipeg and the Council of Canadians – Winnipeg Chapter held the 38th annual Winnipeg Walk for Peace. The purpose of this year’s event is to call upon the Canadian government to promote peace and international cooperation and development, objectives that are sorely lacking in Canada’s foreign policy.

The threat of the “New Antisemitism”
June 22, 2019: Speaking at the Winnipeg Walk for Peace, Harold Shuster, of Independent Jewish Voices, explains the threat posed by a new definition of antisemitism.

Women Strike Part 1: The Nawrockis in Concert
June 13, 2019: ‘The Nawrockis’ is Norman Nawrocki’s exciting new violin and ukulele duo with his sister Vivian. They play traditional, upbeat Ukrainian folk music. She’s a Vancouver-based singer and musician. They provide the warm up act that proceeded Norman’s play (see next item.)

Women Strike Part 2: The Play
Women Strike! 1919-2019 – The Winnipeg General Strike was recorded at the Ukrainian Labour Temple in Winnipeg, Canada on June 13, 2019. Written and directed by Norman Nawrocki, the play features Karam Daoud, Lorraine James and Marri-Lou Paterson. It was staged as a part of the Winnipeg Labour Council’s 2019 Mayworks Program.

Elizabeth May: Canada’s most important election ever
Aug. 15, 2019: Green Party of Canada Leader Elizabeth May was in Winnipeg to lend support to Greens contesting the Sept. 10th provincial general election. Speaking at WestEnd Commons in Winnipeg with Wolsley candidate David Nickarz, May described the upcoming federal election as the most important one in Canada’s history because it will be the one that decides whether Canadians will be able to act in time to meet our climate targets.

Inclusive Democracy & Proportional Representation
Aug. 27, 2019: Fair Vote Manitoba held a forum on electoral and other democratic reforms at the Park Theatre in Winnipeg featuring candidates from most of the parties running in the Manitoba provincial election.

ELECTION 2019: Manitoba Leaders Debate on the Environment
Winnipeg, Sept. 5, 2019: The global climate crisis has occupied centre stage in the Manitoba provincial election. Leaders from three political parties showcased their perspectives on climate change and the environment in a debate organized by several environmental organizations.

Winnipeg Lanterns for Peace 2019
Aug. 6, 2019: Winnipeggers held their annual Lanterns for Peace Ceremony to commemorate the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on Aug. 6 and 9, 1945. Their aim is to help keep the memory of these attacks alive so that current generations understand we must never allow nuclear weapons to be used again.

Maria Páez Victor: The Case for Venezuela
Winnipeg, July 20, 2019: Speaking at the Class, State and Nation conference, Dr. Maria Páez Victor describes the criminal nature of the United States-led campaign to undermine the government of Venezuela.

Arnold August on the US Canadian Attack on Cuba and Venezuela
October 3, 2019: There is no doubt that Canadian foreign policy has taken a hard turn to the right, especially with regard to Latin America. Arnold August provides the context and details the US led attacks on Cuba and Venezuela that Canada has been supporting so vigorously.

Bryan Palmer: The 1919 Winnipeg General Strike heard around the world
The 1919 Winnipeg General Strike was followed with great interest by people around the world, says Dr. Bryan Palmer, Professor Emeritus at Trent University. Professor Palmer was speaking at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy entitled Class, State and Nation in the 21st Century, held in Winnipeg July 19-21, 2019.

Winnipeg Chile Solidarity
Oct. 24, 2019 — People in Chile are dying at the hands of their repressive government. People in Winnipeg showed some solidarity this morning at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.

Michael Hudson: Resisting Empire
Renowned economist Dr. Michael Hudson spoke at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, held in Winnipeg in July 19-21, 2019. The conference was entitled Class, State and Nation in the 21st Century.

Vanessa Beeley: Canada’s Dirty War Against Syria
December 13, 2019: Two successive governments of Canada, those of Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau, have been an integral part of the US coalition for regime change and economic sanctions against Syria since 2011. Independent journalist Vanessa Beeley visited 7 Canadian cities in December to deliver a talk entitled “Canada’s Dirty War Against Syria: the White Helmets and the Regime-Change-War Billionaires.”




July 21, 2019: Professor Michael Hudson gave the final keynote at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, held in Winnipeg at the University of Manitoba. Photo: Paul S. Graham

Michael Hudson is President of The Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends (ISLET), a Wall Street Financial Analyst, Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, author of many books and an outspoken critic of capitalism.

He spoke at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, held in Winnipeg at the University of Manitoba this past July. The theme of the conference was “Class, State and Nation.” Professor Hudson’s talk, which I’ve titled “Resisting Empire” (because YouTube likes short titles), charts the rise and decline of the American Empire and some of the strategies implemented by other nations (principally China) to overcome the domination of the United States.

What follows is video I recorded of his talk and (for those who prefer to read) a transcripts of his remarks, lightly edited for clarity.

I can’t think of a conference where I’ve learned so much starting with the wonderful three-hour tour of Winnipeg and the general strike in 1919. It’s sort of a metaphor for everything that we’re describing in the world today. That here you had a city that had the potential to be taking off. They talked of it as a potential Chicago. And what happened? The workers and the general strike wanted the same things that workers all over the world have wanted. They wanted higher prosperity. They wanted a decent pay. Shorter hours would have been more productive.

And yet the ruling class of Winnipeg, the Thousand said, we, we could have a wonderful growth. We could make a lot of money in real estate alone by immigrants coming here. We could make it a centre , but then other people would have to get rich just like we are. We don’t want it. We would rather be relatively rich and keep them poor than have development. We want to keep our status of control over them so that we have all of the initiative, all of the planning power and they are powerless because that is for us the system.

It’s not an economic system. It’s the same system that existed in Rome. And the result of course is that Winnipeg didn’t become another Chicago. It became Winnipeg today.

Well, this same attitude is the attitude that the United States is taking towards the rest of the world. And the question is, will, the rest of the world be more successful than the Winnipeg strikers were in 1919?

From the very beginning, I’ve been a part of WAPE (World Association for Political Economy) and the very first issue, volume one, number one David Laibman and I had an article. So, we’ve been part of this for a long time. Uh, I want to thank both Radhika and Ellen for the wonderful organization of this meeting.

I did write a paper for it that maybe will be posted. But after listening to the discussions here, I’ve decided to make a different set of comments. And I think the framework for my comments is that capitalism has not evolved in the way that Marx expected.

Marx wasn’t wrong, but he was an optimist. He thought that capitalists would act in their own self-interest. Well, of course, if they would have acted in their self interest, you wouldn’t have had the Winnipeg general strike. He thought that their interest was going to be in becoming more efficient in streamlining the economy and getting rid of the fictitious costs, what he called the false costs or full fray of production. And he’s rightly been called a revolutionary. But what upset the vested interests more than anything else was not simply that Marx is a revolutionary, but that he showed that capitalism itself was revolutionary. He said the historical destiny of capitalism was to get rid of the landlord class that simply collected rent without providing any productive service. The task of capitalism was to get rid of parasitic finance and instead finance would be used to fund industrialization as it seemed to be happening in his time in Germany and in central Europe. And he thought that the role of capitalism was to be so much more efficient that in a speech he gave before the Chartists in London, he supported free trade, not on the basis of the neoclassical and neoliberal silliness of free trade is being productive.

But he said, well, the one virtue of free trade is going to be that since Britain is the most efficient economy its trade with India is going to break down all of the backwardness of India. And as British manufacturers undersell the manufacturers of countries that are backward, that have elites that have predatory and parasitic vested interests and ruling classes, they would have to either modernize or be swept away. And it seemed logical to him that capitalism would pave the way for a natural evolution into socialism by at least getting rid of the carryovers of feudalism the landed invasions, the warlords that became the Lords and controlled the politics and the land.

Well, as we all know, that’s not what the leading economy of the United States is today. If Marx were looking at the United States, he wouldn’t say, I think that it’s wonderful that all the other countries should follow the United States lead because it’s going to bring about prosperity and efficiency. In contrast to England and the industrial revolution, the United States has become the most inefficient economy in the world in terms of manufacturing. The reason that there cannot be a revival of a manufacturing industry in this country is simply because the accumulation of debt has gotten so large and the price of housing and the privatization of monopolies and health insurance has become so expensive that if American workers were to get all of their food, all of their clothing, all of their transportation for nothing, for zero, they still couldn’t compete with China or even Europe because out of every paycheck they have to pay up to 40% of their income for rent. 15% is taken off for social insurance and medical care, another 10% for payments of interest and debt.

Only a small portion of the worker’s budget is available to be spent on the goods and services they produce. So the United States is left in a very high cost position and has become something that is different from the industrial capitalism that Marx talked about in his day. Industrial capitalism has become finance capitalism and the roots of finance capitalism, the basic analysis for it is all outlined in Marx’s volume three of Capital and volume two. The reason he left it for volume three and volume two and not in volume one was he thought that there was already the 1848 revolutions in Europe; already there was pressure to tax away of the rent of the landlords. Already there was pressure to create a public subsidy of health, of basic monopolies of post office, of transportation, and communication.

And by the time Marx wrote, he thought, okay, that fight has been won. Capitalism can take care of the post feudalism problem. And Marx talked about the problems of capitalism itself, the relationship between the employer and the employee. And for him, industrial capital was money that was spent on employing labor to make a profit and squeeze out surplus value.

This seemed to be the way that the world was evolving until World War One and World War One really changed all of that. England found itself bankrupted by the debt that it owed to the United States when the war was over. For hundreds of years, Europeans at the end of a war had simply canceled the mutual debts because they thought we’re all in it together. But the United States said, well, we sold you a lot of arms before we were in the war. So we’re really not brothers. You have to pay us enough money that to cause mass unemployment there — to essentially do to England what the IMF has done to the Third World after World War Two. And so England and France also had to pay into her ally debts turned to Germany to pay the reparations and caused austerity and a crisis in Germany. And the result of course was a chronic depression that a build up of debts that finally all had to be wiped out in 1931, 1932, when the inter allied debts and reparations were forgiven. And the crisis was so great that it brought on the world depression of the 30s that was only pulled out by World War Two.

So, what has happened since World War Two was something that Marx could not have expected. He thought that banking and finance capital would be industrialized. He described finance as external. Finance existed in Babylonia in the third millennium BC. Interest bearing debt was in Rome and Greece. But all of this debt Marx described was simply parasitic. It took money and it accumulated and it grew by the mathematics of compound interest. And Marx collected everything that was written in his day on the mathematics of compound interest. And he said, it grows inexorably by purely a mathematical laws of its own power and there’s not part really of the capitalist system, but if the banks made productive loans to industry where the bank credit provided the industrial borrower with the means of earning a profit, able to repay the debt, then that would become productive. And that would become a basis that even socialism could apply.

Many of Marx’s followers in the 19th century expected the banks to be the planning center, the incipient planning center of the socialism to come. And this view was based largely on the German experience where there was a combination of the Reichsbank, the large banks the military for credit for armaments, especially for the building of navies and heavy industry. And it was largely a government coordinated development in Germany, which seemed to be headed towards the leadership of the world.

This terrified England because England really had failed to do what seemed potentially able to do in 1848. It wasn’t able to get rid of the banks by the time that in 1914 when World War One broke out, there was a set of articles in the economic journal in England worrying that England was going to lose the war because its financing was so predatory, so greedy, so corrupt and its behavior was so short term hit and run that it could not possibly compete against an economy that had basically planned productive credit as a Germany had. The stockbrokers in England were notorious for putting their customers into financial frauds and just hitting and hitting and running, for taking over companies and insisting that the companies pay all of their income out as dividends, not reinvest their profits, not accumulate productive power, but rather simply build up debt. And the Marxists were in the lead of describing this phenomenon of finance capitalism that at the time it seemed to be a perversion of industrial capitalism, but turned out to be something almost entirely different. And we all know the result of that.

That was World War Two. And in World War Two, the United States set out to dominate the world and make itself the center, sort of a wheel and spoke system. The United States called this globalization or internationalism.
But the role of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund was not internationalist at all in the spirit that we just heard describing the Belt and Road Initiative. The idea of the World Bank was not to promote development, but to promote dependency. The leading assumption of the World Bank was under no case would domestic currency loans be made to develop agricultural self sufficiency and countries to become independent and grow their own food. From the very beginning, the United States wanted loans to go only to the export sector. Third World countries, Latin America, Africa, the Near East were told to depend on American grain and the loans were only for export crops to build railroads and roads to lower the cost of making exports so that America could get raw materials from other countries.

And America became [what it] accused England of wanting to make it in the 19th century — hewers of wood and drawers of water. That was how the Bible phrased it. So you know, what has happened as a result? Well we had a dependency system here. At the time America emerged from World War Two, it had by far most of the gold supply of the world. And at that time the domestic money created by central banks with based on gold. The United States had such a dominant possession that by the time the Korean war broke out in 1950, the United States had accumulated 75% of the world’s gold supply.

This meant that other countries were facing austerity. The Americans expected quite correctly that as a result there was going to be rising social revolution in these countries. So the American free market planners realized the first premise of free market economic theory — I don’t know why this is left out of the textbooks that they teach — the first premise is you cannot have a free market unless you’re willing to assassinate everyone who opposes you, unless you can have a regime change for any country that does not follow a free market. All of Roman history is this. The fifth fourth, third, first century BC. Every single advocate of debt cancellation, of land redistribution, of democracy, was killed. The United States immediately set up a regime change in Guatemala overthrowing the Arbenz government that wanted land reform.

And it came in, in support of British Petroleum in Iran and overthrew the elected Mosaddegh regime. And it installed dictators throughout Latin America long before you had Pérez Jiménez in Venezuela. You had everyone there. Kissinger was very open in backing Pinochet in Chile saying if you have an opponent of free markets — meaning American dominated — you’re free to buy anything you want in the United States, but you have to buy it — whatever you buy — in the United States. He said we have to kill, not only the leader, but the entire class. And the result was a huge 10-year war throughout all of Latin America, political assassinations of labor leaders, of socialists, of academics, of professors — a mass of terrorism.

And it was really in the 1970s that America emerged as the leading terrorist country in the world backing its concept of free markets and democracy. By democracy. It meant pro American. Any regime including the Ukrainian Nazis that are pro American are called a democracy. Any country no matter of whether they elect their leaders or not is called anti-democratic or totalitarian, meaning other than the United States.

So, the problem is: where can we go from here? Well, the problem of finance capitalism is finance is extractive: leveraged buyouts, stock buybacks, finances short term. Banks look at something [as] “how much can we collect?” And banks don’t lend in terms of “what can our loan create in productive capacity to earn the profits to pay?” They say, “if we make a loan, where is the property that we can grab when there is a default?” The aim of creditors throughout history has not been primarily to earn interest. It’s not to earn interest. It’s to foreclose and get the property of the debtors that cannot pay the interest. This is essentially the IMF’s policy, in a nutshell. It will make loans to countries as long as they’re in the US orbit. It will not make loans to countries opposing the US and it makes loans in conjunction with World Bank plans that cannot be paid. And when there is a balance of payments crisis of countries IMF’s clients, they’re told “you can pay us by selling off your property, by privatizing your property, privatizing your mineral resources, privatizing your public utilities, and your natural monopolies, especially your electric companies, your water companies your oil reserves.”

This is the game and the IMF essentially is the knee-capper, as we say in America, it’s the gangster for the American objective of buying out control of other countries. Because we’re in a position now which Alan Freeman has pointed out where we’re not growing in the United States. And if you look at the actual growth in GDP, all of the growth in American GDP since 2008 has only gone to the top 5% of the American economy, Wall Street, the finance, insurance, and real estate finance sector. The 95% of the economy is shrunk. And if you say, well, what is this GDP growth? Well, one big element is late fees charged by banks on debtors that can’t pay. When banks charge a late fee the GDP economists say that’s providing a service of taking a risk to provide the economy with credit.

The other maybe 8% of the GDP is the increased value of homeowners’ homes. In other words, they’re asked, if you own your home, what if you had to pay rent for your home? How much rent would you have to pay? And as housing prices are inflated on credit the houses price goes up, the rents go up more and more. And so this increase in GDP is the increased value of homeowners’ living conditions, even though it’s the same home. No new home has been built, nothing has changed except the inflation of housing prices. So basically, what passes for GDP growth in the United States is simply the increased asset pricing the inability of labor and industry to pay debts, causing late fees, and what the classical economists called unearned income, economic rent.

So, we’re a rentier society and America’s relationship to the rest of the world is that of a rentier, that is a rent extractor. It lives off the interest and the property that it can grab as a result of its international credit. It lives off the dollar standard, a free ride. After America went off gold in 1971, countries had to keep their foreign reserves in some kind of risk-free asset. And the only risk free asset large enough was the US dollar. And the reason there were so many US dollars in the world is they were pumped into the world economy by means of the balance of payments deficit. Now, balance of payments deficit: that sounds abstract, but in practice, the entire deficit, every cent from the 1950s, 1960s onward, it was military and other, the private sector is just about in balance, but the America through its 800 military bases over the world, and its supply of dirty tricks and the American foreign Legion is very expensive.

The foreign Legion is ISIS, Al Qaeda and the other terrorist groups. So all of this is creating a huge influx of dollars and these dollars end up by the free market being spent largely in China, Asia and other countries and America, until about a year ago, said you countries can earn as much as you want by running your own balance of payments trade surpluses, but you have to send all of your surplus to the United States by buying US treasury bonds to finance, not only the US budget deficit, but to finance our expenditure on encircling you with our 800 military bases. That’s called a circular flow, and that was the definition of equilibrium that they had. Now, you can imagine my surprise a few months ago when Donald Trump came out and accused China of manipulating its currency by buying US treasury bonds.

And Trump’s argument was — somehow, he read an economics textbook — this was a disaster. He was very successful being a petty criminal throughout his life. He made his money by not paying his workers, by not paying his suppliers. He’d go to suppliers, offer 50 cents on the dollar and say, well, if you don’t like it, sue me. And in the United States, it costs about $50,000 to mount a court case to collect. And he ended up cheating people. He didn’t pay the banks. He defaulted. No bank in the United States will lend to Donald Trump. No contractor in New York city, where I live, will deal with him. No labor will deal with him. He thought that it worked for him; it will work for the United States. All you have to do is promise the moon which is called equilibrium I guess for economists and then say, well, here’s what we’re going to pay you.

It obviously is not working, but this puts other countries including China in a dilemma. What is it going to do with all of the dollar payments that it gets from other countries in Asia, in the Third World and the United States ? What will it do with them? Well, a few years ago, it said, well, the natural thing for us to do is what the United States does. We will recycle these dollars by buying up foreign industry. They tried to buy oil, not just filling stations. Oil distributors in America. America said, that’s a national security threat. There was a discussion in Congress. They said, anything China owns that makes them richer is a threat to our national security. Well, this is just what was said in Winnipeg in 1919. Any improvement in the status of labor or to anyone but us is a threat to our security and our domination.

So, China is considered a threat to our national security by being prosperous. This is not a case of the most efficient economy in the world spreading its way of production into other countries. It makes other countries essentially colonies. It’s a form of financial neocolonialism. And the advantage of neocolonialism in a financial means is you don’t have to draft an army. In fact, the whole character of control has shifted away from military. The last draft in America was in the Vietnam war, and if America tried to invade Venezuela or any other country you would have the same kind of riots in America that you had during the Vietnam war. So that’s why America needs either a Foreign Legion or what’s called client oligarchies like it’s trying to install throughout Latin America and for other countries.

But you have to sort of feel a little sympathy for America’s position. And I want, I want to make a plea for sympathy. How can this country survive if it can’t be permitted to kill your leaders? If it can’t be permitted to take over your industry and get all of the rents and the profits and the raw materials for free? How on earth can it survive if it can’t produce its own industrial goods? It’s high cost. It’s heavily indebted. How on earth are American companies and the employers and the employees who worked for them that are heavily indebted — pension funds will lose their money, the stock prices will go down, the banks will go bust, there will be defaults on the real estate. So America really feels that the only way that it can survive is by international sabotage.

The only kind of war that a democracy can afford to fight is by bombing. It can’t afford to have a military draft, it can’t afford to invade a country because of the domestic politics. It can only bomb. It can only destroy. That is the only form of warfare that is available right now. So what is amazing is the lack of response by Europeans. All of this has been celebrated since about 1980 as the end of history. And this end of history book came out right after the Soviet Union dissolved. And that was taken by America to say, well, we’ve won. The end of history means there is no alternative and they’ll make sure there is no alternative because American policy is to make sure that history will not change, that there won’t be an alternative to the current way of doing, of doing things.

So, this is not survival of the fittest. It looks like it’s the survival of the parasites. It’s the survival of an unproductive, predatory economy. And if you’re making a forecast about the future, the natural tendency is to assume that everyone will act in their self interest and everything will grow better and better. But that’s not happening. If you looked at Rome, exactly the same thing happened in Rome. Finally by the first century, there was such a land grab, such a monopolization of land, such a power of creditors. Revolution after revolution uprising after uprising — everybody expected Caesar to cancel the debts. And he was killed by the oligarchy for wanting to be even, even moderate. The result of what then was neo-liberalism, meaning the vested interests are in control, was the dark age in feudalism.

So, the question is whether the American plan, the neoliberal economics, is going to lead to a new kind of feudalism and how other countries can protect themselves. Rome survived for a century by looting its more productive richer provinces like Asia minor and Gaul. But finally, there was no more money to loot and the economy just collapsed from within. And in a way, this, this problem is inherent in Western civilization. It made Greece and Rome different from Sumer, Babylonia, Persia, the Near East. All the Near Eastern countries, when they had a debt problem, the rulers, would step in and cancel the debts and they would reverse all of the land transfers. Where people had lost their land to the creditors, the land would be returned to them. Every single ruler of Sumer and Babylonia in the third millennium and second millennium did this. This became the Jubilee year of the Bible, which was taken over word for word from the Babylonian lawyers. It remained in force in Constantinople, the Eastern Christian empire, but not in the West.
The West has the concept of progress and this ideal of progress is irreversibility. You can’t go back. This is the problem that president Obama faced himself with. He’d promised to write down the debts of the junk mortgage loans of the fictitious loans, and keep the homeowners in their houses. But then he said, no progress means you can’t cancel the debts. You let the debts completely go up.

No member of the 1% will lose their money. That means the 99% has to lose their property. And President Obama invited his Wall Street backers to the White House and said, I’m the only person standing between you and the mob with pitchforks. These are the people that Hillary Clinton called the deplorables. The role of the American president was basically to convince the population that somehow all of this neoliberal stagnation that they’re experiencing is all for the good. And you’ll have the economics profession sort of looking at all of history this way.

All of you have heard about Rome falling into the Dark Age, but there is a new economic history of neo-liberals. It said, well, it wasn’t so dark. If you look at the rich people, there were a lot of big manors. And there was a lot of trade and nice ceramics, all Near Eastern. All the traders were Near Eastern. All the money that Rome could extract from its colonies was sent to India or further East. But they say that the rich people had such an enjoyable life that we really can’t call it a dark age. It was only a dark age for the 99% of the people. And but look at the 1%, you know that’s what we have in the museums. Was it all worth it or no?

So the question is, what does China do in response to all of this? Well, obviously the first thing it’s doing is agreeing with Donald Trump. Yes. We’re going to de-dollarize. We’re certainly not going to keep our savings and loans to the US treasury that enable you to encircle us with military bases. So de-dollarization is one aspect.

China’s not going to ask the International Monetary Fund the planet’s economy and tell it what industry is to be privatized and sell off to private managers who will simply increase the prices that China has to pay for its electricity, transportation and others. So, and in fact, it’s set up its own independent bank as a by-product of the Belt and Road Initiative. It has its own bank and its bank is financing actual tangible investment instead of financing dependency. In response to the unilateral us trade war and protectionist tariffs, China has the option of countervailing sanctions. The United States already has large investments in China. The balancing factor would be for China to say, okay, you’ve grabbed our money. We’ll just take what you have here and call it even.
There’s obviously a cyber war. Also, as you know, the American CIA and national security system have worked with Silicon Valley to install back doors so that it can spy on every other country. What makes China’s Huawei so undemocratic is it doesn’t have spyware for the United States. And so that obviously is a threat to US control. So you have that in place of the class war and the austerity program in the US China’s kept its credit in the public domain.

This means that in America, when the company — you’ve seen the wave of bankruptcies of American corporations recently, especially in the retail sales — when an American corporation goes out, a hedge fund or a vulture fund comes in and buys it at a fraction of the cost. In China, there are many industrial plants that have been unable to pay the debt, but because the creditor is the government, the bank of China can simply write down the debt. It writes it down so that it keeps the industrial employer in business. It doesn’t sell it off to a hedge fund or an American. China realizes what Marx expected to be the future for banking and finance. It’s a public utility. It’s created electronically, basically credit. Any bank can simply make a loan and create money.

China’s already doing that, and the final capstone is that China’s developed an alternative economic theory to neo-liberalism and that’s Marxism. Marxism looks at the overall context. It places it in the context of politics so that it looks at the economy as a system, not as parts to be carved up and essentially looted. So, as long as China can continue to develop its monetary policy, its trade policy, its foreign policy and military policy, in keeping with this overall view of systemic growth, it’s going to be operating in a way that creates its own future instead of passively surrendering to America’s neoliberal future.