future where you can share your burning questions or any other questions that come up during the discussion. So welcome again everyone my name is Lauren and I'm the assistant for the China is not our enemy campaign. The goal of this campaign is to counter and stop the US's aggression on China through a love for humanity and dedication to mutual respect cooperation and world peace. First of all I would like to thank our post sponsoring organizations without whom this work would not be possible and events like these would not be possible. So a very grateful thank you to No Cold War, the People's Forum NYC, Chow Collective, Pivot to Peace, Massachusetts Peace Action, and Veterans for Peace, the China Working Group. Thank you also to our amazing Latin America team at CodePink for helping this collaboration come to fruition. Secondly I would like to let everyone in the audience know about the China is not our enemy campaign's latest action. You can go to codepink.org backslash innovation to use the one-click politics feature to email or tweet at your Congress member. War is not innovation. Demand that Congress keep militarism and xenophobia out of make it in America, formally known as the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act and the America competes act. The America competes act passed earlier this month in the house and now a special conference committee is reconciling the differences between the two bills to get a final version to the president to sign. So we want them to remove the military funding and China provisions before it gets to President Biden's desk. The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, which is the Senate's version passed last June, allocates $500 million for media coverage critical of China. Specifically mentioned in the bill is media that criticizes China's Belt and Road initiative. Again, go to codepink.org slash innovation to use the feature and let your Congress people know that war is not innovation. All right. Now let me introduce our wonderful guest speakers. Our first speaker is Carlos Martinez, who is an author and researcher based in London, Britain. He is co-editor of Friends of Socialist China and co-founder of No Cold War. His first book, The End of the Beginning, Lessons of the Soviet Collapse, was published by Leftward in 2019. You can use the, you can see the links to Carlos's Twitter and websites for No Cold War and Friends of Socialist China in the chat so you can follow Carlos's work. Our second guest is Manolo De Los Santos. Manolo is the co-executive director of the People's Form NYC and a popular educator and organizer from the Caribbean. Before joining the People's Form, he organized solidarity and education programs in Latin America. You can find the links to Manolo's Twitter and the website for the People's Form NYC in the chat. Now that we're all better acquainted, let's jump into the topic for today. China's Belt and Road initiative. What is the Belt and Road initiative? People may have heard the name in passing or seen it in news headlines but not really understood what it entails. Can Carlos or Manolo, can you give more context as to what exactly the Belt and Road initiative is? Go ahead, Carlos. Yeah, I'm happy to have a first stab. Yeah, essentially it's like a global development strategy that seeks to promote economic integration and cooperation basically via an enormous network of infrastructure. So roads, railways, bridges, factories, ports, telecom systems, energy transmission systems, renewable energy infrastructure and so on. It was originally referred to as the New Silk Road because the vision was based on the Silk Road, this ancient trading network that connected China with Southeast Asia, Central Asia, Europe, Africa, the Middle East. But now it's kind of expanded in scope such that it essentially includes the whole world. I mean there's 200-ish countries in the world and of those 140 or so are signed up to the Belt and Road and the vast majority of them developing countries. So yeah, the elevator pitch is that it identifies a need for infrastructure and matches that need with financial institutions that are able to invest and with companies that have got the expertise and the capacity to plan and to carry out the work. So it's about industrialization, it's about economic upgrade and it's also about connectivity and just to use a slightly controversial word, it's about globalization in a sense. And on the left we tend to use that word globalization in a somewhat negative way into it's kind of a synonym, the way we use it with imperialism. But in terms of increasing the connectedness of the world, bringing people together, learning from one another, trading with one another on the basis of equality, on the basis of mutual respect, that's what globalization could mean, that's what globalization should mean. And I think you can contextualize the Belt and Road Initiative within this framework of a new type of globalization. So fantastic. So there's a lot of misinformation in the West about the Belt and Road Initiative. Can either Carlos or Manolo tell us what exactly does the Belt and Road Initiative do for Latin American countries? Why do they want to join? Well, I think one of the most important things to always start is with the reality of Latin America itself. It's a continent that on one hand, particularly in the last few years, due to constant US government intervention, has seen a sharp increase in the rates of poverty and extreme poverty. Only in 2020 it was estimated that at least 35% of the Latin American population, I'm talking about at least 215 million people, were living in conditions of poverty on the continent, which is accompanied by my nutrition, hunger, lack of access to education, lack of access to decent public transportation, lack of access to housing, and many basic services that in many other parts of the world, we would assume are necessary for any human being to live with dignity. This is a continent that despite having quite large trade relations with the United States and with Europe continues to live in this poverty. Then comes China in 2013 and says, we are proposing a third world development plan, because that's what the BRI is. It's a plan envisaged or built and constructed out of the third world that proposes third world solutions to third world problems without ever sacrificing the integrity, the sovereignty, or the independence of the nations involved. Many people who are in favor sometimes say that the Belt and Road Initiative is not political or is not ideological. It is very ideological and it's very political because it precisely out of China's view that if we want to actually live in a world of equals, if we want to actually have equal relations between nations and move towards a multipolar world, which is now a common word being used heavily in our context today, then it actually requires equal development opportunities for the third world. So when you go to Latin America, a diverse continent, it's not a monolithic continent. We have many political differences in our continent. You will see that across the board there is generally an appreciation of what the investment brought by the Belt and Road Initiative is because in all cases, it has sought to end poverty in our own context. It has sought to elevate each country's ability to take care of its own needs and not depend on others because what Latin Americans have seen for, I would say, over 100 years of being solely dependent on US trade is that we were essentially being turned into consumers. Of US merchandise and goods. Despite being a completely rich continent, we were forced to buy American, to think American, to dress American. No one ever called that imperialism or colonization, but we were forced into this habit. China for the first time with the Belt and Road Initiative essentially opens the path for us to begin to see ourselves as an independent continent, not disconnected from the rest of the world, but able to join the rest of the world on our own terms. Can I come in on that as well? Yes, please. Yeah, I think it's worth pointing out that of all of the countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, currently around two thirds have signed up to the Belt and Road. So it must be offering something. You know, I guess the right-wing press and politicians attacked the Belt and Road and attacked this China-Latin America relationship kind of on the basis of a double racism, right? On the one hand, you've got the Chinese and they're cunning and they're inscrutable and they're these fume and true characters that basically are intent on world domination. And then on the other side, you've got these kind of backward Latin Americans and they're corrupt and they're very easily duped and so on. For our purposes, you know, we can probably avoid the racist tropes and consider what these countries might actually be getting out of the Belt and Road, which I think Manolo has spoken to very eloquently. You know, in most of the countries in the region, there is this massive infrastructure gap and there is an enduring underdevelopment, which is the legacy of the whole history of the continent since colonization. You know, I mentioned earlier about globalization. Latin America has been at the core of a very different type of globalization since 1492, right?  And so the region was integrated into an imperialist globalization, a colonialist globalization, which was designed very specifically to serve the needs of the global north, right? Of Europe, of North America, supplying land, supplying resources, supplying labor, supplying markets. So the Belt and Road and more broadly integrating into a more equal, a more multipolar global economy is about breaking out of underdevelopment, right? You know, signing up to the Belt and Road essentially means signing up to a package of infrastructure development, investment in projects that are designed to upgrade a country's economy. And in that world, China is unquestionably the world leader. You know, if you look at China's progress, particularly in the last two to three decades in terms of building railways, roads, high speed rail, energy networks, clean energy and so on, it's startling, right? Something like 90% of the high speed rail in the world is in China. Now, I'm in Britain, you guys are in the US. I think between us, we're responsible for approximately 0% of the world's high speed rail. So for developing companies looking to upgrade their economies to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels, to improve living standards, high speed rail and these other technologies are really important. And part of the Belt and Road is really sharing China's experience in all of this. And, you know, aside from providing the capital and the technology, China's just, it's a very relevant example specifically for the developing world, right? China's journey out of underdevelopment has been one of the most remarkable economic phenomena in history, right? To go from being one of the poorest countries in the world at the time of the of the Revolution in 1949 to becoming today a science and technology powerhouse country of 1.4 billion people that's able to reliably provide those people with food, housing, clothing, education, healthcare. You know, if there's something to learn for other developing countries, it's definitely worth learning. So, you know, there are a number of pretty clear benefits to Latin American and Caribbean countries of joining up with the Belt and Road, and they can be summed up as development. And a very important element of that that I hope we'll get into later is the idea of environmentally sustainable development, which is something that requires, you know, a long-term investment, long-term strategy, and is another area that China is very much at the forefront of. Fantastic. Thank you for that very thoughtful answer. And, you know, speaking of underdevelopment, can either of you contrast the IMF loans and the Washington consensus, what they've done in Latin America, to the Belt and Road initiatives and China's relations with the region? Well, it's important to talk about the Washington consensus, not just in terms of the financial or economic structures or elements that are tied to it. For most Latin Americans, it's very marked in our memory that the period tied to the Washington consensus also came tied to military coups financed and supported and organized by the United States government. It was a period of invasions. It was a period of dictatorships, military dictatorships, that in places like Argentina meant the disappearance of over 30,000 people who simply thought different. It meant in places like Chile, secret torture prisons built under the advice of U.S. military officials. It meant in many parts of the region a very difficult period in our history. And the Washington consensus, in a sense, came about as a period of both the complete process of rebating and attacks against the left in the region and continents, but a complete submission of the peoples of our continent through economic projects that ultimately privatize and sold all or most of our public resources and goods in order to serve the interests of the United States government. What many people now like to talk about neoliberalism or the project of neoliberalism was born in blood in Latin America. We were the experimental site where for decades, for decades, everything or anything that in any period in our country served as an indicator for going against poverty or providing basic human services and goods were being completely destroyed under the direct advice of the U.S. government. In fact, it's a painful history that marks us till this day, which is why the contrast becomes what does it look like to receive, I wouldn't call it aid, but what does it look like to receive or be in an economic relationship with another partner country where political conditions aren't imposed as to what your own political system, economic system should be. And I think this is important because, again, I don't like to say that the Belt and Road Initiative or the Chinese are not ideological or political.  The fact that two-thirds of the countries in Latin America relate or members of the Belt and Road Initiative is particular because you have everything from governments that I hate and abhor, like the government of Colombia, who has incredibly strong relations with China and engages in massive trade and is a big part of the Belt and Road Initiative. In fact, the construction of many of the major ports now in Colombia is being done with major financing from China and the Belt and Road Initiative. And Colombia is one of the countries that's most renegotiating its debt with China in large numbers. I think the last number, I think they've renegotiated in the middle of the pandemic. Because of the pandemic, they renegotiated over $400 million in debt with China, which would have been impossible to renegotiate if the creditor had been the US or the IMF or the World Bank. The fact that China relates to Cuba is another particularity. You have the whole spectrum of politics in Latin America covered in the Belt and Road Initiative. The biggest contract is also that the IMF and World Bank in their consistent history in Latin America have always come in with loans that require that Latin Americans invest less in education, that we invest less in health care, that we invest less in the needs of the common people. In fact, it's been the requirement to this day, for example, as Argentina right now is trying to renegotiate its debt with the IMF and the World Bank. What are the impositions that even a progressive government like the one in Argentina has to fight against? When the IMF continues to go back to the table with what cuts are you going to make? Belt and Road Initiative comes in with the opposite. Belt and Road Initiative says if you want to think about long-term development, you have to build infrastructure and not just infrastructure of building little roads or building pipelines. A lot of the capital investment actually goes into things like education. I just recently had the pleasure of meeting a series of a group of congressmen from different countries in the Caribbean who were speaking about how much of the investment through Belt and Road was coming into basically rebuild and actually update the teaching of sciences and technology in public universities in the region. That is a long-term investment and we have to acknowledge that not everything that comes out of China is positive. There are many of the trade relations that China brings to the continent that are not always fair, that are not always transparent, that are not always the best for our countries either. I don't want to paint an illusion either, but there is a huge difference even in those relations between the ultimate goal of wanting to build a win-win style of development versus the U.S.'s total or none policy. Either total profit and gains for the U.S. and their friends or nothing at all. Ultimately, Latin Americans are deciding for themselves what is best and the reality is that the U.S. is clear, which is why they increased their propaganda campaign in the region, that more and more we are finding that China is the better reliable partner for our needs. Yeah, just to pick up on the economics thread there, the IMF, what the World Bank have very consistently done with their loans in Latin America and in Africa is to impose conditions which is based on their preferred economic model. Sometimes it is called the Washington consensus, as we have been referring to. Sometimes it is called neoliberalism. The details vary a little bit, but the essence is pretty predictable. It means liberalization of foreign trade, so removing any kind of protective barriers that countries might have in place to protect their domestic industries. It means privatization, opening up bigger and bigger parts of the economy to private ownership and management. Most notoriously, in a number of African countries, that's included literally privatizing the water supply and turning it into a profit-making concern. You even have people like Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty, who said that this type of economics is a violation of human rights in sub-Saharan Africa in a situation of relative water scarcity to place ownership and management of the water supply in private hands. And the other aspect of the Washington consensus is the reduced role for the state, the reduced role for the government, which is a very ideological thing. It's a kind of recognition that governments have some level of accountability. They've got to in some way be responsive to their populations. And in the case of a lot of countries in Africa and in Latin America, you're talking about governments that have emerged from liberation movements, and that actually do have some relationship with and sense of responsibility towards the masses. So the effect of imposing these kind of neoliberal policies, the effect of imposing deregulation is to shift the balance of power in favor of the privateers, in favor of multinational corporations that are lining up to get a piece of the action. Now, you compare that with China and you compare that with the Belt and Road Initiative. I agree with Manolo in his point that it's not all kind of honey and roses, but China doesn't use loan conditionality. And that's the fundamental economic difference between the US and China's approach, right? The US tries to enforce its economic model as a proxy for imposing its dominance, its hegemony. China's very explicit that different countries have different needs, different conditions, and it's up to them to choose a development model that suits them. That's what multi-polarity is all about. And you've probably seen a book called The China Triangle by this US academic Kevin Gallagher about China-Latin American relations. And he points out that this way of doing business, China's model with Latin America is very much in line with its general foreign policy of non-intervention, non-interference, which it goes back to the 1950s. It goes back to Bandung in 1955. It goes to Zhou Enlai and the formation of the non-aligned movement. And China's hewed pretty close to that policy over the course of 70 years. The other thing, and Manola's touched on this, but the other thing about the Washington consensus is it's not just economics. It's economics backed up with guns, with coercion. As we've talked about looking back at these last 70 years, you've seen direct or indirect US involvement in regime change operations in Guatemala, Brazil, Chile, Nicaragua, Panama, most recently in Bolivia. It was involved in the coup attempt in Venezuela in 2002. It's maintained a crippling embargo on Cuba for six decades. So alongside neoliberalism and proceeding neoliberalism, you've got imperialism, which is another crucially important difference between the US and China. China's waged no wars in Latin America. China's carried out no coups in Latin America, imposed no sanctions, conducted no destabilization campaigns, set up no military bases. This is a non-trivial point that we should take into consideration when we're comparing the behavior of the US and China in relation to Latin America and the Caribbean. That was great. It seems like China is offering an alternative at last to the US and the IMF and World Bank. The Washington Consensus and IMF are a neoliberal project. How would you characterize the Belt and Road Initiative? I would say that the Belt and Road Initiative is a development project for independence. That's how it characterized it. Does it still function within the confines of capitalism, of global capitalism? Yes. That's the world we're living in. Does it subvert the things we hate about capitalism? Not exactly, not consistently, not systematically, but I think in the moment that we're living in history, the conjuncture we're living through, to even think of a different world in which many of our countries could actively think about ending poverty, liberating masses of people from the apartheid of healthcare inefficiencies, of hunger, of financial destitution. The Belt and Road Initiative is the best alternative we have. For those who identify with the left, who identify with progressive causes, I would like to always think about where will Cuba be today if it wouldn't be for the help of countries like China and the Belt and Road Initiative. You have a country like Cuba who has been attempting a socialist project 90 miles away from the United States government for decades now, for over six decades. Cuba has a challenge of how does it think about food sovereignty? How does it think about environmentally sound transportation? It has to think about the building of biotechnology and the expansion of biotechnology projects. It wouldn't be able to do any of these projects if it hadn't been, if it weren't for the continued support of projects like the Belt and Road Initiative, which allow it to not just connect to China, because I think this is the key element is that the Belt and Road Initiative is useful for Latin America, ultimately, in that it allows us to expand our own projects of economic integration in the region. It helps to better connect our region going from the Caribbean to the borders of Mexico to the United States, all the way down to Tierra del Puego in Argentina. This project of political, economic, and social integration is being helped by BRI. I would like to say, almost like we have to write that donkey as far as we can. We have something that for the first time is beneficial to us, so let us write the donkey. I mean, neoliberalism is a slightly misused word. Sometimes people use it a bit sloppily, a little bit carelessly, like putting an equal sign between neoliberalism and capitalism, or even putting an equal sign between neoliberalism and markets. You've got some people on the left who say, well, China from 1978 introduced market reforms. It's adopted neoliberal economic policy, but it's just completely incorrect. It's a mischaracterization, because neoliberalism means something relatively specific. It means adherence to neoclassical economics. It means a program of privatization, deregulation, de-unionization, getting the government out of the economy. If you had to sum it up in a single phrase, it's free market fundamentalism. It's allowing the maximum freedom for private companies and private individuals to make unfettered profits. That's the liberation in neoliberalism. It's freedom for capitalists. The neoliberal package is exactly what the West has offered Latin America and Africa and the Middle East for decades. Most notoriously would be the IMF structural adjustment programs that were imposed in Africa in the 1990s and 2000s. As we talked about, Chinese investment, Chinese loans don't come with that type of conditionality. No one's having to privatize their water supply in order to get access to Chinese financing. That's an important difference. The other thing is that the neoliberal model has tended to hold the global south in this position of a low level of development, very focused on using the global south to provide raw materials, primary commodities, and to keep it stuck at the very bottom of the value chain. Increasingly, BRI projects are about moving up the value chain and upgrading economies. That's quite a recent shift, actually, in terms of the relationship between China and Latin America and Caribbean. In the early 2000s, from 2003 to 2013, there was a commodity boom. Commodity prices were very high. China was buying lots of them. That's not a bad thing. A lot of Latin American countries did extremely well out of that, most notably Venezuela and Brazil. It paid for extensive social programs and redistributive packages in those countries. Venezuela in particular took billions and billions of dollars worth of oil-backed loans from China and used those to create social housing and create literacy programs and to put doctors in the porous barrios of Caracas for the first time. No complaints about that. But in recent years, over the last decade, there's been a shift away from energy resources and particularly from the extraction of fossil fuels towards industrial cooperation, diversified production, including green energy, smart manufacturing, telecoms, infrastructure, IT. Huawei has got nine data centers in Latin America, for example, and there's financial cooperation as well. Brazil, Argentina, Chile have joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. This is a very new development for a lot of countries in Latin America to have access to the latest technology, to have a path to upgrade their economies and to enter into this fast track of science and technology is, I would say, a historic development. Yeah, that's great news that these kinds of industries, education, science, technology are finally being attended to. It's really exciting. Argentina recently joined the Belt and Road Initiative. I know that they are trying to refinance their 44 billion debt to the IMF while accepting new credit from China. And as we mentioned before, Venezuela, Cuba, other countries are being heavily sanctioned by the US. How do these countries navigate new credit and existing debt with the IMF World Bank? I imagine this is a plight of other countries with different political landscapes. Do you have any thoughts on that? Well, I chuckle and laugh a little always when I see how the US reacts to any independent sovereign government in Latin America, even implying that it wants to have normal relations with China, that it wants to have normal trade relations with China. First, it makes large threats. And the President of Argentina was recently visiting China, meant with President Xi Jinping made a series of visits and agreements towards Argentina's national economic development. And immediately, I don't think his plane had even landed back in Buenos Aires. And multiple US officials were both critiquing, lambasting, attacking, and threatening the sovereign president, the democratically elected president of another country with all sorts of conditions if Argentina didn't step back from those commitments they had made in China. That is despicable. That is completely despicable. You know, the US today wants to talk about, particularly about territorial sovereignty and maintaining the independence of countries and how much it fights for the independence of other countries, but it respects very little the independence of Latin America. In fact, you know, Biden, who is very rarely lucid, said recently, you know, Latin America is no longer our backyard. It is our front yard. And maybe he's right in the sense that it's the yard now that they want to pay more attention to. They see it as a zone of conflict, of contradiction, of struggle over whose interests will be primary in the region, whose interests, whose plans, whose economic needs will be paid more attention to in the region. Will it be Latin America's needs or will it be the US's needs? And essentially the US government is willing to go out against any government, be it progressive, be it right wing, be it center right, whatever flavor of the month we have in Latin America when it comes to the political spectrum, the US is essentially willing to go against any of these governments willing to have relations with China, you know. And it's in a way sad, but at the same time, it's also been an interesting moment to see more and more governments, again, face with this dilemma, make I think very responsible choices, which is ultimately we have to do what is best for people. And because China is a good economic partner for many of these right wing governments, they also decide based on what is good for the pockets of our business class and our ruling class in our countries. This is a win-win project. This is a win-win project. And the fact that not one Chinese ship, not one Chinese ship has shown up in a Latin American port at the moment of having to sign an agreement is remarkable. Who is touring Latin Central America today? The head, Laura Richardson, head of the general, head of the Southern command of the United States military. She is in Honduras today. In case there was any rumbling that Honduras would break relations with Taiwan and fully recognize, finally recognize that there's one China. We know for a fact that this is part of the agenda being discussed in Honduras today between the general and the president, Xiomara, who's a progressive person, who's a leftist who actually already in her campaign indicated that there was an interest in developing and recognizing the one China policy of the PRC. And that Honduras would benefit greatly from having independent relations with China. Who shows up today? The general. Are those conversations ever friendly once? Does the US ever send the general just to say hello? So we really have to ask ourselves, laugh a little, but also be very concerned about how these things play out in our continent. I mean, it would be a pretty terrible thing if Honduras were to follow the US model and adopt the one China policy, as the US did in 1972 with the signing of the Shanghai Communique. But I do think we should probably, there should be some gratitude towards China that because of its involvement in the continent, Latin America has now been upgraded from backyard to front yard. This is historic. In terms of the specific problems that Argentina has now got to deal with, it's perfectly fair point to make that taking out loans is by its very nature somewhat risky. Loans mature and have to be paid back. Investments are capitalized and what happens if things don't work out as predicted. And ultimately, that's a matter for Argentina's politicians and economists to run their own affairs in a responsible way. And that's part of this whole dynamic that we've been talking about. China's not going to tell you how to take care of your business. Of course, Chinese banks, like any creditors, are going to do their due diligence and they're going to conduct feasibility studies and so on. And they're very much not into providing bad loans with no hope of repayment, except in the case of policy loans. And these are sort of very low interest and essentially form part of a program of foreign aid. So for example, China's written off lots of loans to low income countries, especially over the last couple of years during the pandemic. But Argentina is a middle income country, right? Argentina's per capita GDP is similar to China's. So Belt and Road investments aren't going to be in that sort of category. They're intended to generate profit and their reform of capital investment like any other. You invest capital with the expectation of reaping rewards in the future. And China's investing in Argentina's development as part of joint enterprise arrangements with the Argentinian state and Argentinian companies. And it will get a corresponding part of the rewards from that. It is, I would like to say, just in terms of the loan terms, a lot of academics have studied this in some detail and they've basically all agreed that Chinese loans typically have significantly lower interest rates than American lending institutions and the IMF and World Bank and much longer repayment periods in comparison with their counterparts in the Western financial institutions. And there's typically much more flexibility around debt and renegotiation, etc. And as we've been saying, in terms of government loans, the Chinese don't tell you what to spend money on. We've seen that in Venezuela, in Cuba, in Bolivia, Chinese loans have gone towards building schools, building social housing, building hospitals, towards genuinely improving people's lives and addressing the entrenched poverty and inequality that can be found throughout much of the continent. That's not what's happened with IMF loans. The IMF has Argentina in a debt trap. Debt trap is a phrase that I'm sure if you were to Google it, you would exclusively find articles about what China's doing in different countries of the world. The West invented the debt trap and uses it to this day. Argentina's President Alberto Fernández said very specifically, I am working to rid Argentina of its dependence on the IMF. So in a sense, this deepening of Argentina's economic links with China and with Russia and with other countries is exactly a recognition that the country is in a toxic relationship with the IMF, with the World Bank, with the international financial institutions that it needs to get out of. Argentina will hopefully come out of this process in a much healthier state with much lower debt repayments over a much longer period and with an upgraded economy that produces more value and that creates a better life for its people. China is finally offering an alternative and a path forward for win-win development. Are there any drawbacks to the Belt and Road Initiative? I know that Manolo had before said that nothing is perfect and there are valid criticisms. Are there any specific drawbacks or things that are lacking in the Belt and Road Initiative that you would like to speak to? As a proud Latin American, I can spend all day and night talking about drawbacks. But I think I have, to be more concise, there are particular areas. And this is not a problem particularly just of the Belt and Road Initiative, but it's a problem of all economic development models within the existing capitalist economy that we have in the world, which is that they're based in our regions on heavy extractive models, models that continue to extract natural resources from our continent at a great social human cost. One of the examples that I often look back at is the fact that China more and more depends on Latin America for the production of soy. And this is meant, this is a challenge for those, I mean, China is very environmentally conscious with many of its projects. When it does infrastructure projects around building roads, building highways, building trains, high-speed trains in Latin America, it's very environmentally conscious. But there are drawbacks when China has to think about how to feed its population and how to feed its growing development, that, you know, the amount of soy that it's actually growing and extracting out of Latin America means more land that needs to be made arable and less rainforest. That is a reality in Latin America. But I don't put that fully on the Chinese. I put part of the responsibility for that on our own national governments, like for example in Brazil. Bolsonaro has done nothing to defend the Amazon. That more land is being sold and raised essentially to grow soy is not China's fault. It's not the fault of people who live in China who, as they grow in population, need to eat. That is part of the lack of a national agenda of development that exists in our own countries. And Bolsonaro in Brazil is the biggest example of that. You know, I would focus on drawbacks. But I would also, because I don't ever like to end anything on a negative when we're thinking about important things like this. For me, the biggest example of why, ultimately, with all these drawbacks, this is a life-creating project, is that in the middle of this pandemic, in which so many of our countries, depending on vaccines for the COVAX through the COVAX programs, essentially invested millions of dollars, millions of dollars, expecting to receive vaccines from the major producers in the West, particularly the US and Europe, only in the receiving 45 million vaccines for a continent of close to 500 million people. China had to step in. China was the one who, under very good conditions, essentially provided many of them, most of it through selling at good cost, selling over 245 million vaccines to the people of Latin America. What would have happened if China did not exist in the middle of this pandemic? So, yes, China is not perfect. China's economic relations to Latin America are not perfect. There's an unequal development that still exists in our region. Ultimately, we have to transform this economic system into one that actually works, not just for our region, but for humanity. And that's going to take more than just criticizing China at any point. Yeah, I think that's a really important point. We can look at the reality. We could read the scare stories in the Western media, and there's lots of them about bad Chinese business practices, about how China is trapping countries on the Belt and Road in debt traps and is engaged in land grabs and all the rest of it. But it's important to actually compare these scare stories with reality. There was this big thing in the press recently about China taking over a new airport in Kampala in Uganda, because the Ugandans couldn't pay off their loan. And it just turned out to be completely untrue. It was literally fake news. The Ugandan government had to release a statement saying, this isn't true. And as always happens, you've got the accusation and its front page news and it's everywhere. Everyone's talking about it. It's all over Twitter. It's all over Facebook. It's all over TikTok, et cetera. And then the retraction comes out and the thing is debunked and no one ever hears of it. The retraction is completely invisible, but we don't have to look at these random scare stories because there's an actual history of China-Latin America cooperation. For example, China has loaned, as I mentioned earlier, billions of dollars to Venezuela, which is a country that over the last decade has had a very tough time economically. If China was holding Venezuela in a debt trap, what would you have seen? You would have seen China seizing Venezuelan assets. You would have seen China compromising Venezuelan sovereignty. You would have seen it taking over the state oil company. It hasn't done any of those things. Nothing of the sort. And there are parallels in numerous other countries. And aside from the business deals that China's making money out of, as Manola said, there's cooperation in a number of areas, including aid and including vaccines, literally for every two COVID-19 vaccine doses that are administered in Latin America and the Caribbean. One of them was manufactured in China, or comes from a Chinese company. And they're setting up joint ventures to produce these vaccines locally in a number of countries in the region. I went to a speech given by Luis Arce, the president of Bolivia recently in London. And he was saying, for a country like Bolivia, where so much of our economy is in the informal sector, vaccination was just completely crucial. You can't tell people who make a living selling food on the roadside, well, you just work from home for a few months, you'll be fine. That's not going to work, right? So getting people vaccinated means that people can return to their normal economic activity and they can survive. It's literally the difference between surviving and not surviving. He said, we were promised vaccines by the U.S. We were promised vaccines by COVAX. They didn't turn up. In the end, it was Russia and it was China who knocked on our door and said, do you want some vaccines? We're going to gift you some vaccines, or we're going to sell you some vaccines for not very much money. And that was transformative. So don't worry about the scare stories. Let's look at the reality. In terms of potential drawbacks of the Belt and Road, one could argue that it's kind of setting up a confrontation with the U.S. that it's kind of forcing countries to choose between China and the U.S., which actually, most countries, you'll find they want to have good relations with everyone.  They want to be left to develop in peace and to be friends and not to have enemies. But this idea of forcing countries to choose, that's not China's doing. China's not imposing some conditions of, well, we won't trade with you if you also trade with the U.S. That's what the U.S. does. As we speak, the U.S. is doing everything it can to disrupt the China-Latin America relationship. For example, trying to persuade governments to keep Huawei out of their network infrastructure. The problem there isn't that China needs to change its behavior or that these countries need to change their behavior. The U.S. needs to change its behavior. This is part of a much bigger conversation. But the U.S. has to come around to the reality of a multipolar world, a multipolar future. Because what's the alternative? The alternative is that we all just accept continued U.S. hegemony. We all just accept the end of history, the Francis Fukuyama state of eternal imperialism. And we accept the organization of the world economy where the rest of the world just provides, as we've said, resources, land, labor markets for the benefit of the U.S., for the benefit of Western Europe and Japan. Clearly, that's not viable or desirable for the peoples of Latin America or the world. Beyond that, are there going to be teething difficulties with Belt and Road projects in Latin America? Are there going to be cultural differences, misunderstandings? No doubt some bad deals and some bad business practices as well. It's inevitable. But I would put these in the category of surmountable problems, problems that can be overcome. Awesome. Thank you for that. We have seven minutes left. But I think we can go over just a little bit because I'd also like to end on a more hopeful note. China has been investing a lot into green energy projects in Latin America. And last October, I believe Cuba joined the Belt and Road Initiative energy partnership. If we're allowed to be optimistic, what could the future look like as China continues to develop bilateral partnerships and trade with Latin American countries? I mean, it's interesting when you look at the data of China's loans in the last few years of the over $136 billion U.S. dollars that have been loaned out by China the last few years, over 93% of over $93 billion of it is in energy projects. There's definitely a keen focus, a very strategic outlook on, one, how to reduce the region's dependence on North America and the U.S. in particular for resolving its energy needs. Two, for countries that are producers of energy sources in the region, how to become less dependent on refining and finishing processes of energy production to be less dependent on the U.S. and other countries. And third, which is key, how to begin thinking about renewable sources of energy. And I think for countries particularly like Cuba, but for other countries in the region, these are three key elements. And sadly, the World Bank doesn't finance these types of projects. The IMF doesn't finance these types of projects. The U.S. government, in fact, has done everything possible to sabotage the financing of these types of projects. Because the agenda of the U.S. government has been, particularly for the last several administrations, is actually to impose ever more in Latin America the use of the U.S.'s fracking gas and oil sources of energy. It's so interconnected between the struggles that have been taking place in the United States, around the pipelines, around line three and so on, to the struggles of people in Latin America. Will Latin America be allowed to actually have energy sovereignty is the big debate? And I think China's investments are sort of pushing their regard. I think there's still multiple questions that, like Carlo said, have to be sorted out. I think there are going to be contradictions that can be surpassed and can be overcome and can be solved. But there are many complicated elements that still have to be seen about, for example, how do all these countries integrate more and more, not just in terms of their local economies, but in terms of the regional economy itself, of how to actually build towards energy sovereignty. I think there's going to have to be also the element that often, again, the IMF and the World Bank ignore, which is that for a continent like ours, which has been deprived due to neoliberalism, due to colonialism, due to economic processes of destruction of the Washington consensus, we've been deprived of the technicians, we have been deprived of the scientists, we have been deprived of people capable of running many of our own energy programs and sources will be to actually get training programs. And that's one of the main things that China is offering through this process of BRI. I mean, for the first time, there are a few countries that have a long history in this already, like Mexico and Brazil, economic giants in the region, Argentina as well. But for countries, for example, like Guatemala, like the Dominican Republic, even for countries like Haiti, who want to think about how to deal with their own the energy issues that come with low shedding, blackouts, etc., sending people to be trained and developed in China is a key thing for how these countries begin to rebuild their sovereignty. So this is in the future, might be one, an area of huge contradiction with the U.S., because it's one of the areas of trade and in relation to China that most create contradiction with U.S. interest in the region. We already saw what that meant in Bolivia, when the source of the Kuwaiti could say was actually over Bolivia's right to develop its own energy resources without interference from the U.S. The fact that Bolivia chose over all competitors to develop lithium and other energy resources with China under its own conditions, with its own technicians, with the development of its own priorities and agendas, we saw what the contradictions of that were. But this is for Latin America almost a do or die situation. Either we fight for our sovereignty fully in energy, politically, socially, culturally and otherwise with the help of an equal partner like China, or we submit to more centuries of being essentially the yard front or back of the United States government. Yeah, just in relation to Cuba, I think this kind of blossoming friendship between Cuba and China over the last 30 years, it's really one of the most politically profound components of the overall China-Latin America-China-Caribbean relationship. Obviously, there's a basic ideological affinity there, as Xi Jinping put it, when he was in Havana in 2014. He said, China and Cuba were both socialist countries, and we've got common beliefs and common objectives that unite our two peoples. But as you're no doubt aware, China and Cuba have had a pretty complicated relationship in the 60s and 70s and 80s, basically as a kind of side effect of the Sino-Soviet split. But in the special period, in the 90s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, China's support was really crucial in Cuba. One of the first deals very early on in the 90s was actually for China to provide a million low-cost bicycles to Havana. And levels of aid, trade investment, have just been steadily picking up since then. And now China accounts for one-third of Cuban imports and exports, which is a lot, if you bear in mind the kind of physical distance between the two countries. And Cuba now joining this Belt and Road Energy Partnership, which is a component of the BRI focused specifically on energy security and on clean energy, it could be really transformative. Cuba's got very little in the way of fossil fuel reserves. In the old days, in the 60s, 70s, 80s, it was almost completely dependent on Soviet oil. In the 2000s, luckily, Hugo Chávez got elected in 1999 and immediately established a great relationship between Venezuela and Cuba, in which Venezuela basically supplied Cuba's energy needs. But Cuba is a country that continues to have very significant and growing energy needs. And without the ability to reliably meet those needs. And at the same time, it's a country that's, it's a trailblazer in sustainability and environmental issues. Cuba for over three decades has been a consistent and often pretty lonely voice in international forums highlighting the urgency of the climate crisis, the biodiversity crisis. It's all very well for Joe Biden in 2021, 2022 to get up at the UN General Assembly and say, yeah, we've got a climate crisis, guys. Fidel was doing that in the 80s and 90s. And everyone was like, yeah, yeah, whatever, Fidel. So it's a priority for the Cuban government to develop clean energy. Unfortunately, at the moment, it's only five or 6% of its power that comes from renewable sources. But it's got a goal, a short-term goal of getting to 25% renewable by the end of this decade. And China's got a very big role to play in terms of the infrastructure for that, you know, China's established itself as by far the global leader in solar power and wind power. So it's a great opportunity. If you look, you know, further further in the continent, Argentina has also signed up to the Belt and Road. And that deal that's just been signed, you know, a couple of weeks ago includes two hydroelectric dams, the expansion of Argentina's biggest solar park, which was built by China, by the way, and the construction of a new nuclear power plant, which opens up a different discussion about the desirability of nuclear power. But certainly, you know, the two sides see it as an important component of the drive towards zero carbon. Nicaragua is another trailblazer in renewables and has also just signed up to the BRI. And zero carbon energy is very much part of that agreement. So while the West is, it's increasingly talking a good game on renewables, on getting to zero carbon, on saving the planet, on preventing climate breakdown, climate catastrophe, the West is actually making pretty slow progress on renewable energy. And what it's definitely not doing is meeting its commitments. It's clear, you know, legal responsibility and obligation to help developing countries transition to zero carbon, while it's not sharing its technology. Actually, it's South South cooperation, led by China, and focused around increasingly the Belt and Road, that offers a really important opportunity for the countries of the global South to get on this path of sustainability. Thank you for that. It's really exciting to think that there is progress somewhere in the world on, you know, carbon neutral green energy. So we're about at time. So I just want to thank both Carlos and Manolo again for being our lovely speakers today and in viewing us with so much knowledge. I'm soaking it in right now. Thank you again for sharing your perspectives with us. And we really appreciate you taking the time to speak with us today, despite all that's going in the world, all that's going on in the world right now. So thank you again to our lovely co-sponsors and to everyone who tuned in. So thank you again. Big hugs to all of you. We keep fighting on alongside Code Pink and all our friends around the world who believe in peace. Thank you everyone.


Good morning, Hickets Tuesday. So I live in Indiana, a state most known for not being known for much. Like, we have a race car thing, some professional sports teams. Our children's museum is being attacked by dinosaurs, which is pretty cool, but that's about it. Hold on, quick road trip. Here's the kind of state we are. Indiana Limestone was used to build a lot of very famous buildings in America, including the Empire State Building, but none of those famous buildings is actually in Indiana. There is one thing Indiana should be famous for, though, which is our state's largest cemetery, Crown Hill, here in Indianapolis. Wait, hold on, like us on Facebook? Oh my god. At any rate, Indiana may not be able to claim many superlatives, but Crown Hill is the last and final resting place of more U.S. vice presidents than any other location on Earth. Here, for instance, is the grave of Thomas Hendricks, who was vice president for about eight months in 1885. And here is the mausoleum of Thomas R. Marshall, who was vice president from 1913 to 1921. Marshall was known for his self-deprecating sense of humor, once writing, Indiana is the mother of vice presidents, home to more second-class men than any other state. And here is the grave of Charles Fairbanks, who served as VP from 1905 to 1909 under Teddy Roosevelt. Fairbanks is most remembered today for actively working against the policies of the president he served under, but he is also remembered for his truly remarkable goatee, which might be the best facial hair in U.S. vice presidential history. One thing all Indiana vice presidents have in common, by the way, not one of them has gone on to become president. 18% of the U.S. vice presidents who never became president are from Indiana, a state that contains just 2% of the U.S. population. But honestly, when I walk around Crown Hill and think about what makes Indianapolis interesting, I do not think mostly of the vice presidents or dignitaries buried here. Crown Hill is a huge cemetery. It has over 25 miles of paved roads and contains over 200,000 graves. And when I am here, I think of all these people for whom Indianapolis was home, their loves and losses and ambitions, the way that together they both made history and were subjected to it. I think about how all these people and so many more built the place where I now live, and I think about how all my neighbors and I are now making Indianapolis whatever it will be for the people who live here in the future, the people who will call Indianapolis home when I am, well, here at Crown Hill. The first person buried at Crown Hill was Lucy Ann Seaton, who died of tuberculosis in 1864 at the age of 33. She and her family were new to the area, and in the local newspaper, her husband posted an announcement that read in part, the first burial at Crown Hill Cemetery will take place today. The husband of the deceased is a stranger to this city. We hope this invitation to the public to join in the funeral exercises will be accepted by a goodly number. And although almost no one in Indianapolis knew Lucy Ann Seaton, hundreds and hundreds of people showed up for the funeral to help her husband and children mourn, and ever since, people of our city have regularly stopped at Seaton's grave to pay their respects. And that, to me, is the best of Indianapolis. Hank, I'll see you on Friday.


Hi friends, welcome back to my channel and a very special welcome. If you're new here, my name is Jen. I'm a certified weight loss and nutrition coach and I'm on WW personal point. Happy Sunday. It is not only Sunday, but it is the day of the very, very, very long awaited Ninja creamy video. The last couple of Sundays I've posted my Q and A's. You guys have been loving those and thank you again for everybody who asked questions. I will link those two videos down below. So it is now time. It is now time for Ninja creamy ice cream video. I am sharing five recipes with you. All are WW friendly, calorie friendly and loaded with protein. Oh, and delicious. So if you're excited, give this video a thumbs up. Subscribe if you're not because I upload lots and lots of new videos every week, five to be exact. And check out the description box. I will link all the recipes, the Ninja creamy ice cream maker. I will find the cheapest one, the most affordable one and link that down below for you. You'll also find links and discounts to my favorite things. Nutrition coaching. I can't recommend macros, calories, enough. And I have one on one coaching for accountability.  We'd love to have you. So we have ice cream to make. And in fact, we have a taste test with Troy. So let's jump in. So we're going to start making ice cream. We're going to do five different kinds of high protein, low point, low calorie ice cream with the Ninja creamy. You have to prepare your ice cream base a day ahead so you can throw it in the freezer and have it freeze solid. So I have five of the little Ninja creamy containers. You do receive two with your Ninja creamy and then I ordered a three pack off of Amazon. So I'll link those down below for you. And another thing I grabbed off of Amazon is the food flavoring oils. So this is what they look like. They're just little tiny bottles of different flavored oils. So apple, raspberry, coconut, chocolate, green tea, you can use these in your ice cream bases. If you want to use maybe a vanilla protein shake or chocolate protein shake, you can add in one of these oils to change up the flavor. These are from the brand Nomeca food flavoring. So I'll link these to all of this is off of Amazon. So let's get started on our first ice cream base. The first ice cream we're going to make, I am super, super excited about. Now you can make ice cream just with a protein shake, but you need some type of thickener or stabilizer. So my favorite thing to use is sugar free pudding mix. I find that it gives it a nice flavor, nice consistency. So we are doing a cherry pie ice creams. You're going to need a vanilla protein shake of your choice. I have the Elani fit shakes. I also have the muscle milk, no sugar added vanilla shakes. I love both of those. I will link all of the protein shakes that I talk about and that I use in my ice cream in the description box for you as well. But for this particular one, we're going to do the Elani vanilla and then you're going to need a can of no sugar added cherry pie filling and some sugar free vanilla pudding. That's it. These recipes are super simple for how amazing the ice cream is. So super simple. We're going to add our Elani or whatever vanilla protein shake you're using to your ice cream pie. We're adding one third cup of the cherry pie filling and then one tablespoon of vanilla sugar free pudding mix. And then you want to give that a good stir. Just make sure that pudding mix is mixed really well and anything else that you add to it, whether it be fresh fruit or whatever you're adding in with the protein shake, make sure that it is mixed together really well. And that's it. We have a cherry pie ice cream. We're going to throw the lid on that and then that actually gets put into the freezer for about 24 hours. Our next ice cream is going to be raspberry cheesecake protein ice cream. I know you don't see any raspberries because those go in at the very end after our mix is frozen. So let me show you what you'll need for the ice cream base. You're going to need some unsweetened almond milk, vanilla protein powder of your choice. I would recommend devotion angel food cake. It's probably the best for any type of baking or ice cream, but I have this integrated nutrition on hand. I'll link them both down below for you. You'll need some sweetener. And as always, I am using La Canto. That will also be in the description box with 15% off.  So to put this one together, we need one cup of almond milk, two tablespoons of sugar free cheesecake pudding mix, two tablespoons of La Canto monk fruit sweetener, tablespoon of our low fat cream cheese and two tablespoons of cottage cheese. Then I think for fun, we're going to pop in a tiny bit of this raspberry food flavoring, literally a tiny, tiny bit. And then we need to add in one scoop of vanilla protein powder. And whenever I have a cream cheese base or a base that has a decent amount of pudding, more than a tablespoon or so and protein powder, I like to use my little handheld frother to mix it because we want to make sure everything is mixed really well. The cream cheese, the protein powder, that way we don't have any clumps when we go to run it through, when we run our base through our Ninja Creamy. So I'm going to give it a quick mix and I will put my little handheld frother down below too. Another amazing Amazon find that I use all the time. Another tip is you can throw your lid on and then give it a good shake too before you pop it into your freezer. But there's our raspberry cheesecake ice cream. Next we're making chips ahoy ice cream. I have heard this one is incredible. I mean absolutely decadent and incredible. Three ingredients, super simple. So you're going to need some of the ghost chips ahoy protein powder. This is one of my very, very favorite protein powders. It's incredibly delicious. And like I said, all of this will be down in the description box for you. You're going to need some oat milk and again some sweetener. So we're adding one cup of oat milk, one teaspoon of licorice and one scoop of ghost protein powder. And again, mix that up with your little handheld frother until fully mixed. Give it a quick shake. Ooh, you can see all the chips ahoy cookies in there. Oh, this one I'm telling you so good. So we're going to pop it in the freezer. Next up we have chocolate fudge ice cream. This one is a great base because it's so versatile. You could add so many mix-ins. I just can't wait to share with you all the mix-ins we're going to do. But let me show you what's in our chocolate fudge ice cream. You're going to need some almond milk. You really could use any milk that you want. You could use low fat milk, fair life milk, almond milk, oat milk, whatever you would like. You'll need some chocolate protein powder. I'm just using the rest of my integrated nutrition. But like I mentioned previously, devotion and their brownie batter would be ideal for this. It's just the best for this type of recipe. But I'm using up what I have on hand. You're going to need some sweetener. And again, I have Lakonto granulated. This time we're using a little bit of xanthan gum, which is a thickener, which works really good with this particular recipe to make it more fudge-like. And then some of the chocolate fudge sugar-free jello pudding mix. So we're adding one cup of almond milk, one tablespoon of chocolate fudge sugar-free pudding mix, one teaspoon of xanthan gum, one teaspoon of Lakonto, and one scoop of chocolate protein powder. Give that a good mix. And the best chocolate fudge ice cream base. And the last base is Fall Inspired, of course. We are doing pumpkin pecan ice cream. So let's take a look at what's in the base. First, you're going to need a premier protein pumpkin spice. You can also make this recipe using cottage cheese and pumpkin puree. I will put the additional recipe idea down in the description box for you. If you do not have the pumpkin premier, you can do it a little bit different way. So I'll share that as well. You'll need some sweetener, some canned pumpkin, and some vanilla sugar-free pudding. I can't tell you how excited I am for this. So we're going to add our pumpkin premier protein, one-third cup of pumpkin puree. This is just 100% natural pumpkin, not the pumpkin pie filling. A teaspoon of Lakonto. And for fun, I have some pumpkin pie spice. I want to add about a teaspoon. I just decided to really amp up the pumpkin flavor. You guys know I love pumpkin anything. And then last but not least, one tablespoon of vanilla pudding mix. And we'll give that a quick mix. It smells incredible. It literally smells like pumpkin pie. Another addition you could make to this base if you want it is add a little bit of vanilla extract. But since I used the vanilla pudding, we're going to be just fine. But that is another option for you as well. And we have a pumpkin pecan ice cream base. The next day. So here's what the ninja creamy looks like. I actually shared this in a what I eat in a day. When I first got it, we actually made a protein shake ice cream in there. But I thought that I would show you quickly what it looks like. It comes in several colors. I picked up white. There are a lot of different types of ice creams you can make. So ice cream sorbet, light ice cream, smoothie bowl, gelato milkshake. And then this button right here is for mixing. So we're going to be adding quite a few different mix in. So we'll re spin it adding with the mix in button. Everything gets put into this handy dandy little compartment down here. The lid is actually where the blade is that spins the ice cream. So the pint just sits right inside of here. So the first ice cream we're making is the pumpkin pecan. I'm super excited for this. It's funny because when it freezes, there's always this little mountain in the middle, especially if you use a protein shake. I don't know why it doesn't affect anything with the ice cream, but you are going to want to take your pints out of the freezer for about half of an hour. So you've up to an hour before you spin them. What I do is just throw them in the microwave for about two minutes. And that makes them just a little bit softer so that they'll spin easily.  You'll know when it's in place because there isn't a line button. So you'll know when your lid is on securely. So it is locked into place and ready to go into the ice cream maker and then lock it into place and the ninja ice cream maker turn it on. So when you're ready, just twist it to the right and it locks into place. The lights turn on and for this particular ice cream, we're using ice cream. And then the magic happens. It automatically turns off when it is done and then we're going to hit the button on the side here to release the bowl, pop it out, get the side button here and turn it to release the lid. So here is what we have so far, but we want to add in our mix-ins. You want to take a good look at your ice cream and see how creamy it is. If it comes out a little bit more on the powdery side, you can add a little bit more of whatever liquid that you use. We use the premier protein shake. So I would add just a tablespoon or two of almond milk, but this actually looks pretty good. So we're going to add in our mix-in, which is going to be two tablespoons of pecans. I'm going to dig a hole in the center. Just move your ice cream off to the side and you can check the consistency at this time as well and just see if it's the right consistency, which this actually looks pretty good.  I am going to go ahead and add just a little bit of almond milk about a tablespoon or so. Put your lid back on and so this is when we're going to use mix-ins. So pop it into place, hit the mix-in button, and it will automatically mix in our pecans. So here's our pumpkin ice cream with pecans. My gosh, it smells so good. You can see that it is the perfect ice cream consistency with all of those chopped pecans in there.  You do not have to respin it when you eat it again. Just let it sit out for a couple minutes in thought. You also have the option to respin it again. Totally up to you. I generally don't. I just pull it out and let it thaw for a few minutes before I eat it. So let's give pumpkin pecan a taste test. Okay, so pumpkin pecan. Really good. It's really, really good. Nice and creamy, like ice cream should be. I like the pecans for the added crunch. Very, very pumpkin-y and you get a ton of protein. I'll go ahead and put all the information, points, calories, protein, all of that here on the screen for you. 10 hours have passed. Next up is the raspberry cheesecake. Now this was the interesting one that had the cottage cheese and the cream cheese in it. So I'm excited to see how this tastes and if it makes it a little bit creamier. I'm going to spin this one on ice cream as well. So the raspberry cheesecake ice cream is spun. Oh, that looks really good. This one, we're adding a couple of different mix-ins. So because it's raspberry cheesecake, we're going to add in some raspberries. This one has a little bit more room on top, so I'm not going to dig my little well. I'm just going to toss the raspberries on top. I would say about a half of a cup or so and then what's really going to amp this up is we're going to mix in some of the Catalina Crunch cinnamon toast cereal and that's going to give the graham cracker crust vibe that is in a cheesecake. So I'm going to add about a quarter cup of the Catalina Crunch cereal, pop the lid on and give it a quick spin on mix-in. And here is the raspberry cheesecake. Oh my gosh, it smells super, super good. You can see that the raspberries got pretty pureed, but the cereal, the cinnamon cereal, is just crushed up. So it's going to give it that texture and that little bit of crunch. Cheers! This one's really good. It's super creamy. This is the one that has cottage cheese in it. Oh. Cottage cheese and cream cheese and then fresh raspberries. Yeah, good. Yum. Really good. Next up is the chocolate covered cherry. So this is the one that had the no sugar added cherry pie filling and the protein shake. So we're going to go ahead and spin this one on ice cream. So here is the cherry chocolate covered cherry. You can see that it's a little bit more on the powdery side. So we need to do our mix-in. So what I'm going to do is dig a little well down in the middle. We're going to add in a little bit of the sugar-free cherry pie filling and about a tablespoon of Lily's chocolate chips. And then I'm going to put just a splash of milk just because it is a little bit on the powdery side. And then we're tossing this back in under mix-in. Okay, this looks really good. Adding that little bit of milk definitely helped make it more like ice cream. The cherries are all mixed in. It looks super good. All right, let's try it. Mmm. Not very sweet. Okay, good. But it tastes really good. It's not as sweet as I was expecting it to be. If you don't like super, super sweet ice cream, I mean, it has really good flavor. You can taste the cherry, you can taste the chocolate chips, but also add a little bit of sweetener. But it is really, really good. Just not as sweet as the other ones. All right, another one done. Oh my gosh, this looks so good. Look at that. It looks like a frosty from Wendy's. Oh, that looks so good. It's definitely a little bit more on that frosty, airy texture, which I'm betting is because we put in the xantham gum, which is a little bit of a thickener. So you could eat it just as is this chocolate fudge, but I'm actually going to add some of the flavoring company salted caramel crunch peanut butter. This is a powdered peanut butter. I'm going to throw in a couple of tablespoons and then spin it again on mixing and see if we can get chocolate peanut butter. All right, chocolate fudge taste test. You will not see anymore of Troy because he doesn't like chocolate. And the last two have chocolate in them. But like I said, this one is definitely a little bit more airy, a little bit more frosty like because of the xantham gum. Now you can admit that because the pudding as you saw in the other recipes made it nice and thick. Anyways, this just changes the texture a little bit, makes it a little bit more like I said, light and airy. Definitely a different consistency. It kind of gives me whipped cream, cool whip consistency, but the chocolate and the peanut butter flavor is on point. It tastes like a Reese's peanut butter cup. So last but not least is the ghost protein powder chips ahoy. This one, I think I'm going to make it a little bit more of a milkshake consistency. And then we're going to do probably the best mix in of today's video. So this one is a little bit looser consistency, which is what I was going for, more of a milkshake style. We're going to add in some of the chips ahoy dessert toppings. I mean, is that not the perfect accompaniment to this? So I'm going to add in one tablespoon of the chips ahoy and then I'm just going to spin it quickly on mix in just to get those mixed in. May or may not be really excited about this. It's thick like a milkshake, but definitely more runny than ice cream. Wow. That is really good. That may be one of my favorites. The chunks of chips ahoy are still there. So you get the crunch and then the chips ahoy protein powder is so good. I am definitely making this again in ice cream form because this is so good. So those are all five recipes for the Ninja Creamy that I wanted to share with you today. Don't forget that there's other options on the machine like gelato and sorbet and smoothie bowls. I will be sharing a lot of other recipes down the road, just plugged into other videos like my What I Eat in a Days, maybe in a meal prep. I might do a smoothie bowl recipe, so definitely stay tuned for more. But I wanted to share with you some fun ways to use the ice cream feature of the Ninja Creamy because let's be honest, everybody likes ice cream. Thank you for joining me for today's Ninja Creamy video. I hope you enjoyed seeing all five recipes. They are all amazing and I can't wait to try more and more and more recipes. So stay tuned for future videos, maybe What I Eat in a Days. I'll include some of the different recipes that I try, but I can't recommend the Ninja Creamy enough. It's a great way to have low-point, low-calorie, macro-friendly ice cream anytime you want it. That's loaded with protein. So if you enjoyed it, don't forget to give it a thumbs up. Subscribe if you're not. I'd love to have you here and check out that description box for everything I shared with you today, including the Ninja Creamy, the recipes, the links and discounts to my favorite things, my nutrition coaching website, and my Facebook group. Come and join us. Happy Sunday friends and I'll see you all in tomorrow's meal prep.


Well, 2021 has been an interesting year, probably not as strange and destructive as 2020. But still, with that being said, 2021 had its fair share of WTF moments. So without further ado, it is now time for us to choose our WTF moment of 2021. Here's how it works. I make four nominations and then I put it up to a vote and let Humanist Report viewers across multiple platforms decide ultimately what the biggest WTF moment of the year was. So here are my nominations. First and foremost, January 6th, it's something that happened at the beginning of the year, but still till this day, it proves to be really significant. It proves how fragile democracy is. And this really, it gave us a warning sign that if we don't take steps to protect democracy and combat lies spread by Donald Trump, then this democracy isn't long for this world. And the big lie that catalyzed that insurrection has influenced GOP controlled states across the country to do voter suppression laws, gerrymander their way to victory once again with newly redrawn districts that disenfranchise a lot of people, mostly minority groups depending on the state. It's a slow moving coup, but it's not over. Like the threat hasn't vanished. And I still think it's important to focus on this since Democrats still have a limited amount of time to act. Once they lose power, then I think that the opportunity has been missed. So January 6th proves to be an important thing. And I think that individuals who downplayed the significance of this really should reevaluate what this means for democracy and how something like this should never occur in a stable democracy that's functioning. Democracy is in danger. This showed us that that is indeed the case. And I think we should take it seriously. My second nomination is Nina Turner's loss. Let me be clear. I never assumed for a moment that this was a guaranteed victory. I knew it was going to be an uphill battle. But I mean, I had good reasons to think that Nina Turner would indeed win. One poll from like May showed that she had a 35 point lead, but still it didn't go that way. And even on the day of the election, I kind of had this sick feeling in my gut that she was going to lose. Still seeing it, it really just it sent me into a depression that lasted a couple of days. Because, you know, when you see a leader on the cusp of getting into a position of power, where she could really make a lot of big moves and that just kind of falls apart after 2020, you know, it's devastating. It's sad. My next nomination is the abortion ban that was codified into law in Texas that the Supreme Court allowed to go into effect. I mean, in 2021, we're essentially going back to coat hanger abortions in dark alleys. And that's truly horrifying. You'd think that as society progresses and we become more egalitarian, things like this are no longer arguable. But now we're looking at the prospect of abortion in the United States being illegal again and unsafe, which is going to kill women. So the fact that abortion was effectively banned in Texas, what the fuck? How could I not nominate that? Now, my final nomination, I had to choose the QAnon JFK Junior Gathering. I think that this is really worrying because if this many people are that detached from reality, we've got a lot of issues in this country. So QAnon subscribers showed up to an event in Dallas, Texas where they anticipated the return of JFK Junior has been gone for decades, but they thought that he would show himself announced to the world that he hasn't been dead all this time. And not only that, he's running a joint presidential run with Donald Trump in 2024. And he's going to be the running mate. I like this story makes me lose IQ points. I don't even know how to describe it. But it's certainly worthy of a nomination. So yeah, it's one of my nominations. Now, having said that, though, it was hard to narrow it down because, again, this year was unique, we'll say. But here's some honorable mentions. The COVID-19 Delta surge, which kind of felt like we went back to square one with a pandemic. Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger, the Secretary of State of Georgia, where he pressured him to find votes so he can still the election. India Walton's loss.  Michael Flynn outright endorsing a Myanmar style military coup in the United States. This is a former White House official endorsing a military coup. That is insane. Dennis Prager intentionally getting COVID-19 so he can get natural immunity.  And also the voter suppression laws that have been passed around the country. Now, let's get to the results. So when it comes to Twitter with 746 votes, the January 6th insurrection hands down is the biggest WTF moment with 66.4%. On Patreon with a total of 40 votes, we have the January 6th insurrection winning hands down with 30 total votes. Now on YouTube, which is where we got the most amount of votes with 10,000 plus in total, the January 6th insurrection with 74% was the YouTube audience's biggest WTF moment. So overall, across three different platforms, my audience overwhelmingly agreed that the January 6th insurrection was by far the most WTF moment of 2021 with the QAnon gathering coming in a distant second place. Now, let's get to some comments. Bill on Twitter writes, even though it was so long ago at this point, the insurrection will be forever etched in my mind. No way I can vote any other way. Yeah, I get it. Mike Murdock on Patreon writes, no contest. It's the January 6th capital insurrection. It showed that how close we were having our own night of broken glass and the fear that it will happen again, even if we even let our guard down for only a second. Sadly, most Democrats are not taking this seriously and I fear it may happen again, but it will be worse than January 6th and I fear this too. Erin held on YouTube writes, abortion ban was worse, lasting consequences, but the whole reaction and amnesia from the riot pertaining to the capital insurrection is insane. Nobel-ang on YouTube says, the JFK junior one is absurd in a hilarious way. Everything else is just actual shook WTF. Redacted on YouTube says, January 6th changed my life and the way I look at politics forever. Matt Ryan on YouTube says, Nina Turner's loss really hurt. She would have been amazing at the job. The DNC machine was never going to let her get that seat. They would rather a Republican get the seat than her. So there you have it. You know, it's odd to think that the biggest WTF moment of 2021 would be something that happened just days into the year, but it just goes to show you how significant January 6th was. So yeah, I agree. I think that January 6th was indeed the biggest WTF moment of the year. So that event was definitely worthy of this award.


There's a great Leon Festinger quote, I don't know if you've heard it. A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him the facts and figures and he questions your sources. Appeal the logic and he fails to see your point. You got wrong. Alright guys, welcome back to the channel. If you're new, my name is Bobby. Guys, today I'm going to review the Chris Cressa versus James Wilkes debate that was hosted on the Joe Rogan experience. Usually debates start by finding common ground and then you go from there. However, it was crystal clear to see that James Wilkes had a totally different motivation for this debate. He wants to debunk Chris Cressa. He wants to character assassinate him and he wanted to gain Joe Rogan's approval. Joe, you're going to really realize here what Chris is doing. He's misrepresenting and he's wrong, Joe. You've got to admit that in this case, do you question that I spent a thousand hours and I've spent another 2,000 hours looking at peer reviewed research since then? You got wrong. Second of all, do you see what Chris just did? Joe, come on, I've come in here. I've heard it already, yeah. So we'll get to another point because you were wrong about many other things as well. How am I doing, by the way, defending the film? So at first they're talking about the elephants in the room, gladiators. They claim that the gladiators were vegan, right? And if we can just prove they think the whole film is based on this premise. That was just like an inciting incident for me to start digging into it. First of all, Fabian Kent said they were predominantly vegetarian and I said they ate mostly plants. As James Wilkes said, there is absolutely no reason to believe that those gladiators were vegetarian or vegan. And on top of that, we do not know what other findings would have shown. We are simply talking about a few skeletons that have been examined. But either way, there is no point in talking about this. The argument was that gladiators have strong bones. Gladiators died very, very young. They lived up to 25 at most. And that of course implies that those young guys would have strong bones. That has nothing to do with their diet. Then they proceeded to talk about dairy and cancer correlation. And that was truly hard to watch. An absolute embarrassment. James Wilkes failed to understand basic math. He cited Chris Cressor's comment, which was 84% of meta-analyses on dairy consumption showed either no association or an inverse association between dairy and cancer. But big shocker, the reality of things is 71% showed no evidence and 13% showed decreased risk. Wow, mind blown. Chris Cressor debunked. You got wrong. So all that Chris did is put the 71 and the 13 together and added up to 84%, which led him to say that the 84% of meta-analyses on dairy consumption showed either no association or an inverse association. He could have said 87% showed no risk or an increased risk. Instead, he chose to summarize it saying 84%. That's the bulk of it. That's 84%. Versus 87%, it doesn't mean. No, no, no. 87% shows increased risk is only 16%. No evidence to increased risk to get 87%. That's illogical. But we're talking about something causing cancer, James. Exactly, so he shouldn't be making that claim. Increased risk is what we're looking for. 71%, the bulk of the evidence shows no evidence. That's exactly what my point. You have no risk for logic. Yet again, you can see that James Wilkes is really not interested in debunking any meat-based science. He just wants to character assassinate Chris Cressor. Which, by the way, has any of your work or your ideas been published in the scientific literature? No, I've never claimed that it has. I just wondered. You didn't wonder. No, I did wonder. I couldn't find anything. But that's not what you were saying. You were saying that to try to make it seem that he's less of an expert. Same argumentation when they started talking about low-carb. Chris Cressor had a certain definition of low-carb to moderate-carb diets for his clients. And Wilkes, on the other hand, appealed to authority for the hundredth time and said that the peer-reviewed literature shows different numbers. In philosophy, there's this illogical fallacy called appeal to authority. The World Health Organization, the FAO, the American Heart Association, the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines. Appeal to authority. Dr. Walter Willett, who is the chair of Nutrition at Harvard, he's one of the most published nutrition scientists of all time, if not the most published, appeal to authority. Should we trust Walter Willett, who at the time was the chair of Nutrition at Harvard, appeal to authority? You're saying that Richard Rang and the chair of anthropology that we interviewed does not represent the scientific consensus of anthropology. Appeal to authority. This has been evaluated by hundreds of PhD researchers. Appeal to authority. The Defense Health Agency has reviewed this film in detail appeal to authority. And these are master's degrees in nutrition, PhDs in nutrition, to get that accreditation appeal to authority. So what does that mean? Is James Work's correct and Chris Cressa is a liar? No, not at all. It depends on context. That is the main important thing here. Are we talking about athletes?  Or to immune disorders and whatnot? Every single person needs a different approach. And the funny thing is that James Work's will even agree with me. He debunks himself by saying... I'm not advocating high carb or low carb. I think that people can do healthy and well. I think for athletes, they need a lot more carbs, which of course getting those from plants. I think there's certain athletes that can, if it's slow and steady state where you're getting more fat oxidation, I think that, you know, slow and steady state athletes can do, but like an MMA fighter, a soccer player, a basketball player. Exactly. Athletes have different needs. And therefore Chris Cressa is absolutely correct here to use the percentage that he needs in order to provide results for his clients. He does not need to appeal to authority in order to set a percentage of carbohydrates which is needed for his clients. So then they move on to B12. Precious B12, vegan's favorite topic. And finally, finally, James Wilkes caught Chris Cressa. This is why he is here, right? Experts and their opinions are not Chris Cressa in his opinion. So you see what Chris did to represent this. He finally can prove him wrong. He can show how bad Chris Cressa is and that he is a liar, a scam artist, not an expert. So Chris, would you consider yourself a nutrition expert? But honestly, what did he catch him on?  Wilkes says that it's common practice to feed B12 to animals. Cressa, on the other hand, says that that never happens. So in order to debunk Cressa, Wilkes shows couple of B12 supplements for animals on Google. And that is his proof. That is his evidence. Great, we can play the same game here on Instagram and we can show what Sean Baker just reposted. Here we have a farmer saying, tough to listen to that podcast. He was so annoying and obviously struggled to prove himself over the evidence Chris uses. I don't get why Joe thinks the vegan did so well. By the way, I'm a rancher. We don't give B12 and I don't know any rancher who does. We do chickens, pigs, and a lot of beef cattle. None of our animals get given a B12 supplement. I've also never even heard of it in the industry, let alone it being a common practice. So there you have it, yet again, another vegan claiming something without being exposed to the industry. Here on this channel, we are in contact with real farmers, but somehow a vegan will show up, show me a study that disproves what the farmer said. It is absolutely ridiculous, as yet again another appeal to authority fallacy. But hey, let's entertain the idea. Let's say that James Wilkes has a point. Every single animal in the animal industry, factory farming, gets supplemented with B12. Let that be so. Still, even if that would hold true, it would be nothing but an appeal to majority that completely excludes everybody that follows healthy eating habits, somebody that would source grass, fat, beef, or wild caught fish. But yet again, this does not prove anything. If anything, Wilkes got a point because Chris Cressor didn't know how many animals get supplemented in reality. But let's face it, neither does Wilkes. The best way to get B12 is to take a supplement, period. And you're wrong if you think otherwise. The most frustrating aspect of this part of the debate was that Wilkes recommends everybody has to take B12 supplements. Just because he looked into vegans and standard American dieters, this is why he recommends a supplement for everybody, right? Amazing, vegan logic. Not just all supplement, doesn't matter. Why should we eat whole foods? If you eat grass, fat, beef, there is absolutely no supplementation whatsoever in those animals. The healthy ruminants that create their own B12, you get supremely bioavailable healthy whole foods. Even when they looked into the science of B12, Wilkes still failed. All he said is, yes, true, vegans have low B12 levels, but if they supplement, they are accurate. Great in the blood plasma. However, Chris says, how about the holotranscobalamin levels, right? That is the real indicator for depletion. And he even shows a study where vegans have lower holotranscobalamin levels, no matter if they supplement or not. And that is the whole point here.  Of course it will. However, how about your body? Does it get absorbed? And Wilkes cannot prove that either. And you're wrong if you think otherwise. Then they proceed to talk about peanut butter sandwiches and how peanut butter is so protein rich. Amazing. James Wilkes tells Chris Cressor that he lied again because if you look at a peanut butter sandwich, it is not only the peanut butter that has protein, but the bread as well. And if you combine the bread and the peanut butter, you have even more protein than a regular steak. How amazing is that? Yet again, vegan logic. Completely fails to admit that we are talking about processed junk food. We're talking about bread and peanut butter and we're comparing it to grass-fed beef. In which universe does that make sense? Of course, in vegan fairy tale land where people are completely macro focused, right? It has enough protein. It has just as much protein. It is the same. If you look at the nutritional profile of peanuts or bread and compare it to grass-fed beef, what will you find? Of course, yet again, you don't have B12. This is why you have to supplement. Take a supplement, period. But on top of that, you have problematic anti-nutrients. You have gluten in the bread. You have aflatoxins in the peanut butter. How is that a healthy food? I could compare a pea protein isolate to steak and say that the pea protein isolate has more protein, but that is not the point. And that is the whole debate in a nutshell. Of course, they talked about a couple of other things. I don't know about you guys, but looking at James' works, I can say the vegan deficiencies are kicking in. He already has those vegan eyes and he's super aggressive.  He does not seem balanced at all. His whole argument isn't at home attack based on nothing. He fails to prove that meat and dairy is bad for you. But there's no evidence that meat is bad for you. No, we can get into that. But this is something that's actually recently been established by mainstream medicine. You understand that, right? There is absolutely no evidence supporting his claim. All the studies that he himself listed didn't prove anything. They definitely did not prove that meat is bad for you, dairy is bad for you or whatnot. He didn't even prove that meat predominantly plant-based. I say usually you can say who's right or wrong in the debate by the way they are conducting themselves. The need for approval, the aggressive nature, the constant ad hominem attacks shows me that James' works is not confident in what he was saying. Overall, it was really, really hard to watch. I tried watching it on twice the speed, but I couldn't keep up with James' works as it is. He looked as if he was on speed or Adderall.  Nobody seemed to be too happy aside from Joe Rogan. And I'm quite shocked. I still hope and believe that Joe Rogan is trolling us with his Instagram comment. All right guys, but this it for today's video. If you liked it, leave it a thumbs up. If you haven't subscribed already, please do so. And if you want to support the channel, all the links are in the description box below. We have Amazon links for you. You can head over there, buy whatever you might wanna buy and it doesn't cost you anything extra. We get a small share that is a fantastic way to support Bobby's perspective. If you want grass-fed beef delivered to your doorstep, butcher boxes for you. And we have CBD links as well. On top of that guys, consider supporting Bobby's perspective through Subscribestar or Patreon. We have a VIP community there where we have Skype group calls every single week where we can discuss any topic no matter if it is health, lifestyle or nutrition related. On top of that by joining, you straight away receive your comprehensive nutrition guide. It is an e-book that teaches you the basics of nutrition but goes beyond as well and is catering to your personal goals no matter if you're keto, primal, paleo or even raw. All right, but this is it. Thank you very much for your support and as always, much love and peace. And I am a combatives instructor, okay? I've heard that. Right, so I'm just saying, I'm putting myself down. I understand. I'm not like a super intelligent guy. That's the general consensus. Can I just finish with that? And I'm gonna show you. I'm not like a super intelligent guy. Joe, you're gonna really realize here. I'm not like a super intelligent guy. Rather than appeal to authority. You just said yourself that's a rhetorical fallacy. No, it's a fallacy unless it's the appeal to valid authority.