It's a very dark evil force. And I truly hope people know how to battle that. Shelly Flockhart from Dallas Center says she was shocked to see it at the Capitol. OK, come on in. Flockhart organized a prayer group on Wednesday around the Christmas tree in the center of the Rotunda to oppose the satanic display near the stairwell. She calls it dark and evil and says Christians should spiritually fight against it. One, I hope people realize spiritual warfare is real, that there are evil satanic forces that are trying to infiltrate our state. Once again, American evangelicals are learning that religious freedom doesn't just apply to them. And after the satanic temple in Iowa was given permission to exercise their religious liberty by putting up their own holiday display at the state Capitol, predictably mass hysteria ensued. And many Iowan evangelicals are outraged that the Republican governor is not doing enough about this satanic display. For example, Brad Sherman, a Republican lawmaker in Iowa, called for Governor Kim Reynolds to remove the display and even introduce legislation prohibiting the display. But Kim Reynolds resisted that call and released a statement condemning the display as absolutely objectionable, but ultimately chalked it up to a free speech issue, which enraged her right-wing constituents who called a response milk toast. That's not how you spell that, by the way. And not good enough. Others responded saying, a bad interpretation of the First Amendment doesn't supersede our duties and your duties as a civil magistrate to God. And another person chimed in saying, that is at best a disappointing response. Any authority granted to the governor or any other elected officials come from where and to do what? This display is designed to do one thing. Mock the creator who grants that authority. It should be burned on the Capitol steps. Now, despite the criticism, Kim Reynolds did not capitulate, but in her first statement, as you might have saw, she did encourage people to join her at the Capitol for a mass prayer event. And she tweeted about this referencing, while not naming the satanic display, writing, free speech is a right afforded to all. But how we use it matters. Today's event is proof that in the battle between good and evil, good will always prevail. But of course, people were still angry, but before we get to some more responses, it is important to know why that display deserves to be there. Solan explains, see, the Supreme Court long ago created a loophole in the First Amendment to allow religious displays by arguing that as long as every group gets to have one, it doesn't violate the no establishment of religion clause. By putting up altars to Satan next to the annual nativity scenes, the satanic temple makes their point about the silliness of this loophole. More important, however, is the trolling part. Every year, Christian conservatives discover the satanic display and have a loud public temper tantrum about it. In this, Satanist proved their point. Conservatives claim to respect religious plurality, but it's a lie. The overt religious iconography on government property was always about promoting the Christian nationalist view that theirs is the only real American religion. And that right there is exactly it. So you can either have no religious displays at all on public property, or you can allow all religions to have their own displays, but you don't get to play favorites. You can't have your cake and eat it too, because if you just allow one religion to be on public property, that's unconstitutional. It violates the First Amendment. But since conservatives are constitutionally illiterate, they can't understand why the Republican governor isn't just overriding the constitution and taking it down. And because she's not doing that, it's turned into an all-out scandal for Republican governor Kim Reynolds. Conservative news outlet The Post Millennial reports that Kim Reynolds is under fire over the satanic display and the same Republican lawmaker who introduced the bill to ban it is accusing her of being wrong about the legality of it. But she's right and he's actually wrong, but him pretending as if she can or should do something is 50% cope and 50% pandering to his evangelical base. I think that he's probably jockeying for like higher office here saying, look, she just let the Satanism persist, but I would do something about it. Well, no, you couldn't do anything about it either because that's what the constitution allows.  But I mean, despite this being perfectly legal, obviously so, it hasn't stopped Christian conservatives in the state from shitting themselves and having nonstop temper tantrums. For example, this MAGA account on Twitter called it a mockery of our savior, Jesus Christ's birthday and pointed out that the state of Iowa allowed it because the Satanists quote, follow the rules. Yeah, that's pretty much how that works. But let's watch the clip that he shared because at the end, you'll see why he's so triggered. And you know, where the weekend, the Satanic Temple of Iowa came in, put up their display, a spokesperson for the Iowa Department of Administrative Services said, there's a procedure to apply for getting to have your display there, and they followed that and met the guidelines for that. But this display is located near the east door by the stairs on the first floor. Now today, members of the Satanic Temple of Iowa were on hand with the display. They declined to do an interview. They said, told me to refer to the Satanic Temple website. And on that national site, the main issues they are promoting are abortion as a religious right and establishing after school Satan clubs. I'm sure that's gonna go for well. Now the co-founder of the Satanic Temple responded to backlash and his response was perfectly reasonable. We're going to really relish the opportunity to be represented in a public forum. We don't have a church on every street corner. Luching Reeves, co-founder of the Satanic Temple, says this Satanic display is a symbol for their right of religious freedom. He says, if you don't like it, don't look at it. My feeling is, is that if people don't like our displays in public forums, they don't have to engage with them. Yeah, it's really that simple. And here's the thing, if you actually look at the display itself, nothing that it's promoting is objectionable. And we know this because conservative journalist Libby Emmons of the post millennial filmed the display and it advocates for compassion and empathy as well as justice and individual liberty and science and rectifying one's mistakes for purposes of harm reduction. There is literally nothing objectionable here, but Christian conservatives are just too triggered by the boffermint statute to even consider the objectively good values that the Satanic Temple is promoting. And I say this because the responses to that video indicate that that is indeed the case.  False, since the entire religion was established as a hate group against Christian believers. It's a hate crime and people need to file charges against the state for engaging in religious intimidation and hate. Very, very normal reaction here. This was put up during Advent as a mockery of Christianity. This isn't an established religion with a robust history around which our culture was built and it shouldn't be given the same protections as one. Now, that's not the totality of responses. Many atheists also joined in to troll the butthurt Christians, but there's no shortage of outrage over this statue if you decide to look. You're just seeing like a small snapshot, but I do wanna give credit to one Republican lawmaker in Iowa, Representative John Dunwell, who also happens to be a pastor because he released a really thoughtful and lengthy response following the outrage, explaining how this organization got legal permission in the first place to erect their own holiday display and also explaining that even though he personally finds the display objectionable and antithetical to his worldview as a Christian, he's guided by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and thus can't support its removal. And he also adds, it's just an inanimate object with no real power. Therefore, Christians have no reason to be fearful of it. Now listen, him and I probably disagree on everything, but him and I having opposing views, but maintaining that mutual respect for each of us to practice or not practice what we want or don't want to makes living in a pluralistic society possible. It's called freedom. So as an anti-theist, even though I disagree with him and his religion, I respect his principled statement here in support of the statue. But after releasing this well-reasoned and thoughtful statement, go ahead and take a guess as to how evangelicals responded.  This person responded saying, I am literally not reading any of that, but to give quarter to enemies of God is pathetic and contemptible. Now he tried to reason with this person with another long and thoughtful response, only to get this response in return. When you stand before the seat of judgment, are you gonna serve our Lord that word salad? And he just responded by saying, saved by grace. Now this person responded to the original post saying, hmm, all these Christians are saying I'm wrong. Clearly they're incorrect, which is a bit of a rip on the principle skinner meme from The Simpsons. He responded to that saying, the path of Christ is a narrow path rejected by most. Another one here, Satanism is not another religion to give credence to. It is the worship of evil per se. To put it on the level of other religions is a mockery of every religion to ever exist. Everyone should be offended by this. His response, I don't want government empowered to make those decisions. Some more responses here. The more words you use to justify a position merely weakens your position. Coward, Jesus himself would have destroyed it just as he did in the temple and threw everyone out. One nation under God, the people who wrote that would not have said, but we are cool to Satan hanging out here too because let's be inclusive.   Yeah, so there you have it. Now let this be a lesson to everyone. There is no reasoning with Christian supremacists, especially when their emotions are overriding what little logic exists in their tiny brains. And I've learned this the hard way with family. It's just a lost cause. They're operating on an entirely different plane of reality than everyone else. So engaging with them is as useful as engaging with a brick wall. You'll get nowhere. They're just incapable of learning. So it's best to just not even try to convince them because it's not gonna work. They have to at least have that initiative to want to change. But when they're triggered like this, you're not gonna get through to them.  Unintentionally so, but hilarious nonetheless. So yeah, with that being said, Hail Satan and happy holidays, everyone. Strange that she's not, eh? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Sister! Vigina! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!


At our hearings, the most telling testimony was counterintuitive in nature. It came from business leaders, bankers, property owners, health care providers, and government and community leaders who stated again and again that increasing access to legal assistance benefited their own institutional performance and financial bottom lines. We created a public record that justified the funding of civil legal services as making good economic sense for our state. Our task force concluded that there is a total return to New York of close to $5 for every dollar spent to support civil legal services.


So, in conclusion, this verse from our Bible can summarize, quote, let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter, fear God, and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man, from the book of Ecclesiastes, chapter 12, verse 13. This video has only begun to deal with the immense issues concerning Judaism and Christianity, nevertheless, we have covered many key issues that a Jew must examine to gain clarity and perspective. Let us summarize these key issues. First, for a Jew, the importance of remaining faithful to our Torah and our people has life or death implications. The blessing to remain part of God's covenant with the Jewish people is not to be taken lightly, and it applies to us, as well as our children, grandchildren, and generations to follow. Judaism also believes that we impact the eternity that our souls will experience by our faithfulness to God and His Torah, and by not serving other gods. The Torah gives us the information we need to make these critical choices. Also, for the last 2,000 years, the Jesus of Christianity has served as the main other God that we have resisted, using economic oppression, violence, or proselytizing. Believers in the New Testament have tried to undermine our attachment to the Torah. Despite the loving face worn by today's missionaries, we must know that they are aggressively trying to make us adopt a faith that has always resulted in total assimilation. Unfortunately, many Jews today have little Jewish education or bad experiences with Judaism. Many are seeking spirituality and are turning to Christianity because they believe that Judaism lacks substance and is incapable of filling their inner needs. With great zeal and startling success, evangelical Christians and Messianic Jews are taking advantage of our vulnerable fellow Jews. By deceptively presenting the missionary message as authentically Jewish, they offer love and acceptance together with Christian beliefs to save them. As attractive as Christianity may appear to be to the unaffiliated Jew, conversion is a trap with terrible consequences. Our Jewish communities must become more vigilant in promoting the love, spirituality, and strength of our religion so that disenchanted Jews will not be enticed by the Christian message. Missionaries cannot quote every verse of the Tanakh because many of its verses contradict the picture they are trying to fabricate. When examining missionary arguments, we see that every verse of prophecy that they cite from the Tanakh is mistranslated or misrepresented, taken out of context, or just made up. When we examine our Torah for guidance, we are told to beware of false prophets who perform real miracles because God is testing our faithfulness. We must realize that the Christian missionaries are trying to convince us to believe in a God that is foreign to Torah beliefs. Quote, other gods which you have not known. The Jews of the Tanakh never worshiped the Trinity nor spoke of the Messiah as being anything other than a human being. The Jewish criteria for assessing a messianic candidate are precise. He must be a father-son descendant of King David through his son Solomon and appear only one time. He will usher in the kingdom of God on earth which includes world peace and end to war, an in-gathering of the exiled Jewish people to Israel, a rebuilding of the temple, and universal belief in God. Obviously, these things did not materialize at the time of Jesus or at any time throughout history. Lastly, if we are to believe that Christianity is merely an extension of Judaism and not a different religion, its beliefs must mirror Jewish beliefs. In fact, very little in Christianity matches Judaism. And furthermore, Christianity can be shown to have incorporated many pagan beliefs within its very foundation. When it comes to answering a missionary, this Choose Life account of missionary study video is not intended to prepare you for a debate with the next missionary you encounter. Some of them are very clever in presenting their case and make inexperienced opponents feel awkward and confused. As well, there is no catchy statement that can penetrate their fixed beliefs because their faith is usually based on emotion and a distorted exposure to Jewish scriptures, whereas our beliefs are based on careful study. Jews for Judaism believes that the best response to a missionary is, in fact, no response. A polite but firm, no thank you, is the best answer. And you are absolutely not obligated to give him or her any personal information such as your name, phone number, or email address. However, if you do become involved in the discussion with the missionary, remember the importance of checking the accuracy and context of their sources. All of Tanakh has a critical context that supports the Jewish position. Taken out of this context, many passages can have deceptive or incorrect meanings. This video has been designed to educate Jews on the vast differences between the authentic teachings of our Torah and the deceptions the Christian missionaries want us to believe and adopt. We hope this study video is informative and thought-provoking, and we ask you to contact Jews for Judaism with your questions. Thank you very much.


We're here at ITU Telecom World 2013 in Bangkok, Thailand, and I'm extremely pleased to be joined by the Honourable John Nassirah, who is Minister for ICT for Uganda. Minister Nassirah, thank you very much indeed for being with us today. Thanks Max. This year's events theme is embracing change in a digital world. I wanted to ask you, where do you see the biggest opportunities in that change for society and for industry? The biggest change I see is this convergence of everything to one platform. And that convergence also brings the digitalization of everything, which brings communicating faster, communicating quicker or faster again, and in a big way. And I think if we embrace this, especially for countries like Uganda, which is a developing country that is trying to emerge, we can take this advantage to use this digital change or this big change to transform our societies. I was going to say, how is Uganda embracing the change? Oh, we are really taking it on. Let me just give an example. If you take, for example, the analog to digital migration in TV, which will save us a lot of, we'll have a digital dividend. That change alone would want to use that digital dividend to roll out broadband in our rural areas, because we are basically rural, and deal with education, and deal with health matters, deal with our culture extension. And also, at the same time of this change, we are trying to make sure that we have a new government where we really do business in a more efficient and faster manner. Is affordability a major issue for you? Yes, partly to do this, you are really talking about connectivity. And connectivity means infrastructure development. And that infrastructure is a big investment. But our policies of a rubberized sector will help, where in one area we attract the private sector, especially the current big telecom companies that are there, to roll out. In another area, we'll go in private public partnerships with the private sector and government. And at the last bit end, where those two cannot work, government will intervene using the Universal Access Fund. And I wanted to ask you, in terms of being here at ITU Telecom World 2013, what's the value of attending such events? Well, these events are great. First of all, we come here to share experiences, we network, we look at new developments. I would just say something we say in my language, that the childhood hasn't moved, thinks the mother is the best cook. But when we come here, we learn a lot, we network. And also, we showcase what we can do and attract investment in our own countries. Because you've had your own presence here, your own pavilion here? We have a pavilion here, we have our young innovators here. I was happy to see one of our young girls, won an award in innovation just the other day. And we have those innovators who are really taking on this change. And you've also been part of a recent BDT initiative, can you say a little bit about that? Well, I have been part of this initiative where an advisory board has been established in place that is looking at ICT for development, linking it to ICT for disaster management. We had our first meeting in Geneva, board meeting which was successful and well-attended. And we're trying to move our work faster, see how we can link ICT for development to ICT for disaster management. Minister Jonas Assira, thank you very much for being with us today. Thank you very much, Max.


Hello and welcome. I'm Lynne Freese, producer of Global Political Economy, or GPE News Docs. Joining me is guest Richard Kozleride. We're going to be talking about UNCTAD's 2022 Trade and Development Report, the TDR. Richard Kozleride is director of the Division on Globalization and Development Strategies, GDS for short, at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, UNCTAD for short. The GDS Division produces the annual Trade and Development Report in line with its responsibilities as UNCTAD's macroeconomic unit tasked with providing original research, economic policy advice, and technical assistance to UNCTAD member states. Kozleride is UNCTAD's chief economist and lead author of the Trade and Development Report. He's published widely on economic issues. His most recent book, co-authored with Kevin Gallagher, is titled The Case for New Bretton Woods. Welcome, Richard. Thanks for the invitation, Lynne. So, Richard, we're going to be talking about the 2022 TDR, but first we should note that this year's Trade and Development Report, like every other TDR since it was first launched in 1981, has been swimming against the tide. So, very briefly, comment on what that means in the broader context of what in 1964 UNCTAD was created to address that's so relevant into the president specifically this year's TDR. Yeah, 1964, obviously, when we were created, UNCTAD was very much the voice for developing countries on multilateral issues, response to all the weaknesses and biases in the system that was created at the end of the Second World War, and that obviously was strongly focused on biases and asymmetries in the trading system, the whole challenges around commodity exporting countries and the problem in the terms of trade and balance of payments problems. But not only that, I mean UNCTAD from its inception was focusing on the financing challenges, on the technological challenges that face developing countries as they moved from being politically dependent to being independent economies. The big why we swim again, and very much we were UNCTAD at that time was really looking to reform the existing system. It was not looking to undermine the existing system, it was looking to find ways to make that system work better for developing countries. And that culminated in efforts to create a new international economic order that was launched at the United Nations in 1974. And UNCTAD was very much the intellectual backstopping of that initiative, and as we know that initiative was grounded in the early 1980s as the global economy shifted onto a very different type of economic path that was, and we look for words to describe that, neoliberal is the one that is often used to describe the shift away from the kind of managed economies of the post-war period to one in which markets became a much more dominant factor in dictating the kind of economic opportunities for countries at all levels of development. And the trade and development report because it was born in 1981, soon after Ronald Reagan took the reins of the White House. We've been contesting that shift in the direction of policymaking and the rules of the international economy that followed along with that. So we have particularly focused on the way in which unregulated financial markets have held sway over the policymaking and economic prospects of all countries, but particularly developing countries during the last 40 years. And so we've moved from being an institution really that focused on fixing the rules of the game to an institution that has focused on contesting the rules of the game that emerged from that neoliberal shift in ideological thinking and policymaking from the early 1980s onwards. The 2022 TDR presents a somber outlook in its prognosis of the world economy for this year and the next across developed and developing regions. So briefly, give us a picture of what you see as some of the main characteristics. Yeah, I mean, in a certain sense, Lynn, we were swimming against the tide maybe till the global financial crisis, which was a quintessential failure, not of government action per se or state intervention, but was a failure of markets, financial markets in particular. And a lot of talk at the time of the crisis and immediately afterwards that we would at long last be seeing reforms to the international economic system along the lines that Ang Tad and other people have been arguing for over the last 20 or 30 years didn't happen. And the last the decade after that was one of very rapid economic growth. There was a lot of there was problems with accumulating debt in developing countries. There were problems with wage stagnation in the advanced economies, but finance continued to dictate the kind of direction of the economy. The responses to the crisis was for central banks to really hose the runway for capital to continue its footloose activities across the global economy. And again, that was clearly producing tensions at the end of the end of the last decade. We warned back in our 2019 report that unless the tensions and asymmetries that had been building up over the post crisis period were addressed quickly, that many developing countries would be facing a lost decade in the 20s. Now the COVID the COVID shock opened up the possibilities. It seemed to us of again revisiting the rules of the international economy in a way that would produce fairer and more stable outcomes, particularly for developing countries, but we would argue for all countries. And so a year ago and that persisted that sense of a building back better world was where we were a year ago in the middle of 2021. The concerns were that some developing countries didn't have the fiscal space to make the necessary adjustments to the COVID shock. But there was a real expectation that again this time we were going to do things differently in terms of managing the global economy. And the last year has seen this quite dramatic shift away from that kind of language, from the language of resilience and fairness to where we are now, which is in a global economy that is on the edge of recession with central bankers again dictating the direction of policymaking, responding to the increased cost of living in the way that central bankers only can, which is to believe that the problem is one of too much money chasing too few goods and that the only way in which you could handle that would be through a sharp monetary shock, rising interest rates, normalizing central bank balance sheets. And that's happened very, very quickly and we argue in the report with potentially very damaging consequences for not only the advanced economies whose central banks are essentially in charge of global monetary policy, but particularly for developing countries. And so whilst a slowdown in the global economy was expected this year from the rapid bounce back of 2021 after the lockdowns were ended and the vaccine was rolled out unevenly as we know, but rolled out. And so we have this combination now of a rapidly slowing global economy, particularly the advanced economies. And rapidly rising interest rates with the real danger that this will tip the global economy into a full blown recession. And that in particular in the report focuses on this in particular with real damaging consequences for developing countries. So when the US Fed responds to the cost of living crisis, as you said, by hiking interest rates, that affects all regions. And rapidly rising interest rates and in some cases the risk of an associated currency mismatch makes life harder for borrowers and so those firms, households and governments that have taken on debt for whatever reason. The report shows that while all regions are exposed to these kinds of risks, it argues that developing countries are the most exposed. Can you elaborate more on this point that you've been making? Yeah, obviously developing countries, as I said, accumulated debt in the period after the global financial crisis was not an irrational decision. Real interest rates were either zero or negative and it made sense in many respects to borrow on international capital markets and they were willing to lend often to countries that had not in recent years been able to borrow on those markets. So a lot of debt was accumulated in the decade after the financial crisis and as the fiscal squeeze tightened during COVID, they borrowed more to maintain some sense of economic normalcy. Now again, interest rates, as you know, remain particularly low during the COVID period and again there was reasons why developing countries should do that. We've entered now a very different world of rising interest rates and there's a very, very serious danger now of a vicious circle taking hold in which as interest rates rise, international investors become nervous about the investments they've made in the developing world. There's a flight to safety, often in the deeper financial markets in the United States. That produces impacts on the dollar, the strengthening of the dollar has been a notable feature of the last few months. And for developing countries that borrow in dollars, the pressure of rising costs of borrowing and their declining currencies is a potentially very dangerous squeeze on their economic prospects. And that's already happening. Some countries have for a while been saved by relatively vibrant commodity markets. But for those countries that are net importers of food or fuel, that's an additional burden when it comes to their payment position. So there's a real set of forces even before the war in Ukraine further ramped up some detrimental effects on global economic prospects. But where developing countries were clearly staring into a very dangerous economic waters. And as developed country central banks continue with their policy of raising interest rates in the hope, we think a false hope, that will squeeze out inflation then the coming year for many policymakers in the south is a very, very troublesome one. Now on top of that, the threat of climate shocks as we know is intensifying. And we saw that recently in the case of Pakistan where the floods covering a third of the country with billions of dollars was a damage caused by that adds another layer of uncertainty and damage to countries in the developing world. And this is what people are now referring to as a poly crisis facing developing countries on the economic, environmental, social and indeed political fronts is a very, very worrisome situation. But the international community, I mean certainly the institutions of global economic governance that were set up to provide safety nets for countries facing these kinds of troubles just does not seem to be fit for the purpose of meeting the kinds of compounding challenges that many countries are now facing. So Richard, you've given us a picture of the short term. Let's turn now to the medium to long term prospects for the world economy. So global growth, financial stability, environmental sustainability and also development in the south. In the TDR, you proposed a modeling scenario that extends the current conditions into the future, so a continuation of the status quo in which policymakers don't break from the Orthodox playbook. So please give us some idea of the assumptions of that scenario and the outcomes. I mean, there is a business as usual model that will simply go back to the kinds of policies that we saw in the period following the global financial crisis, which with a strong emphasis on monetary policy, lack of coordination between monetary and fiscal policy, a strong emphasis on the need for flexibility of markets, adjustment for countries that come under bouncer payments pressures by the indebted country with no real demands placed on the creditors countries. The familiar playbook that we've seen in place before COVID hit and as we try and model that kind of policy regime and its impact on developing countries, we see a particularly weak pattern of economic growth, weak employment generation for developing countries. That means a continuation of a large informal sector of low wages and limited protection for workers and very little hope under those kind of conditions of countries meeting the sustainable development goals and perpetuating their vulnerability to climate shocks. And certainly no sign of a meaningful transformation in the structure of their economies in a way that is consistent with the need to move away from a carbon based growth path. So that's what we understand to be the business as usual type strategy. And in light of the fact that this does not deliver on the kind of transformative, sustainable, more inclusive outcomes that the international community has set itself, and we argue that we need to see a very fundamental change in the kinds of policy programs that all countries, but particularly developing countries need to pursue over the coming decade. And that means a break with austerity. We need a much more expansionary type of macroeconomic environment. Wages need to take a much more prominent role in leading the expansion, cutting wages endlessly in the hope that you will gain a competitive position in the global economy is ultimately a zero sum game. So shift to a much more balanced monetary and fiscal policy regime in which all monetary and fiscal levers are used to underpin a more expansionary agenda. We understand in that context, particularly when it comes to meeting climate goals, that there needs to be a much more prominent role for public investment in shifting the structure of economies. And that's obviously true when it comes to moving into different types of energy system, more efficient use of their energy in the different sectors of the economy, but also when it comes to the provision of transportation and the range of utilities that make up a balanced economy, which need to be provided by the public sector and have suffered over the last decade or more from a mistaken ideology around public-private partnerships and blended financing and other miracle cures that have not delivered on those kinds of promises. So we offer a scenario and trying to model a scenario in which countries begin to follow that kind of policy regime rather than the business as usual model that has failed to deliver over the last decade or more. What we've tried to do in this report is to emphasize the importance of greater South-South cooperation as offering a framework in which those kinds of policies can really take hold in a more effective way than has been the case in recent years. And as we look at the evolution of the global economy over the last 20 or 30 years, it's clear that the weight of developing countries in the global economy has increased if you look at their share in global output or if you look in their share of global exports or in their share of global foreign direct investment. There's been this significant shift towards developing countries as being much more important players and contributors to global growth than was true 40 or 50 years ago. I mean that's clear. A lot of that, as we know, is down to China, but it's not just a China story. The emerging economies, particularly in the first 12 to 15 years of this new century, were significant contributors to global growth. And that opens the opportunity, we think, for those countries rather than to fixate on their relationship with the advanced economies to find greater opportunities to integrate with each other in a way that can support the kind of positive policy agenda that I outlined. And in the process create the kinds of virtuous circles in which expanding markets, rising incomes, rising investment, increased productivity performance, feeding into greater markets within the south can become a more visible part of the global economy. And we model that in this year's report and we do show that under the right circumstances that increased cooperation amongst developing countries will indeed produce benefits in terms of employment, in terms of government revenues, in terms of investment within the developing world. I think though we are very insistent as we try and outline that kind of alternative to the business as usual approach that it remains the case that in our interdependent world, in which a lot of economic and political power continues to rest with the advanced economies, we need a shift in the multilateral system if we're going to scale up the kinds of initiatives to meet the global problems that we all face, particularly obviously with respect to climate. So this in no way can be seen as a substitute for the kind of reforms to the international economic system that UNTAT has been arguing for really since 1964, but with particular emphasis over the course of the last two decades. So the need to ensure that we have multilateral financial institutions that provide the kind of liquidity that developing countries needed if they do face unforeseen economic shocks, which of course should be the responsibility of the International Monetary Fund, and has not been done on the scale that is needed in response to the shocks that we've since the global financial crisis. But also the need for a more reliable, cheaper, long term financing to make the kinds of productive investments that developing countries need to transform their economies in a more sustainable way. That has to come from the multilateral system in a much more scaled up way, and it's not the case that the increased South-South cooperation can somehow substitute for that need for much greater multilateral efforts. So I think what the South-South agenda does is point in a more positive direction to the kinds of reforms and initiatives that the multilateral system will need to follow if we're going to achieve the kind of goals that the international community set itself in the last decade. So as we've been discussing, the structures of the international system of finance and trade were designed under the hands-off business as usual model. So as this international rules-based system put in place extensive deregulation since the 1980s, all governments, but most especially less powerful governments, so small and developing countries, lost what you call policy space. And if I understand it correctly, the idea of the South-led scenario is that by cooperating and integrating among themselves gives developing countries scope to regain policy space. In other words, within their respective regional arrangements, governments would have room to pursue policies that do work towards a fairer outcome for all rather than just find themselves constrained in having to follow policies as dictated by the so-called market forces, more appropriately called the concentrated market power of global finance and the multinational corporate structures that dominate the market under the auspices of the hands-off model. You've already given us a picture of vulnerabilities linked to power symmetries in the context of the international system of finance. Let's bring the international system of trade into the mix and more specifically vulnerabilities linked to the concentrated structure of global production. The concentration of corporate power across economic activities has become a much more visible feature of the global economy over the course of the last decade or two. And we know that the vast bulk of international trade, for example, is controlled by a relatively small number of corporations. And I know there's a kind of fixation in some quarters about the need to support small and micro enterprises as engines of economic growth and possibilities. But these are not players in the international trading system. So taking on and tackling the asymmetries in the structure of production is certainly going to be a critical feature of the kind of alternative development path that we're talking about. But again, that's not a tension that is unique to developing countries. We've seen around the questions of digital corporate power the need for policymakers in advanced countries to address the problems that can cause them. That's been true, particularly in Western Europe in recent years around the issues of taxation, for example. So again, it's a progressive agenda that can begin to forge a new kind of internationalism will need to take full account of the tensions and contradictions that the financialized and corporatized global economy has posed to advanced economies since the new millennium. I think we need, again, we can't simply expect countries of the South acting together to provide the kind of, by themselves, provide the momentum for change. There has to be significant changes within the advanced economies themselves and their approach to international cooperation if we're going to build a fairer and more sustainable future. Given your views on where we are now, and this a continuation of three to four decades of the perpetuation of the business as usual model, what makes you think that this time around we could see a change in direction away from the status quo towards this more positive agenda that you describe as a virtuous circle? It's easy to look at what the advanced economies are doing, particularly in the international realm, and be very pessimistic about the prospects for the kind of changes that you just mentioned. There are some reasons I think to have a more positive outlook, and that comes from the fact that the advanced economies since the global financial crisis have in many respects been saying one thing about the need to maintain the status quo and doing something else. And we can see that particularly, for example, with the reemerging debate around industrial policy, and industrial policy, part of our scenario about a more inclusive and sustainable development path hinges on the far more extensive use of industrial policy than has been the case under the hands-off business as usual type scenario. And we're seeing a far greater use of industrial policy in the United States. I mean, it's often couched in a way that is not particularly progressive. So the recent efforts of the United States to counter what they perceive as their falling behind East Asian countries, particularly China, but not just China, in the area of semiconductors and certain types of new technologies has forced the US into reassessing its own industrial policy. The kinds of initiatives I think that that implies will and already are falling foul of the international trading rules that were designed under this hands-off business as usual approach. You can't do the kind of industrial policy that the United States is currently pursuing in a way that's consistent with the rules of the Uruguay round. So that is going to force significant rethinking, I think, if I take a positive view of the international rules of the game with respect to trade and trade and investment agreements. And the developing countries who have suffered the most under those rules need to kind of form a positive narrative out of their own experiences of closer integration with each other that can be used to make the international rules of the trading system work in a fairer and more inclusive way. So I think there are developments both within the South, but also within the advanced economies that at least hold out the possibility of shifting the workings of the global economy in a direction that can deliver greater sustainability and fairer outcomes for all. Again, if I understand it correctly, part of the strategy behind the South-led scenario is that when countries act as a block in their respective regions, whether that be an African block or a Latin American block, this end can be a lever. And as put in the report to quote, policymakers in the South share critical common ground to be capable to question the asymmetries and biases in international trade and finance that favor large corporations from advanced countries. Leveraging this shared interest opens a space for a South-led way to counter the status quo. Does that then mean that political will will be needed among policymakers in the South if they are going to leverage their shared interest and open that kind of space? Well, I mean, it's political, it's political organization. I mean, it's certainly the case that the developing world has not been able to make the gains that it needs to make because it has been fragmented itself. And that the need for it to build cooperation amongst itself is a critical component of forging the alternative. And there are economic advantages to themselves from closer integration. That's what we show in the report that if they do forge these closer trading and financial technological ties, there are real gains that they can make amongst themselves and that needs to be exploited. I think the the second side of that story is whether in the process of building closer relations amongst themselves, they can leverage that to a change in the multilateral system that brings the kind that ultimately will determine for the global economy, whether we do get the kind of inclusive, transformative, sustainable future that the international community has been promising itself since certainly since the middle of the last decade with the initiatives around the sustainable development goals and the Paris climate agreement. So yes, there are gains to be made from the closer South-South cooperation. But I think that the real challenge is to ensure that the kinds of solidarity that the South builds up through those kinds of closer arrangements translates to changes at the multilateral level, which will ultimately determine whether we achieve the kinds of builds that we set ourselves. I'll just state the obvious and very quickly flag reviewers that the report details many more features that characterize ways the South-led scenario breaks from the status quo than we can possibly talk about today. And that includes details on an agro-ecological model of industrialization where employment intensive and traditional agriculture are part of a coordinated effort to maintain a pace of agrarian transition consistent with industrialization, employment generation, food security, and the need to avert environmental degradation. So again, as we need to keep this conversation at a manageable length, let's just focus today more specifically on the issue of food security on how agrarian policy fits into a framework of a broader industrial policy consistent with sustaining employment in developing countries. Yeah, we have again tragically been exposed to the threat of food insecurity over the course of the last year. Hunger is on the rise again across large parts of the South and addressing that problem needs to think very hard about the kind of agrarian relationships that exist in the South and the vulnerabilities that exposes many countries too. So in our understanding of a sustainable growth path, I think it would be true to say that industrial development which has been on hold in many developing countries now for two decades or gone backwards needs to be revved up to make the kind of transformation that we're talking about. But that should not come at the expense of thinking about other structural imbalances that continue to continue to limit the economic possibilities that developing countries face. And we know that as agriculture has been hollowed out in the South, the consequences of that has had in terms of the emergence of informalised urban economies is not a route for the kind of inclusive growth model that we think developing countries need if they're going to meet the sustainable development goals. There's an intimate relationship between what happens in the agricultural sector and the possibilities of the kind of industrial development that developing countries we think still need to be able to pursue. The report also makes it clear that because you don't want to propose anything that's unfeasible, the South led scenario is based on unmodest assumptions. So you're not creating mechanisms from scratch, but what you're doing is intensifying existing mechanisms. So you take existing arrangements and enhance them to the point that you think it's realistic and feasible. For example, in the case of finance you propose scaling up the existing mechanisms for countries within their respective regions of the South to rely more than before on their own respective currency for trade between themselves and to build common stocks of reserves to help stabilisation efforts and for greater scope in regional stabilisation funds etc. So then within respective regions of the South, the focus of this report is very much on scaling up what's already in place. Scale economies matter when it comes to a dynamic growth process and developing countries have tended to think of those scale economies coming from building closer ties with advanced economies. There's a logic to that. I mean all we're saying is that there are huge opportunities to achieve economies of scale if developing countries integrate more closely with each other. So that kind of mechanism is certainly critical for the growth path that we are outlining. But there are certain things that can only be tackled through a reform multilateral system and of which the most prominent of course is the burden of debt. Because obviously China has emerged as an important creditor over the last decade or more. But the asymmetries in the creditor-debt relationship remain fundamentally north-south and with a much stronger role for private creditors in the relationship between advanced and developing countries. And that's a huge burden that unless it is lifted over the next few years will prevent the kind of progressive growth path that we try and outline in the report. And that will require some fundamental changes to the multilateral system if we're going to alleviate that burden of debt on developing countries. That's not something that can be solved by closer south-south cooperation. As further context to that and other asymmetries in the global economy and how it relates to the hands-off scenario. The TDR argues the hands-off scenario is tied into a vicious circle where increasing disparities of power, wealth and income lead to repeated crises followed by the mismanagement of those crises that further perpetuate an unequal and stagnant world economy. And as statistics to flesh that out, the TDR refers to two well-known deeply ingrained trends. One that the labor share or the wage share of income has been falling in advanced and in developing countries since the 1980s. And another that government spending has been decreasing as a share of national income for four decades. And that the flip side of those two trends being how from 1995 to 2015 the real benefits of global trade went to the profits of the corporate 1% who control over 50% of international trade. That reported in the 2018 TDR. Can you expand on that? One of the important points that we've tried to make consistently in recent reports is that the world economy as a whole has suffered from a shortage of global demand. And that part of the reason for that is that there has been a persistent tendency to repress wages to the point where wages in some countries have essentially become disconnected from any improvements in productivity growth. I mean that's largely true of the world's largest economy in the United States where wages of real wages at least have been stagnant for decades. Now that and so in the case for a wage there's a case to be made for a wage led growth model that stimulates economic growth in a very virtuous type of circle. And I think that's true for both, certainly true for advanced economies and we would also argue it's true for many developing countries as well. So that understanding of the growth dynamic lies behind a lot of what we have to say. Now you can make a case that rising profits can themselves offer a dynamic growth story if those profits are reinvested productively. And we've seen examples of that in the South. The China model to some extent is a model in which there has been a rising profit share in the economy but there has also been a rising share of investment in overall output and income. And that has been a major part of the success of the China story, excessively so some would argue, but without a shadow of doubt for a period of 30 years or more that has been an important engine of the China growth story. You don't see that in the advanced economies. For the last 20 years, even as the share of profits in overall income has been rising, investment has been stagnant. It's one of the great weaknesses of the hands off or the neoliberal agenda. The neoliberal agenda was sold as being good for business and therefore good for investment and innovation. But when you look at the distribution of profits, this increased share of profits that are being made by large corporations, the vast bulk of it over the course of the last two decades or more has gone to buying back shares or allocating dividends. The work of Bill Lasonic, for example, has shown that for the firms in the S&P 500, in excess of 90% of profits have been used for those two purposes, not for reinvesting in capital formation or improving human capital, but for buying back shares or handing out dividends to the 1% who, as you know, have a relatively low margin of propensity to consume, which is one of the reasons why we face this problem of persistently low aggregate demand. So tackling those problems, I think, is those systemic problems, is one of the great challenges that we face, given that the kind of growth path that we set out in the report and in previous reports does depend on a transformation in the structure of the economy that can only take place with relatively high rates of investment. So moving away from that business as usual model, we see offers, opportunities for raising investment, for raising productivity, but also for raising wages at the same time. It's that kind of virtuous circle that to some extent, I mean, you've got to be careful with historical analogies, but to some extent was the modus operandi of northern capitalism in the period, in the two and a half, three decades from the end of the Second World War. So that's the kind of narrative that we want to generalize across the global economy. We see opportunities for that in the kind of closer South-South relationships that we model in this year's report. But again, it's imperative that the advanced economies also embark on their own reform process that can break with the kind of stagnation retendencies and highly unequalizing tendencies that have marked those economies now for three decades or more. This global policy model scenario lays out how a South-led agenda of industrialization and coordination aimed at avoiding climate meltdown and promoting employment generation globally is technically possible. Yeah, it's technically possible. But ultimately we live in a world where it has to be politically possible, right? And the politics of this is where the struggle is taking place. And I think the South has to demonstrate that the politics built around solidarity and cooperation offers not just a morally superior way of organizing economic and social life, but also offers one that is more prosperous and more sustainable. And I think that's where the narrative of South-South cooperation really needs to build an agenda that is much richer and more powerful than the one that has for now 30 or 40 years established itself around this notion of hands-off is better, and individual initiative and endeavor are the only ways in which we can achieve the kind of better future that we are, that we are aspiring to. This then would mean the South assumes a leadership role in shaping the global economy. And so breaking from a decades-long experience is rule takers, not rule makers. And so too breaking dependence on comfort and conformity, as the report puts it, or on being on the right side of a commodity boom or a geopolitical divide. So in a South-led scenario, the narrative changes to we're on the right side of a policy agenda that we are forging and going to fight for. We're going to fight for and that will not only be good for us, but will be good for the economies in the advanced world too. I think that's critical, right? So that the leadership in the advanced world can themselves think about a different way of pursuing international engagements and coordination. Because the system that we have in place now is simply not delivering the kind of the scale or the nature of resources that we need to prosper together on an increasingly stressed planet. Developed countries have their own challenges that are different from those in the developing world and they'll have to find instruments and mechanisms to deal with those challenges that are not necessarily appropriate for the South. But I mean, there is a demonstration effect from South-South cooperation that we hope will encourage leadership in the North to think about their own problems differently. And a rethinking too of the relationship with China? Obviously, you know, the kind of hostility towards China that has emerged particularly over the last four or five years is not conducive to building a healthy multilateral system. And the advanced economies need to get over the fear that they have of an increasingly powerful and prosperous China because that's going to happen. I mean, China is going to become an increasingly more prosperous and powerful economy and, you know, the Western world needs to come to terms with that and to find, and again, that requires a narrative built around cooperation and coordination rather than competition and conflict. And, you know, I think developing countries and some developing countries have their own concerns about China. But the initiatives that China has built around the Belt and Road and other things, I think, despite the fact that there are clearly issues that need to be dealt with there, again, it's a sign of a change in the world economy that offers a different kind of future from the hands-off approach that has misshaped multilateralism over the course of the last four decades and back to where you started against which we've been swimming for much of that period. Richard Coesler, right. Thank you. Thank you, Lynne. Thank you. And from GP News Talks in Geneva, Switzerland. Thank you for joining us.


I was a communist for the FBI Praying, Dana Andrews and an exciting tale of danger and espionage I was a communist for the FBI From the actual records and authentic experiences of mass lev edict From many of the incidents and it's unusual story Here is our star Dana Andrews as mass lev edict Who for nine fantastic years Liveed as a communist for the FBI nine years of solitary confinement but nine years crowd jostled me waiters took my orders conductors punched my transfers operators got me telephone numbers I was free and at large but I was in prison I walked in crowds and I was alone I had comrades but I didn't have friends and that's only part of what it meant to be a communist for the FBI in a moment listen to Dana Andrews as Matt Sebedek under cover man as Matt Sebedek under cover man this story from the confidential file is marked red clay several days I've been noticing a peculiar speculated look in comrade Revchenko's official eye when he doesn't think I'm watching he's sizing me up when your chief and the Communist Party takes stock of you you don't know if you're on your way up or on your way out I don't have long to wait Revchenko wants to talk to me in private and I put on my mad face which helps me get away with some stuff that would land other comrades in front of the control commission for disciplining comrade Sebedek you have lived in this town most of your life that's right comrade Revchenko you went to uptown senior high school that's right then you know the principal there Mr. Dexter DeLancy I never heard of Mr. Dexter DeLancy he may have been after your time Dexter DeLancy has a very ingenious and realistic approach to the problem of influencing American youth he's certainly in a position for it he sympathizes with our cause but so far he's been reluctant to join the party officially now however he has agreed to discuss the idea broadly he'll want to meet him at his office at four o'clock for a general check once he joins the party you will instruct him in your duties you mean I'm to groom this highbrow to replace me we need him youth is like play in hands like his I understand American kids pretty well myself orders come on Red Sofitik what happens to me you will be sent to neglected strategic areas farmed out to the miners you mean sent to strategic areas comrade Sebedek I'm useful here and I'm at home in here I see no reason but Sebedek four o'clock principal DeLancy's office cultivate him carefully I stroll down the somehow shrunken corridors of my old high school same old bulletin board same old corny student cartoons on it same graduation dance notice the same decent hopeful eager kids but to the architects of communism clay red clay to be molded into totalitarian families that was filming two minutes to the final bell I stopped in front of a familiar door room 10 miss Hunter miss Hunter with a massive bronze hair and the electric green eyes miss Hunter my English teacher with whom I once imagined myself deathlessly in love I reached for the door now I stand on the doorway gaping a big mature looking boy is reciting earned but I hear him dimly it is his teacher I gave this hunter younger and more beautiful than ever the thick bronze hair the green eyes the faintly and pleasantly freckled nose I just stand there in the open doorway spellbound all over again without your eyes and that bad taste very good thank you miss Hunter won't you come in for me oh yes are you the father of one of our students here what oh no no don't be so infantic about it these are the most advanced seniors in school yes miss Hunter that's all class those keen looking seniors file past me and I feel as sharp as a sack of potatoes non-slick grade the young man who'd been reciting when I came in and talking to miss Hunter I feel a bond of sympathy with him I know just how he feels I was in love with my teacher he leaves looking at me curiously and then a beautiful teacher approaches me straight out of the golden line of yesterday I can't be I miss Hunter oh now I've got it straight Mrs. Hunter used to be my teacher that's it my mother she feeds me in Buffalo now but you were a pupil of mother Matthew's heretic color and not just a pupil I was a devoted pupil I think I understand I'm having a similar problem with one of my students well he'll get over it I hope unless he meets your daughter 18 years from now I'm so sorry you can't be oh that's all right I I have an appointment with mr. Delancey what did you say your name for my mother I haven't written down someplace now if you'll give me a telephone number I'll call you and spell it for you okay I walk out of that dim lilac haze with a telephone number stashed away in my head along with the memory of bronze hair and green eyes floating around in the lilac I don't want to conduct red business in lilac time but I've got to the bubble bursts and soap gets in my eyes and superior or see two principal Dexter Delancey gets under my skin with his theory for the reconditioning of young minds to the communist idea and what is my method is simply this mr. Kubelik so that it CVET I see I am in a position to point out in my own history classes that our American forebears would have been communist sympathizers today that's not the good trick if you can do it oh I can do it after all the Declaration of Independence was a document endorsed by the 13 states for the overthrow of government by force of arms yeah but it was a tyrannical government the government overthrown by the Russian revolution was even more tyrannical yeah rebellion to tyrant is obedience to God that was Thomas Jefferson's personal motto nothing wrong with that wrong it's marvelous in his own words the writer of the Declaration of Independence admits that revolution has the approval of heaven then how can the capitalist world accuse Russia of being godless you see etc go on mr. Delancey call me Dexter now look at the French revolution the more I listen the sicker I get inside sick and scared there's danger in the smirking egetus so vain about his learning in this man lies infinite danger to America this walking talking decay so close to our youth I listened to him so I can remember what he said because I've got the funny answers someplace when I finally get out into the clean air I dialed to new 3211 and invite myself over to call on this Mary Hunter even if I didn't have a plan I'd want to see her anyhow and look at her just hit and look at it right on time come in I walk in stumbling stupidly on the throw rug and walk into the living room in the presence of that other schoolboy admire of miss Hunter the student named Charles it's a Charles Weber hello Matt hi I've been helping Charles compose his valedictory speech for graduation oh I didn't want to interrupt anything well I'd rather talk a seasoned debate it's Charles Weber oh we'll find something to debate about I'm sure in less than an hour by easy logical steps I've managed to twist the conversation to politics world affairs the American Revolution it's like a nice cold plunge I don't want to take it but I've got to I don't plunge in either I stumble in involuntarily it seems I'm repeating the slick sick insidious malvings of principal Dexter delante and making Mary supply the answers I mean well isn't it true Mary that bourgeois minds considered the American Revolution radical isn't bourgeois strange word coming from you Matt no I mean conservative sure it was considered radical by many it was radical it was nothing of the sort Charles it was overthrow of government by force and if the Russian Revolution was radical so was ours or putting it the other way if our revolution was justifiable so was the Russian our revolution was political the Russian Revolution was social revolution by bloodshed and terror class against class well what's the difference the Russian Revolution different from art in this great great respect it substituted one form of tyranny for another Jefferson would be taken by the turn of events in the Russian Revolution I challenged that Miss Hunter I didn't realize you were so well informed on the subject I've had several serious discussions on the subject with principal delante whom I respect and admire very much in class and after class and he maintains it's getting pretty late I think I'd better be on my way I've got the family Jalopy let me drop you someplace I'd like to speak to you for a moment Matt privately oh well I'll take a taxi Chuck oh well thanks anyhow good night Charles good night miss Hunter Matt good night Chuck Mr. Stavetek Matt you haven't asked me why mother has to teach in Buffalo when she's not glad to be here with me well it did occur to me to ask she left here rather than be gagged by people like Dexter DeLancy gag how DeLancy didn't force her out of here he's a very powerful and persuasive man I mean you could lose your job here talking up to me as you just did reported it to the principal I see very late Mr. Stavetek I didn't mean to keep you well good night Mary good night Mr. Stavetek I spend a bad night thinking of Mary Hunter having to be cautious of a man like Dexter DeLancy I have a knock in my stomach thinking about young Chuck Weber honor student parroting the red line right out of the horsey mouth of Dexter DeLancy but that note of jealousy at the very end of the evening gives me the big idea turn Chuck against me because of Mary and he might lump DeLancy with me and turn against him too I'd have to keep on supporting DeLancy's views I'd have to keep goading Mary into fighting me on them because if it comes to either Mary losing her job or my losing mine she'll have to go it's like that sometime being a communist for the FBI and it hurts it hurts bad back to Dana Andrews starring as Matt Stavetek and I was a communist for the FBI and the second act of our story I have a job to do and I do it I play remorseful and persuade Mary to see me again when I know Chuck Weber will be rehearsing his valedictory speech with her sure enough I managed to drag in the line that our early American patriot would be called radicals today I won't give the unpleasant details but she talks in angry and white lip and I hate to talk about giving Mary Hunter pain but it works and it's important respect when Mary asks again to talk to me alone Chuck Weber pounds out of their spots slamming that door he's pretty mad he's very strange he's very jealous I asked you a very direct question maybe I know what it is I know you were seeing principal DeLancy the day you wandered into my classroom I didn't just wander in I made a point of it are you coming Mary Mary Hunter I'm not the common I'm so glad why I don't know I hate you all people to be a red one of mother people one of our most devoted people all right Stavetek hold it wait Chuck have you been waiting for me in this alley all the time yes Mary finish talking to you I want to talk to you guys Mary yeah Mary and keep away from it you sneaking red funny you should say that all I know is what Dexter DeLancy tells me and you wouldn't call him a red would you are you gonna keep away from Mary you're a powerful hundred and eighty pounds of star fullback Chuck and I haven't pulled back in many a year but the answer is no all right then don't make me get you time you won't be able to cut it out fight Tommy all right you're not cut get out of there get out of here get the grip if you want to graduate yeah yeah and that's why I send the rest of the night in the police station cell I don't dare involve the FBI in dealing me out and I'm scared of how come I'd rub tinco I'm reduced to calling Mary Hunter and a beautiful teacher in the whole solar system in the morning there she is thanks for coming down for me I won't ask you what happened and I won't tell you or even give me an idea teachers are just too small I will take custody of Mr. Stabetic comment Rev Chinko gives Mary a withering look and then steers me outside and into a taxi we don't see a word until we get to his office he's it down I stand he looked at me with contempt that's okay though I don't admire him either in the future comrades of Attic save your street brawling for party purposes was it in the paper and I came down just in time to relieve that woman of you who is she and she is not in the party I would know who is not in the part and stay away from her all right these bourgeois women with their emotional demands keep away I heard you remember you will regret it don't go but I want to see Mary once more I just want to look at it it's busy just before graduation but she takes a few minutes at lunch to sit on a bus stop bench with me five blocks from the school neither one of us is very happy though after the other evening when he denied being a communist I thought things might work out I still say I'm not a communist what about that dreadful man who came for you in jail were you totally doomed if he owned you why because he does own you body and mind and soul and you don't have to tell me why Mary please don't cry I'm not you are though there was something that was sweet and third of tender in the pupil of my mother holding in love with the daughter don't take it so hard then Mary I'm not in love with you it was a bit of nostalgia and sentimentality that's how it is red chinko I might have known it you'd never understand sit down comrade civic if it won't take long I'll stand that chinko very well you did not want to be sent to some hinterland when Dexter Delancey joins us for a while I considered your plea now however you will go where we send you and without complaint that is all I don't call Mary again I've got to see her I just want to sit and look at her and the place would have to be the graduation hall of Uptown senior high school as a lump in my throat and fog in my eyes as I watch the proudest kids in the world get their diplomas and become the gravest young men and women in the world then principal Dexter Delancey flashing his magnificent teeth makes a brief introduction our students of the year and four-year honor student athletically classically and his citizenship Charles Webber principal Delancey members of the faculty of Uptown senior high school fellow students and friends with the generous assistance of Miss Mary Hunter of the English Department of this high school I have prepared a validation but I have decided not to give it instead I should like to make this question is the revolutionary philosophy of our founding fathers radical I shall ask our distinguished principal and revered teachers who take me affirmative in that debate mr. Delancey no brother mr. Delancey no most certainly not this is most irregular Charles give your prepared speech since Mr. Delancey is not prepared to debate this question publicly I myself to take both sides of the question and answer the unamerica and subversive charges that have been made against our greatest patriot it's great point at the point slander after slander against our founding fathers Chuck Webber breaks down coldly methodically magnificently next to Delancey gets up in the middle of it and stalks out and when it's all over and Chuck Webber sit down they all stand up and cheer I stand up in my chair I want to look at Mary Hunter I see her I just stand and look at her I just want to good morning Revchenko mr. pathetic pathetic good morning mr. Delancey the comrade Delancey soon I trust in fact I'm prepared to want to take a full tour of duty at once London you mean you're prepared to give the party your full and undivided time precisely what about your duties at school and on the board well you'll be pleased to hear that I attended my resignation this morning as a consequence of last night's embarrassing events well under the circumstances revchenko I couldn't face a board action you resigned forthwith fool what he said fool I don't understand get out I don't understand explain it to him comrade pathetic you're my functionary in this district functional I have worked I don't understand this way Dexter as principal Dexter Delancey of a metropolitan high school and a member of the board you'd have been invaluably situated for the service of the party but I could have worked behind the scenes and said you became playing mr. Dexter Delancey of no use to the Communist Party incredible I'm ruined sorry Dexter Dexter stumbles out in a day then I walk out on air he goes his way I go mine Delancey is out and I stay in as undercover man working hand and glove with the FBI the work goes on I win but when I win I lose to no more homework no more books no more teachers or to look no more any kind of looks in my country Mary Hunter I'm a red it's always that way I'm a communist for the FBI Dana Andrews will return in just a moment this is Dana Andrews with the word about the story you've just heard his play although based on fact is happily a rare interest rare because the teaching profession has always been outstanding in preserving our American ideals in this story as in all others names dates and places are fictitious to protect innocent person many of these stories are based on incidents in the lives of Matt Sabetics who worked undercover for the FBI next week another fantastic adventure join us won't you