The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3559 - Celebrating Michael Brooks on His Birthday w/ Milton Allimadi, Harvey J Kaye, Lisha Brooks & David Griscom

Episode Date: August 13, 2025

It's Hump Day on the Majority Report Today is Michael Brooks birthday and we are celebrating him by bringing on two of his favorite guests. But first the Trump administration is nominating EJ Antoni for the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics despite a deluge of conservative economists labeling him incompetent. Not to mention that he has made several media appearances while using a Nazi battleship as his Zoom background. An incompetent Nazi in the Trump administration?   Author and co-founder of Black Star News, Milton Allimadi joins us to discuss Frances retreat from West Africa. Here are some links to Milton's appearances on The Michael Brooks Show: First Wave Of African Liberation & Neo-Colonization ft. Milton Allimadi (TMBS 92) The US Neocolonial Role In Africa ft. Milton Allimadi TMBS - 116 - Beating The Global Right ft. Nina Turner & Milton Allimadi   Historian and Professor Emeritus of Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Harvey J. Kaye joins us to discuss Trump's authoritarianism and it's place in American history. Check out some of Harvey J. Kaye's appearances on The Michael Brooks Show Harvey Kaye Discusses Make America Radical Again (TMBS 112) A Secret Organizations Decades Long War On The Left ft. Harvey Kaye & Daniel Bessner (TMBS 82) TMBS - 82 - Winning The Future With History ft. Harvey Kaye & Daniel Bessner We are thrilled to have Michael's sister, Lisha Brooks join us to discuss his legacy and how to honor Michael's legacy. Matt Lech's Left Reckoning co-host and former TMBS producer David Griscom joins the show to discuss Texas politics and working with Michael.   In the Fun Half: James Talrico appears on the Will Cain's show and owns him so much that Cain has to fake an ad break to get out of the segment. Rep Tim Burchett (R-TN) is so scared of crime in DC, also has been attacked by colleagues in the halls of Congress and kicked in the ribs by a horse on his farm. This poor guy has to live in office to avoid all the crime. All that and more plus your IMs. Happy Birthday Michael Brooks.   The Congress switchboard number is [phone]. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors TRUST & WILL: Get 20% off trustandwill.com/MAJORITY SUNSET LAKE: Head on over to Sunset LakeCBD.com and remember to use code BIRTHDAY for 25% off sitewide. This sale ends at midnight on August 17th. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech Check out Matt’s show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon’s show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza’s music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder – https://majorityreportradio.com

You are listening to a free version of The Majority Report. Support this show at join the Majority Report.com and get an extra hour of content daily. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Wednesday. August 13th, 2025. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five-time award-winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, USA.

On the program today, it is Michael Jamal Brooks' birthday. He'd be 42 today to celebrate his birthday. we've invited on two of his favorite guests from the Michael Brooks Show, Milton Alamadi, author, journalist, professor, and co-founder of Black Star News. Also on the program today, Harvey J.K., Professor Emeritus of Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin Green Bay, the author of The Fight for Four Freedoms, What Made FDR, and The Greatest Generation, truly great. Also on the program today, Trump's military troops occupy Washington, D.C.

Didn't anticipate my ever doing that as a headline. Trump regime reviewing the Smithsonian exhibits to make sure they comport with the right-wing revisionist history and vision for America. New report, Texas Democrats plan to return in exchange for the end of this special session. Zelensky confers with Trump and EU in lead up to Trump-Putin meeting, where a Trump primed to give away the House, literally. Judge orders partial restoration of UCLA research funding. Juneau, Alaska, braces for a record glacier melting flooding.

Secretary of Treasurer and about 14 other jobs at this point, Scott Bissent, calls for a rate cut based upon employment numbers that the Trump administration supposedly doesn't believe. With hundreds now a debt of starvation in Gaza, 27 nations demand Israel, a large, allow for permanent and immediate access for the U.N. to provide aid. Minnesota, a teenager, forced to show her breasts to prove her gender in a restaurant bathroom. Feminism. Thank you, Terfs. Thank you so much. new poll Chuck Schumer at his lowest ever favorability rating

he is now underwater with New York City voters for the first time ever oh dear we will be underwater all this and more

on today's majority report somebody saying audio is choppy Refresh if your audio is choppy Refresh if your audio is choppy Meanwhile sushi with the blood boys says We've already passed the record in Juneau Welcome everybody

It is Humpty, happy birthday Michael Brooks It is Like I said earlier, it would be Michael Brooks's 42nd birthday I don't know It was a couple years ago We decided to

in lieu of remembering his death to celebrate his birthday Michael, of course, passed away five years ago in July of July 20th. And so today we have a couple of

his favorite guests on. He had a lot of favorite guests, but these are, I think, too, that I think and certainly he brought them to audiences that I don't know

that would have a chance to hear from these folks so we're going to bring them on we'll also hear from Leisha Brooks Michael's sister and I think

David Griscom will also join us briefly part of the the Uber producer team Matlack and David David Griske, him back on the Michael Brooks show.

All right, but let's get into it. Daniel from Virginia asked, how would Michael Brooks have reacted to news that there would be a UFC fight on the White House norm? Is that true? I didn't hear that. That's what Trump is saying. Trump is saying it, but I doubt it'll happen.

I mean, he's, it's, he would have deferred to Binder on that one. Exactly. He'll get distracted by something the next day, Although it seems like they are going to be doing some increasingly, like, integrated events with the White House and with UFC, part of why the Dana White connection is being promoted. So, I don't know. It's a little fascistic. Conveniently, they just got to deal with Paramount, too, UFC. That's very convenient.

Wow. Isn't that weird? What are the chances? Let's turn to this. As you know, Donald Trump. fired the head, the chief of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, when the abysmal, really genuinely abysmal jobs report came out about a week and a half ago, claiming that the jobs numbers were false, based upon the fact that the BLS does what it does every time it releases a

jobs report that is provides revisions for the two months prior because when they release their jobs report for any given month they simply don't have all the data in they have two different ways of measuring this a household survey and a business survey which is much more complete or i should say more um more complete when all of it's sent in but not all businesses send in their their information in that first month. When it comes in later, they get revisions. It happens all the time. This was not a completely unique downward revision.

We've seen that in the past, 2008. There's been other occasions. But it was a dramatic one for sure. And so the White House was asked yesterday. day. What are you going to do? When are you going to release the new reports? I mean, Scott Bassan is now the acting head of BLS. And here is Caroline Levitt answering that question. I need for BLS Commissioner EJ and Tony recently told Fox business that the BLS should suspend issuing monthly job reports and only issue quarterly reports until the jobs data methodology is corrected.

So does the president disagree with that assessment that his nominee has said there or suspending these monthly job reports a real option? I think he floated the idea of possibly suspending until they can get the data and the methodology in order. And this president wants to ensure that the BLS, again, is putting out accurate and honest data that the American people can trust. Since you brought up the new commissioner, he holds a master's in doctor's degree in economics from Northern Illinois University. He's the chief economist in the Heritage Foundation's center for the federal budget. And in addition to his work at Heritage, he has multiple other roles. He's been widely renowned for his work on economic issues. He's been called before Congress to testify as an economic expert.

So he's a qualified individual, and the president trusts him to lead this important department. Two things. One, like I say, Scott Bassant apparently trust the numbers of numbers. enough to call for a rate cut, despite the fact that we're seeing core inflation go up. And two, let's look into E.J. and Tony. Respected expert. He is a respected expert, according to Caroline Levitt. Here, actually, pop this article on the screen.

this is an Axios piece that came out yesterday utterly unqualified Trump's BLS pick gets panned by conservative economists

oh well let's scroll down and see we need to fire the people of Axios we can get some more accurate headlines for President Trump yeah here we go what they're saying Antonio's fellow conservative criticized his record as chief economist

that the right-wing Heritage Foundation's Herman Center for the federal budget. Stan Vega, Vugar, Senior Fellow at the Conservative American Enterprise Institute said, and Tony's work, quote,

work at the heritage has frequently included elementary errors or nonsensical choices that bias that all biases findings in the same partisan direction. This is a from the American Enterprise Institute. Dave Herbert, who works at the

Conservative American Institute for Economic Research, wrote in a post on X that he's worked with Antony before and implored the Senate to block the nomination. Whoopsie. Quote, I've been on several programs with him at this point and have been impressed by two things. His inability to understand basic economics and the speed in which he's gone maga.

um conservative economists have cited examples of antony quote appearing to misunderstand the data he'd be responsible for as b ls head daniel d martino a fellow at the conservative manhattan institute they are very conservative showed an institute of antony citing the rising number of americans who aren't in the labor force without accounting for the role of aging population in terms of my neurological capacity quote this is one of the many elementary errors that show me mr antony is unqualified for the labor market data collection in an analysis role he was nominated to jessia ridell another person from the manhattan institute a senior fellow there the articles and tweets i've seen him publish are probably the most error filled of any think tank economist right now come on he must be peer reviewed and by peer reviewed mean, he has a positive letter of recommendation from Ron

Vera. Yeah, exactly, I'm sure. Or maybe he has a positive recommendation from Mr. Tony and Tony J.E. Exactly. Tony Suprano. It's J. Soprano

who's going to head the BLS. It's also, I mean, there's bipartisan support for this guy being an idiot. Jason Furman, who was on Biden's White House chair white house council of economics advisors i don't think i've ever publicly criticized any presidential nominee before but e j antony is completely unqualified to be a b ls commissioner i mean even on e j alone the rs m u.s chief economist joe brussels said that would be a serious

mistake in my estimation it would only feel critiques of politicization of job market data I mean, it keeps going on and on. E.J. stands for economy genius. And just to top it off, aside from being at least judged by his peers, both on the left and the right, as being totally unqualified for this job. And despite the fact that the guy's talking about not releasing this data, which I would imagine is pretty important to some people. here he is doing a fox business hit and has chosen an interesting background that being apparently a Nazi battleship cruiser it is a German Bismarck Wall Art Canvas printing decor I mean it costs 90 bucks I mean so maybe it was discounted but to be fair but there it is

look he's an economist not a historian exactly but he's just very interested in that history that particular part of history one side of that history in fact he's just a collector like who was the sugar daddy for

the rich guy I forget what it's Harlan Crowe Harlan Crow they're just interested in history but there it is it remains to be seen if the Republicans in the Senate are going to kowtow to Trump this much

when they have this sort of broad I have a feeling a lot of these guys are going to take vacation that day they're going to basically like be out of town there'll be 40 Republicans in the Senate and the Democrats will be able to block this nomination I mean otherwise it really

is I mean it's off to the races time I guess we are already off to the races but this is significant Seeing them openly and actively hire a guy explicitly to manipulate the data, watching them also simultaneously do things like get the Smithsonian to change his exhibits based upon revisionist history and Donald Trump's proclivities. I mean, we are in an authoritarian state.

It sounds dramatic to say these things, but you have military occupying Washington, D.C. My guess is they're not going to last there longer than 30 days, but then they'll move on, and they're just going to keep trying to extend the program. That's basically it. I mean, the bond market's a mess, and you want to know why? Why would people buy long-term U.S. bonds if the employment data, they have no idea if it's true or not? or even the inflation data where a lot of our most

reliable securities are pegged to inflation to encourage investment and to basically show that these are going to be very stable securities. It's like a $2 trillion market. That's in jeopardy now because

if you can't rely on government data, people aren't going to want to invest in the United States. Yeah. Both like in terms of business interest but also like buying our bonds in a moment we're going to be talking to

Milton Alamati author journalist professor co-founder of Black Star News first a word first a word from our sponsors as people know I am a very carefree person

and sorry I'm a very carefree person you're always skipping around For meadows and things like that. And people often ask me, how come you're so carefree, Sam? Why is it like you're so laid back and so chill all the time? Well, I tell them the reason is because basically I am not worried about the one thing that used to freak me out.

The reason why I come off is much more relaxed than I used to be is because I have, I got a will for just. in case i um pass away i mean eventually i'm going to um but that's the bottom line a lot of us particularly i mean i didn't do this until i had a kid um but if you want to get uh the most out of life uh you got to be prepared a lot of us don't realize that will doesn't cover everything when it comes to estate planning trust and will can help ensure that your loved ones are covered when it comes to things like medical decisions and power of attorney this is really important stuff actually and i will also say uh important even if you have like a like a kid who's just uh maybe over 18 um you want uh things like medical decisions and power

attorney uh for them too so that it uh because they're their own individual they're no longer minors um and so you need to go in i mean god forbid something like that happens um it but this is important stuff to get. And more than anything else, it just gives you peace of mind. It's one of those nagging things that you think in the back of your head, oh, I've got to get this done. Go to trust and will.com slash majority. You get 20% off their simple, secure, and expert-backed estate planning services. For most people, this stuff is fairly straightforward. And trust and will makes it really easy. The website is intuitive. They walk you through everything.

And again, just knowing that you've done this gives you a huge piece of mind. All your information, your documents are securely stored with bank level encryption. Each will or trust is state specific. It is legally valid and it's customized to your needs. State planning, even if you have a very simple situation, can feel confusing and certainly can feel intimidating. But it's super easy to do. Trust and will just walks you right through all of it.

An overall rating of excellent thousands of five-star reviews on Trust Pilot, used by hundreds of thousands of families and counting. You can't control everything, but trust and will can help you take control of protecting your family's future. Go to trust and will.com, one word, slash majority. Trust and will.com slash majority. get 20% off. That's 20% off at trust and will.com slash majority. All right, quick break.

When we come back, Milton Alamati. We are back, to the majority of course, it is a pleasure, it is a pleasure to welcome back, Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland, on the majority report, it is a pleasure to welcome back to the program. Milton Alamati. He is an author, journalist, professor, and co-founder of Black Star News. In Milton, it is Michael Brooks's birthday. You were one of his favorite guests. And so, you know, we've been trying to sort of like, I don't know, do what Michael would be doing or at least, you know, be talking about some of the things on his birthday. one of the things that he had that he really brought to the show broadly speaking was

a wealth of knowledge when it came to foreign policy but also a real knowledge base and curiosity of what was happening in the global south and in particularly throughout Africa and you were one of his

you know primary sources of information. So I really appreciate your coming on today. Thank you. And in that spirit we'd ask you like, you know, what do you think he would want to be talking about what would he be following

today? And one of those things you had mentioned was France's complete withdrawal from West Africa. Tell us a little bit about that and the relevance. And then maybe we can get into also like, you know, what's happening in the wake of USAID coming out But what your thoughts are on that? Okay, very good.

All right. So I think when we had our first conversation about Africa, West Africa, it was focused on Burkina Faso. He was a huge fan of the late Thomas Sankara. And me too, by the way. So I think today he would be impressed to see that there is a resurgence of the spirit of Sankara. wanting to take control of the destiny of African countries, wanting to kick out French neo-colonialism. French neocolonism was very special relative to the colonial experience in Africa.

So when you compare with Britain, for example, the British withdrew, they relinquished control over the finances. Of course, they could still control it in a different way. Now they could rely on the World Bank and the IMF. But France, in addition to the World Bank and the IMF, tie the currencies of the West African countries to the French franc. And it tied it in a very peculiar way. They were required to keep a portion, at one point it was 50% of their reserves in the French Central Bank, meaning France was pretty much managing the economies

because France was investing that surplus fund and if it made money for them, good. If it lost, too bad, right? So that's how dominant France was. And of course, the French also had military garrisons in those former West African colonies. And that's why it's even hard to, you know, all of these countries generally,

When you talk about independence, it's very superficial. They have their own national anthem. They have their flags. They have their statehouse. They have their president. They have all the symbols of statehood. But they don't really have sovereignty, generally speaking, even for the former British colleges that I said.

But add to that, what I just factored in with the French arrangement, so you cannot understand why the French presence is so widely resented, even by other African countries that were not former French colonies. So when Dorsakara came on the stage in 1983, it was quite remarkable. Here is somebody in our former French colony where neo-colonialism is so dominant, coming into power and taking, you know what we can actually do for ourselves. We can run our own country, we can produce our own food. Why are we importing bottled water, for example? And it instituted agrarian reform.

The land was made widely available to people that previously did not own land. Production grew within three years. Burkinafaso became self-sufficient in food. So obviously, France did not like this example that Sankara was setting and made it its mission to eliminate Sankara, using the leader at the time of neighboring ivory course, Felix Wubewanyi, a very tightly controlled neocolonial leader. So then Sankara was off the stage, and now you see this resurgence. You see the current leader

Ibrahim Trouret, evoking the spirit, memory, and the practice of Sankara. You see it being duplicated in Mali as well, and in Niger. So this is a conversation that I'm sure Michael would really enjoy exchanging with me. And, I mean, what is leading to the, is it that the French are being pressured out? Or is it simply like the France don't have the resources or are reorienting or is it a little bit of both? A little bit of both. And that's a very good question, actually. I think France, obviously by virtue of being a member of NATO, by having a strong relationship with the United States, was able to project beyond its power militarily on the African continent.

I think that is no longer the case. I think, for example, when you had a coup in Niger, the U.S. had built a couple of years ago a $100 million drone base in Niger. So when the new government, the military government, came in Niger, gave France an ultimatum. You have to leave by such and such a date. You've been exploiting our uranium. We are going to ban further exports until we come up with arrangement that benefits us financially. So the U.S., with France, they're normally on the same page on issues like that. But the U.S. realized, wait a minute, we need to speak a different language with them in case they allow us to remain and keep

our drone base. So the U.S. actually ended up staying an additional several more months while Niger was considering. And then Niger came to the conclusion that, no, U.S., you have to go as well. So generally speaking in the past, France was able to flex more muscles than it really had because of U.S. support. So that has made it much more difficult. And plus, I think the young people are much more aware now. and much less willing of being exploited by the French. Unlike the older generation, where we had a few,

they would have picked the bourgeois African leaders to support, and those leaders would be able to maintain solid control with French military support. But the young people are now showing that they're willing to come out on the streets and protests much more vigorously, and France obviously does not want to be seen supporting a government that is shooting down its own. citizens. How does that history or that understanding with young people translate to other countries

now trying to invest in African countries, particularly China as well as it builds out infrastructure across the continent? I'm curious if there's that same skepticism, rightful skepticism that carries over now. Okay. So when we come to China, China has a very unique relationship with Africa. Because as you pointed out, China has built a lot. In fact, the African Union headquarters, for example, in Addis Ababa, that was built by China. A lot of the impressive roads, highways in Addis Ababa built by China. The bridges, the railways, it's invested a lot in rail, something which the West has not been willing to do. I was there 26 years ago in And they were, and everyone was talking about how the Chinese were investing there.

Yes, yes, absolutely. But of course, that also comes with a cost. They're not doing this a free. This is not the China of Chairman Mao. No, this is a very different China. The China of Chairman Mao built that great railway connecting Tanzania to Zambia, for example, calling the Tanzania-Zambia Railway. That was done much in the spirit of solidarity.

Because when they started working out that relationship, China was not a member of the United Nations yet that we had Taiwan. So China needed a lot of African support and solidarity in order to get seated at the UN. Eventually that happened. And of course, now China is part of the permanent member of the Security Council. But the China that we have today is very much market-oriented China. So China comes and builds all these roads, but of course, in return, they want either payment or they want a significant stake in your mineral resources. So the young people are now questioning that relationship as well with China. Why are we mortgaging our resources for such a long period of time?

So you have younger leaders, in the case of the military leaders in Niger, in Burkina Faso, in Mali, they know. that, okay, once you kick out the French, you're going to need an alternative. So for right now, that's why they were building this tighter relationship with Russia. Not so much that they have a particular love for Russia, but if Russia can give them military support to withstand any possible aggression from France, they're going to take that. But then you have the case of a leader like Basido Faye in Senegal, who is a civilian but came to power because of a young activist who came out in the street when France wanted Marquesal, who had served two terms,

but had a very neocolonial relationship that France was happy with. They wanted to support him to even extend into a third term, even though it was banned by the Constitution. That's when the young people came out on the street, led by people like Basino Faye, and ultimately forced them to have elections, which Vasido Faye's party won. So now he is trying to play off the Chinese relationship

with the West, with the United States, with France. So that's the kind of type road that he's walking in terms of the difference between his approach and the approach of the leaders in Mali, Uki Novasso, and Dijer. But ultimately, the young people are also questioning the neocolonial control that the World Bank and the IMF has over African countries. I think the best example of that was what we saw in Kenya last year, when the government wanted to hike taxes because it wanted to increase its capacity to pay the World Bank

and IMF loans. And the young people are saying we are already being bled really to death. We can't afford to pay anymore. And the taxes were on items that you cannot live without. food, fuel, and housing. So they organized on social media. It was very powerful, very effective. They forced the government to cancel those taxes. It came at a cost, of course. At one time, the government just seemed to lose control.

And young people are being shot at with live ammunition. I think more than 50 were killed. But ultimately, they succeeded. So that is the kind of change that we're seeing in the after. in country right now, where young people are becoming much more vigorous in challenging the neo-colonial status quo. And France seems to have a, they get a little white knuckled about this stuff, it feels like. I mean, you know, I have never been able to get over their claim on Haiti's, you know, gross

a national product up until, and people I don't think realized it's, Haiti had to pay back France the cost of freeing themselves as slaves until, what was it, like, 1950.

And maybe it was 1948 or something like that, but that's a hundred and, I don't know, I can't do the math, 150 years or so. Absolutely. And that that sets a country back a little bit

If you lose 150 years of essentially compounding interest in being able to reinvest your resources. Absolutely. And that's a tragedy. A huge tragedy. And France is sort of like really the, they had that their grip was the last on some level to go, at least from that era of colonialism. Yeah. And of course, you know, the Haitian revolution, you don't want something like that to spread. That is not an good example to be, to allow to spread in places where Africans were still enslaved. So that was part of the reason that, okay, even though they kicked out physically, militarily, we still have ways to make them pay the price and to set an example to other places where Africa's may want to emulate or duplicate what the Haitian people did. And also, it goes with the whole spirit of how dare you deprive the ruling Plata class

of their assets, of their property. That is not a good example as well. So a lot of people were not aware until recently, because now in recent years it's been the news, that after the slavery was abolished in Britain, in Britain, in 18, when was it, was it 1883? No, no. Slavery was earlier than that in Britain. I believe it was like 1830.

Yeah, somebody looked it out. I thought it was like 1882. But anyway, after they abolished, they compensated the former enslavers. Those were the ones who were compensated, not the formally enslaved. You see? So it was consistent with what France was doing as well. How dare you deprive us of our assets? The amount that Britain compensated the former enslavers,

if you do it, let's say, in 2024, U.S. currency, it will come more than $2 billion. That's how much they were compensated, you see? So it goes to that whole mentality that you are not entitled to your liberty and to deprive us of our income, which we're entitled to, from your sweat and blood. So it was 1834. I knew it was before the states got to it.

Yeah, I'm mixing around by putting 83. I was going to say 38. So, yeah, thank you for that. What are the implications of the aid cuts? that we've seen from, you know, obviously from the the Trump administration is basically all but abolished USAID.

And what's your perspective on USAID because there's there's sort of a it is another mechanism of control on some level but also it saved a certain amount of lives. Absolutely. And that is the

Catch 22 and that is the tragedy. Of course, the tragedy is for the neo-colonial, bougie, African elite leadership that emerged after independence to allow themselves to develop that kind of dependency with the World Bank, with the IMF,

and with these institutions. The British have their versions of these institutions as well that have made African countries so dependent on these quote-unquote aid organizations. So you have a situation where now, and I'm not saying it's directly tied to USAID per se, but you have African countries that have abundant fertile land.

And yet, on an annual basis, Africa imports $35 billion worth of food. That is preposterous. There have never been this food dependent since even the 1960. In the 96, they used to grow much more of their food than they import today. So in a roundabout way to answer your question, I'm saying in the short run, it is going to be devastating, of course. In countries like South Africa, for example, that depended on a very significant amount of that money to support their health care program, the fight against HIV-AIDS, a lot of people that won't have access to the medicines are going to die. You know?

So obviously, nobody can support that. kind of unilateral overnight cut, right? This is something that should be phased out, but definitely should be phased out, so that these countries can develop their own capacities because they have the natural resources. They have the energy resources to generate well from that and get away from this dependency. And that also applies to the economies, for example. So you have today in 2025, the same structure that was created and established in 1884, 85, at the infamous Berlin conference when African countries were partitioned by the European powers. What did they set up? They own the territory. So it's like a new form of slavery, in fact. They own the territory. They

control the population. They impose subjugated labor upon. them. They take away their land, so now they don't have independent income to be independent because they're now dependent on working on the people that are now taken over their land. They produce raw materials that are shipped off to those European countries that have now industrialized. They manufacture products that they bring it back to African countries, so they have a captive market. The Africans have no choice but to buy those manufactured products. from Europe. 2025, we have the same arrangement.

There's not a single industrialized African country, right? So the Europeans don't even have to be physically in control anymore. You know, you have the World Bank and IMF. You want to get a loan from them. They're going to give you conditions which preclude industrialization. So up, so it's 2025. You're still selling raw materials. How explicitly do they preclude it?

I mean, is it explicit or is it just that they put constraints on capital investments? Yeah, it's a very good question. They can't come and say, you know, you can't take this money and put it and this and that. So they use so-called free market, right? You know, they talk about the free market as if we even have the free market here of the United States, right? Right. So they say you should put the money into the, what do they call it, what you have a comparative advantage in? right and obviously your competitive advantage is not producing cars right you you should import that

from the u.s or britain or from european countries your competitive advantage in producing raw materials and that's the argument they make you know so and that's the constraints they put on the loans essentially and that's only half of it and then that other half is and this has been referred to as structural adjustment. Also, we don't want wasteful spending. So you have to lay off civil servants. You have to lay off teachers. You have to stop subsidizing education. You have to subsidizing health care. There's an interesting documentary. It's called the end of poverty with a question mark. It's pretty old, like 20 years. It needs to be updated. But I mean, do you have Africans being interviewed describing the impact of these conditionalities?

People dying of simple malaria. Because now when you go to a health clinic, if you don't pay cash, you won't have access to quinine. And basic medication that would save your life. That is just one of the types of impacts. You have people that have been kicked out of school now because they have to pay now because the government is not subsidizing education. it's fascinating stuff Milton we could

continue this conversation and there's a lot other things too I think that we could be talking about we have to move on but let's do this again soon and we love Michael and we miss Michael and may he rest with the ancestors in peace. Indeed. And we will put links to some of the past interviews and conversations that you

had with Michael on TMBS in our podcast and YouTube description. Again, Milton, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it. Thank you so much. Be well. Thank you. Good to see Milton. All right. We're going to take a quick break. When we come back, another one of Michael's favorite guests, Harvey J.K., Professor Emeritus of Democracy and Justice Studies. The University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, and the author, The Fight for Four Freedoms, What Made FDR and The Greatest Generation, Truly Great, will be with us in just a moment. We'll be right back after this. Thank you.

We are back, Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland, on the majority report today would have been Michael Brooks's 42nd birthday. And to celebrate his birthday, we're having some of his favorite guests on. And I want to welcome back to the program. uh one of michael's a very favorite guess one of the like i feel like one of the first people are actually in studio uh here um uh harvey j k he is of course uh professor emeritus americacy and justice studies at the university of wisconsin green bay author of the fight for four freedoms what made fdr and the greatest generation truly great i think we just had you on uh with the letter hack uh for

the comic strip. The comic strip graphic novel, I guess maybe. I don't know. But we were hoping to get there, yeah. And Harvey, you were one of Michael's favorite guests and he loved talking to. And, you know,

you've been on the majority report many times too. But, I mean, you know, we're trying to sort of get a sense of like, you know, what would he be talking about these days? probably wouldn't be radically different from what we've been talking about. But wanted to get your take. I mean, we're in, how unique of an era are we in relative to, like, authoritarianism? And then we could talk about, like, you know, what we need to do to push back on it. Well, first I'll just say, you mentioned in studio.

I always had an arrangement with Michael that if he would say, you want to come on soon, I say, well, I'm going to be in Brooklyn. like the next month to visit our daughter who lives in Greenpoint and so I would end up in studio which was always a pleasure I mean if I were in Brooklyn right now I would rather be with you folks as opposed to zooming

with you folks and one of the things that was always the case I mean Michael talked about three mentors Adolf Reed Richard Wolfe and me each one of us had a kind of separate orientation you know Adolf was very much a political scientist

Richard Wolfe, an economist, and I was the historian of that crew. So whenever I was on, Michael would always ask, how did we get here? And this was, we're talking several years at the least ago when these questions began, maybe 10 years ago. And I remember using the term, well, for 40 years, you know, we've had this creeping, they should talk about creeping socialism back in the 50s. But we've had creeping authoritarianism ever since the 70s and the Declaration of War, essentially by capital conservatives and the neoliberals who came into the show around then and here we are i mean we've seen it for all these decades and basically the republican party lives up to the worst expectations

the democratic party is is hardly relevant and allowed themselves to become decreasingly relevant all these years so how how unique is this well in terms of authoritarianism for the united states this is actually very unique. In terms of authoritarianism for large, you know, segments of the population, no. I mean, we had slavery, okay, then we had the, you know, the reconstruction period, which everyone thought might be a moment of real liberation, but then they ended up imposing the bourbon regimes in the South. Immigrants had their own struggles to get along.

Women, of course, always experienced versions of that. But this is a very, in its own way, every crisis, every moment is unique. and in any ways this is unique because we have done the nightmare version we allowed ourselves and I'm not saying you and I are responsible or am a responsible we allowed ourselves to elect a man who already indicated his aspirations of dictatorship and authoritarianism and most people out there either didn't believe him or thought he was comical when he would talk in those terms they didn't imagine he might actually begin to pursue it and if you think about the past six months i mean we are in this is one of the great crises in american history i think

really one of the great crises and the action to get to get out of this is is is a challenging one i mean it really it is um it happens very quickly when we cross that threshold i mean it's very it's you know it's like a tough line to see uh crossed until you sort of see it in your rear view mirror and you know the idea that we have troops on uh that are have been deployed to washington dc after being sort of deployed to uh la right and um this stuff with the smithsonian with the bLS with uh the the massive federal police force that ice is going to create with the the the deportations um it and making uh law firms and um universities uh you know bend the knee essentially um and uh so it it seems

dramatic and in terms of like a fascistic movement put aside the the authoritarianism for a moment we've seen this kind of fascism though rise in this country right i mean you know like a We had the KKK at about 10% of the population in 1920. And we had a, I don't know, how far in the attempt of the coup of FDR we got with Smedley Butler, et cetera, et cetera. But where does it rate along that line? along that line i think this remains unique here's what here's what i mean okay if we assume for the moment that he has the maga base as it's called okay and i'll be generous and say the maga base might be 30% of the american people although it's it's it's probably shifting a bit in light of

events um that that's rather unprecedented so if you go back to the 30s for example with the attempted coup, you know, to take out FDR and the attempted coup from above, which was, which, that is, investing huge sums of money in the 1930s by way of the American Liberty League. The billionaires of the day, the multi-millionaires of that time, invested heavily to try to take him down. But what FDR had, okay, and this is to his advantage, and it's not to the advantage of Trump specifically, or ever he would have been to the advantage of Biden, is is that FDR, by the time of two years into his presidency, they loved him. The American working class loved him, whatever reservations they might have had,

because he had already begun to show that his party was committed to addressing not just the economic depression, but the inequalities and the authoritarianism of capital. okay they i mean right away in the first hundred days we all talk about the national labor relations act of 1935 which empowered collective bargaining and the right to organize unions and place the government at that time solidly behind those efforts but in fact in 1933 fDR had already signed into law the national industrial recovery act which included just that those kinds of rights and and sadly speaking capital found a way around it by way of creating for a while companies The other thing was that FDR made it clear when he signed the National Industrial Recovery Act into law, he said, quite publicly, the time has come for corporations and businesses to pay nothing less than a living wage.

Now, these are the kind of signals FDR sent, and Americans mobilized, I mean, hundreds of thousands and millions ended up joining the labor movement. Civil rights organizations actually began to rev up in a significant way in the 1930s. I mean, there was a massive national housewise movement that took place when they found that companies were often, you know, trying to jack up prices in order to cover what would have been the higher wages. So in that sense, the tumult of that time favored FDR and the Democratic Party, which other than the Southern Democrats, had decidedly moved in a direction that, though the term wasn't used by FDR or the Democrats, social democratic direction. Social Security, National Labor Relations Act, housing, I mean, across the board, those kinds of dramatic changes. So this is unique, because we have a man in office right now who was elected. And, you know, if I can just, you know, sidebar a moment. To me, the critical moment was probably when Obama was elected, at least to have shifted gears.

I mean, if Obama had pursued half of the promises that, yes, we can implied, we might never have arrived here. Okay, I mean, and just, yeah, from a structural standpoint, I mean, there was a really started when he was the nominee. They began to coalesce power. I mean, specifically the word went out, do not support outside groups, we're bringing it all in house, and then Obama for America basically was, you know, led into a dungeon, as it were after. and and i mean there was a specific um agenda i mean a tactic in their mind to disempower the organizing the populism that had built around obama um and i mean i don't think it was ever his agenda to be populist but as evidenced by the fact that they did not want any other power bases outside of the white house to exist

And we ended up seeing the results of that, both in how hard it was for them to get the ACA through, even with ultimately with 60 votes, but also how many elected officials in the states were lost over that time. I think it was about 700. A thousand, I think over the two terms. and, you know, that's why we lost the governorships. That's by 2010, all of that redistricting happened at that time. You know, there was some state comptroller who left politics because they had nowhere to go because the whole bench was wiped out.

So let's talk about the sort of like what FDR did as a proof of concept of, in terms of like the electoral power of this because you know i think there's a um we operate not everybody but uh there is one mode of operation where the democrats are trying to figure out how to win and um and they they can't figure out how to do it and they argue that you know we need to moderate and you know um uh uh but but the democrats know we have proof of concept right even if you look at it the most cynical way it's there uh the people don't realize this i mean at least you and i do because we're old but uh people in this office like democrats controlled the congress until 19 what was it 95 uh and um i mean for 40 years straight

they controlled 50 years uh straight they controlled the house because of the reforms and um uh so it's out there it's just there are certain percentage of democrats maybe over 50 percent maybe less who um use this question of how do we get elected as a way of making sure of really saying how do we get elected with a set of policies that are not going to disempower are benefactors. You know, you know, clearly they're all praying for, uh, for a Cuomo victory in, uh, or, you know, or possibly even Eric Adams victory in New York, you know, God forbid that New Yorker, oh, my God, I'm joking.

I don't know, sleep, well, the, how do you pronounce that name? I was, I think it's Slewa, but I did find out the other day he lives in a studio apartment with like over a dozen cats. So I don't know if I trust that guy fully. Well, I have a feeling that's a function of divorce. I've heard New Yorkers who are progressive say, hell, better him than Cuomo or... Well, fair enough, yeah. Yeah, so look, I mean, what's interesting is people, for, look, our, well, I'm a generation ahead of you, Sam.

But our generation... Just barely. Yeah, well, to me, you got everyone else who stayed younger where I'm getting older. The thing is that we were taught wrongly about FDR. Americans, you know, of the post-war years, those of us who were baby boomers, so to speak, we were taught that this was all because, you know, FDR was a liberal, okay, and he saved America from capitalism, et cetera, that's what made him great. And they really did not want to make the case that, well, the point is that FDR had said,

even before he took office, that he needed to make America. fairly radical for at least a generation in writing he had sent to a friend who was like the foremost figure in the field of social wealth academic social welfare questions and then from the very that first hundred days immediately challenged americans to try to live up to that now there's no doubt that at the outset he made accommodations with capital but when they made it clear they were not going to to give way he turned and in 1936 And you can imagine how much working people loved it. He said at the Democratic National Convention, 1936, in Philadelphia,

at a stadium of like 100,000 people nationally broadcast, he said, you know, they complain. And when he said they, he meant the economic royalists complain, that we want to overthrow American institutions. And he said, but what they really complain of is that we want to overthrow their power. and to paraphrase, and guess what, they're right. I mean, he made it clear. However much, ultimately, much, it didn't happen, maybe as people on the left today,

would have said, oh, geez, but he didn't do this and that. The fact is, that was a remarkable 12-year presidency. And you're right, not until 1995. I mean, they briefly lost Congress in 1946, but they got it back and right, all the way through. I mean, even Dwight Eisenhower in 1954 said, when his brother asked to who was a conservative down in Texas, when are you going to start doing what we put you in office to do? And he said, anybody, any party that tries to get rid of labor's rights,

of social security, I mean, he went on and on and on, will never be heard from again in this country. Okay? And then, of course, our generation was involved from the bottom up, so to speak, watching our parents' generation elect the most liberal, indeed, progressive Congress since the night. 1930s. And one advantage they had is that, of course, they had experience. And what they knew to do was to have a president who surprised them, okay, and became the most progressive president since

FDR. Again, the war, and I can give you other reasons in which, you know, I have real criticisms of the Johnson administration. But they did institute a second effort at least of approaching a new deal. And then what do the Democrats do in the 70s? It's like they said, well, I guess it's You know, we've got to turn our back on labor, on the working class, on the FDR tradition. By the way, that included the likes of Gary Hart and in time, well, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and on and on and on and on. And it is amazing. It isn't that the Democrats, I used to think, well, the Democrats forgot, right?

But they didn't forget. They literally sold out and were bought up. Right. Okay. But here's the thing. And this is the amazing thing that people always don't realize. And I don't know how many times it shows up in the media, they occasionally do make it clear. The majority of Americans still want exactly the kinds of things that FDR pursued and promised,

especially in 1944 with the idea of an Economic Bill of Rights. I mean, we actually had polling done, those of us who were involved in this project, of creating an Economic Bill of Rights. And to our pleasure, we found out that, yeah, you know, the majority of Americans want, essentially an economic bill of rights. And at least in the Democratic side of the thing, they really want it, the great majority wanted it. But what do the Democrats do? What do they do?

Sorry, I'm getting revved up here as if I was with Michael back then, you know? Right. What do they do? They allowed Biden to stay in office, you know, or say he was going to run. They then choose or position Harris to take over. Even at the moment where they might have done something when she chose Waltz, you know,

they send him out against Vance in a debate. This is like that moment where you see it happening. And they probably told him, just shut up. Don't say anything. And that was like the final straw in some ways. Because the election was relatively close, but seriously speaking,

it's like when people used to say, well, you know, the Democrats really don't want to win, the consultants make more money as losers. And I used to joke about it. And I used to laugh at them and say, come on, don't be ridiculous. But it isn't that. It's that they don't want to lose the donors, period. Okay? And the fact is, we are the majority. Progressives are the majority,

and the point now is to try to organize. And I, as I sent the note to Brian and to you, look, the left, the left has got to grow up. Okay. We have got to come together around a radical, and I say radical, because in this day and age it sounds radical, a radical call a progressive, I don't care, vision that approaches or actually in. endorses and embraces an economic bill of rights because it is what Americans want, and Democrats especially want it. And by the way, you can't work without it. We have got to align these progressive organizations with larger and smaller movements.

We have got to get labor to remember that in 1944, when FDR called for an economic bill of rights, they launched national campaigns in pursuit of it, and they never gave up that vision until at some point they were so smashed, I don't think they could imagine anything after the 70s and 80s with Carter and Reagan. So, you know, I mean, and then, last but not least, you have Rokana on occasionally, do you not? We haven't, but, but, I'm sort of familiar. I mean, he and I spoke together a year ago at the pre-convention progressive thing,

and I think people like him in the Congressional Caucus, progressive Congressional Caucus, it's about time they came out bluntly, not. policy by policy, bluntly and said, in a manifesto-like way to the Democratic Party, this is what we stand for. We stand with FDR, period. And that's what we want. Right. And then you can hit the Republicans on being the party of the robber barons of the current era. And then you make it a full circle, historical kind of perspective here. Yeah. I got two questions for you. One was one

historical and one just referencing what you had mentioned but let me just start with this where's McGovern in that I mean I know where Hart is Gary Hart and Clinton

and the sort of like rise of the more austerity corporate oriented Democrats but McGovern McGovern was

you know know and i've always perceived more government as being sort of like the uh the you know that he's been smeared as being the hippie choice and and and and and i i mean he was very progressive on a lot of things but he was somewhat anti i don't know if he was anti labor i guess is what i'm asking you because he certainly was um he was in charge of a commission that moved the that introduced democracy more democracy to the democrats in terms of their primary process, but also specifically to disempower labor leaders at that time. So where do you put him in, that's the piece I've never fully understood about McGovern.

Yeah, it's really, that's like one of those tragic moments. What happened was, yes, he, after 68 at the Democratic Convention, they created a commission to examine how candidates were chosen in the party. and McGovern chaired that commission. And indeed, it had to do with primaries and other things, and they set it up in a way that labor's capacity to influence the outcome of elections within the party would be reduced in favor of folks who had been marginalized for women, minorities.

They democratized it. I mean, it used to be sort of like more of like a smoky back room type of situation. And that's first to remember that, Well, actually, it's the second thing that George Meaney, the head of the AFVIL-CIO, was shocked by. I mean, absolutely shocked. The first one, you've got to go back a little further. In 6566, a law, a bill appeared before House and Senate, okay?

And the bill was to finally bring an end, I should have mentioned this earlier, an end to the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, that disempowered labor in the sense that it made it extremely difficult. to the whole thing, to organize in the South, which, by the way, also utterly hampered the civil rights movement, okay, for those years. Okay, so, anyhow, the bill, it comes up, and it's before the Senate, and needless to say, there's a filibuster, a filibuster being pursued by a combination of especially Southern Democrats and perhaps some Northern Republicans, okay? So McGovern was from South Dakota and he

didn't know what to do. South Dakota, I believe, had already become a right to work state. And he asked for permission, I think, from who I don't know, he voted to not bring an end to the filibuster. That began the animosity

that labor started started to feel for him. That would have changed, by the way, those are the kinds of things that would have changed the course of American political history. Right. I mean, people have to understand Taft Hartley was like Empire Strikes Back against the National Labor Relations Act. And really curbed and started the essentially was the beginning of the end of union dominance in this country. It took a couple of decades. But Taft Hartley really narrowed the ability. It meant you couldn't have cross-sector strikes. You couldn't have strikes outside of shops. I mean, it really limits labor's ability. And, you know, if we had gotten rid of that at that time,

we'd have a very different country right now. Yeah. And people, people often say that it was the civil rights and the civil rights movement and then the riots of the late 60s that brought an end to the Democratic Party hegemony, so to speak. But if you actually look at the, at the surveys and polls of the period in the 70s through the 80s when Republicans asserted themselves and neoliberalism emerges as the powerful force in the Democratic Party. Most Americans were still saying the majority of them they wanted great society, New Deal kinds of policies. But the Democrats turned their back on it. But so anyhow, so we get to 72 at the convention and they choose McGovern and Meeney, not all of labor, but Meeney and the AFL-CIO,

representatives there they walked out and they sent a signal that the to the Democratic Party that you know you can't depend on us in the same way and part of that wasn't just a personal animosity to Montgomery I mean there was a sort of like a cohort of people would ultimately be known as the Reagan Democrats oh absolutely who were responding against the emancipation movements of women and of black people and of otherwise marginalized people in our society. But do we see that strain today with Sean O'Brien and the Teamsters who are now moving towards the republic? I mean, this is the sort of the dilemma.

Have we alienated labor to the extent at this point? with the democrats not being the party of the of the working class enough that like we're going to have to do something radical to reorient and get back i mean we there's no returning to the status quo it seems to me no thank goodness the scary part is that there is no returning but that's also the challenge yep okay i mean if the democrats want to go on in the way they have. It's not the end of the Democratic Party. It's literally the end of American Democratic life. Okay. I mean, when you have, look, sorry, I'm pulling slightly away, but I know you've mentioned the presence of troops in Washington, D.C. Right. I mean,

they're there essentially to antagonize. Right. Okay. I mean, not all those guardsmen are saying to say, yeah, I'm going to antagonize. But that's, trump's intention okay he's looking for an excuse and when he pulled and at the 30 days i think was he said it they're pulled out he'll go to another city and he's already implied you know whistle what do they call that dog whistle like way he'll go to the cities where where african americans govern okay he'll push it and push it so i mean it's going to take a hell of a lot of patience not to blow but on the other hand on the other hand the democrats better realize their job is not to moderate it's it's literally to get out of the way sorry yeah no but i mean it's it's all

lastly uh you said uh on the left we have to grow up and and and unite around a progressive or radical social democratic vision who who's gonna grow up what is involved in that like what do you mean you may have you may have noted when i sent that message to brian i said liberals and liberals and the left. So liberals are going to have to grow up and stop and stop talking about simply

worrying about if you like the politics of it. They're going to have to start realizing that behind the politics of it is the point of the economic royalists. So it's not a matter of persuading. It's not a matter of how you sell the party.

Like so, I mean, think about just, I don't even know how anyone can bear to listen to my fellow LSU alum, what's his name? Carville. Carville. Gee, you know. I thought you were going to say Pete Buttigieg, because he's the new version of what we're talking about here. I mean, I've got my target, so to speak, but I chose the one that Lig just turns my stomach when I hear him, okay? I mean, those folks literally need to be displaced. They need to be sent home. And, you know, if they have any If any Democrat, anywhere along the way, has acted like a neoliberal in any fashion, we should make it clear, we're not going to buy it.

But we've got to start making it clear now. So I'm talking about, you know, there are still militant liberals, the militant liberals, as well as, for lack of better way of putting it, socialists who show up in various places, and the progressives who have their organizations, PDA, okay, our revolution, and others. they need to sit down and say okay it's not a matter of compromise it's a matter of winning and the time has come for us to organize around and i use the example of the economic bill of rights

because you've had alan minski and neon the co-authors of the 21st century economic bill of rights you've had matt uh you know jackbyn on and myself and we put it turned all that into a comic strip i mean it's got to be around something like that By the way, it won't be simply around one policy, health care for all. It's got to be broader because health care for all may not actually attract the unions that are central, pivotal to this coalition. Often they're behind it because, so it's got to be a set of principles that, so that, A, everybody's on the same page in terms of an agreement on some very basic principles. Right.

And B, so that you can almost. give a certain amount of like grace regarding specific issues that are not addressed within the context of those principles so that you can move forward and organize around some of those narrow principles. And you guys have to win in New York. Okay? That is that's got to be the message. Okay. Something like that.

Yep. Well Harvey Kay, always a pleasure. you brought a lot of joy in knowledge to Michael he would cite you often and we will put a link to some of your appearances on the Michael Brooks show in our podcast and YouTube descriptions today again thanks so much for coming on really

appreciate it. Good to see you guys again don't hesitate to ask. Great to see you. Bye-bye. Bye-bye. All right, we're going to take quick break and we're going to hear from Leish Brooks, Michael's sister, in just a moment. Thank you. I don't know. Thank you.