Economic Update: Winds of System Change

Summary

---

Economic Update with Richard D. Wolff

Episode: Winds of System Change

Date: April 5, 2018

---

Overview

In this episode of Economic Update, host Richard D. Wolff explores the “winds of system change” sweeping through economics, politics, and society. The episode commemorates the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s death, connecting his battles against racial and economic injustice to current movements in the U.S. and France. Wolff analyzes recent mass protests in France over labor rights, the resurgence of dangerous financial practices in the U.S., the sharp decline of public investment in education, and the rising activism across American society. In the second half, joined by Dr. Harriet Fraad, he discusses the Stormy Daniels scandal and its broader implications, particularly the growing willingness of historically subordinated groups—women, students, and workers—to resist shame and subordination and demand change.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Remembering Martin Luther King: Economic and Social Justice ([00:10])

• Wolff honors Dr. King’s commitment not only to fighting racism but also to challenging economic inequality:

  “Martin Luther King learned in the course of his efforts to deal with that problem that it was inextricably intertwined with another problem. And that is an economic problem.” ([00:28])

• Links King’s support for the Memphis sanitation workers to the ongoing struggle of American workers of all backgrounds.
• Wolff notes the persistence of racial and economic inequality in the U.S.:

  “The average wealth of African Americans is lower today than it was 20 years ago. A statement that is stunning in the history of modern capitalism.” ([01:22])

---

2. Protests in France: Defense of Labor Rights ([02:02])

• Wolff discusses massive demonstrations across France against President Macron’s labor reforms, which aim to make firing easier:

  “Mr. Macron wants to cut them back. He wants to make it easier for employers to hire and to fire. … Masses of people are in the streets to say no, no, no, no, no.” ([03:34])

• Contrasts French activism with apathy in the U.S.:

  "Similar things have been going on for years in the United States. But there are no masses of people in the streets to fight them … We don't do that in this country. Nothing like the French." ([04:38])

Achievements of French Workers:

• Shorter work weeks
• Universal health insurance
• Five weeks paid vacation by law
• Daycare provisions

Alternative Solutions Suggested:

• Redistribute high executive salaries
• Lower prices for global competitiveness
• Invest more in technology and education

---

3. Capitalism Repeats Itself: The Return of Subprime Lending ([09:22])

• Wolff warns financial markets are bundling subprime mortgages again, mirroring the practices that caused the 2008 crash:

  “Call this capitalism that can never learn. And they're doing it again.” ([10:39])

---

4. Education: Public Disinvestment and Student Debt Crisis ([11:18])

• Notes that in over half of U.S. states, students now pay more than government support for education:

  “For the first time in half the states students have to come up with their own money to go to college more than the government kicks in to help them. Crazy behavior, self destructive behavior.” ([13:00])

• Highlights broader effects: undermining the quality of workforce and economic prospects, decline of social mobility
• Raises the question: Why does a rational society flout its own interests in education?

---

5. Waves of Labor Action: Red State Teacher Strikes ([14:42])

• Celebrates teachers’ strikes in West Virginia, Oklahoma, Arizona, and Kentucky:

  “Their teachers are not going to be told no. They're making the demands long deferred, that they get the respect as educators that they deserve.” ([15:23])

---

6. International Poverty Comparisons ([17:04])

• Shares research showing the U.S. ranks worst among developed countries in reducing poverty via taxes and social programs:
  • Denmark: 6%
  • France: 8%
  • Ireland: 9%
  • U.K.: 11%
  • USA: 18%
• “One out of five people in the United States is qualified as poor. ... We still rank at the bottom.” ([18:42])

---

7. Worker Cooperatives vs. Capitalist Firms ([22:06])

• Recommends research by Virginie Perotin, documenting the greater efficiency, community benefits, and human satisfaction found in worker cooperatives.

---

8. U.S.-Korea Trade and the Truth about Truck Tariffs ([23:50])

• Details the long-standing 25% tariff protecting U.S. truck manufacturers and the resulting artificially high prices for American buyers:

  “This is a way to do what? It's a gift to the American truck producer because it makes foreign competition too expensive.” ([24:26])

• Exposes hypocrisy in political rhetoric about “free trade” and “competition”:

  “Don’t be fooled. The American truck culture... has been worsened by the truck, which has made profits for the few companies at the expense of the prices we all have to pay. They got protected. You got ripped off.” ([25:51])

---

INTERVIEW Segment: Stormy Daniels, #MeToo, and Rising Resistance (with Dr. Harriet Fraad) ([29:41])

Main Theme: Breaking the Chains of Shame and Subordination

1. Stormy Daniels’ Symbolism ([30:02])

• Stormy Daniels’ 60 Minutes interview drew 20 million viewers, surpassing major awards shows and Trump’s own post-inauguration interview.
• Dr. Fraad views Daniels as emblematic of a wider social break from submissiveness:

  “Even as a sex worker, she feels entitled to stand up to the president.” ([30:14])

2. The Wider Movement: MeToo and Student Gun Activism ([31:53])

• Fraad links the Daniels case to the MeToo movement and student anti-gun protests:

  “Those who are at the bottom are speaking up. ... The youth movement against guns... they are saying the powerful forces of state and local government will not protect us.” ([32:07])

3. Breaking Internalized Oppression ([32:27])

• Drawing on Louis Althusser:

  “More powerful than the police and the army ... is to keep disciplining them from the inside. To make them ashamed ... so that they don’t even dare imagine standing up, no less do it. And that’s what’s happening. That’s very powerful.” — Dr. Fraad ([33:04])

4. What Has Shifted? ([34:00])

• Previously, “Stormy would have thought, I'm a lowly sex worker. Who am I to stand up to the President of the United States?” — Dr. Fraad ([34:36])
• Women in MeToo movement and young people previously internalized shame and subordination.

5. Using Social Media Against Established Power ([36:57])

• The story of David Hogg’s activism after being mocked by Laura Ingraham:

  “He contacted his 600,000 Twitter followers with a list of all her sponsors... At least 12 of them have already withdrawn.” ([37:22])

6. Roots of Rising Confidence ([40:24])

• Changes in women’s economic position:

  "Women are no longer at home ... They have financial independence... Women don’t have to be subordinate anymore. We're in the workforce, we can stand up." — Dr. Fraad ([41:05])

• Consciousness lag: It has taken decades for these economic changes to alter mass behavior.

7. Young People and Economic Insecurity ([43:58])

• Young people face no economic guarantees, high debt, and unstable job prospects:

  “They are looking at massive college debt and no jobs. ... Why should they obey the rules that are keeping them down?” ([44:32])

8. The Political Backdrop: A Collison of Values ([48:11])

• Current U.S. leadership (e.g., Betsy DeVos, President Trump) signals support for inequality and patriarchy, provoking further backlash.

9. Changing Tides: Shame to Strength ([50:01])

• The “contagion” of resistance — what began in smaller circles is now spreading:

  “What I think is happening is that all over people are saying, me too. ... I will not be debased by my female sexuality.” — Dr. Fraad ([50:01])

  “I did it because nobody's going to call me a liar and get away with it.” — Stormy Daniels, as quoted by Harriet Fraad ([51:03])

10. This Is Just the Beginning ([53:40])

• Possibility of a mass fightback, not just by women or students but the wider working class:

  “It could spread. In a sense, it is the beginning of something that could really change the society.” — Wolff ([54:12])

  “I think it is. I think it's a spark, and it's a spark that could create a fire because it sparks such interest and sympathy across the nation.” — Dr. Fraad ([54:22])

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Springtime and capitalism is shaking.” — Wolff on French protests ([07:30])
• “Call this capitalism that can never learn.” — Wolff on subprime mortgages’ return ([10:39])
• “We could have had trucks much more cheaply if we would have allowed foreign truck companies to compete on a level playing field with Americans.” — Wolff ([25:25])
• “The American truck culture... has made profits for the few companies at the expense of the prices we all have to pay. They got protected. You got ripped off.” — Wolff ([25:51])
• “When the whole apparatus that gets you to be ashamed of yourself so you shut up and obey collapses, big changes can happen.” — Dr. Fraad ([33:27])
• “I will not be debased by my female sexuality.” — Dr. Fraad ([50:04])
• “I didn’t just do this for the money. ... I did it because nobody's going to call me a liar and get away with it.” — Stormy Daniels, as recounted by Dr. Fraad ([51:03])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:10–02:02 — Tribute to Martin Luther King; economic dimensions of social justice
• 02:02–09:00 — French labor protests; comparison with U.S. labor rights
• 09:22–11:18 — Subprime mortgage crisis returning
• 11:18–14:42 — Declining public support for higher education; implications
• 14:42–17:04 — Teachers’ strikes in conservative states
• 17:04–21:40 — U.S. vs. international efforts to alleviate poverty
• 22:06–23:50 — Research on worker cooperatives (Virginie Perotin)
• 23:50–26:07 — Truck tariffs, U.S.-Korea trade, and trade policy myths
• 29:41–55:20 — Interview with Dr. Harriet Fraad: Stormy Daniels, MeToo, student activism, and rising resistance

---

Conclusion: The Winds of System Change

Richard Wolff’s episode frames 2018 as a moment when longstanding injustices—economic, racial, and gender-based—are meeting resurgent movements for change. From French protests against neoliberal “reform” to American teachers’ strikes and the surging refusal of shame by women and youth, Wolff and guest Dr. Fraad see the potential for contagious, society-wide resistance. The episode ends with cautious optimism that these sparks can ignite broader transformation—if people recognize their collective power and refuse to submit.

---

Transcript

[A]

Welcome, friends, to another edition of Economic Update. It's a weekly program devoted to the economic dimensions of our lives. Jobs, debts, incomes, crises of all kinds that beset the capitalist economy that. That we live in and live under and live with. I'm your host, Richard Wolff. I've been a professor of economics all my adult life, and my hope is that it trained me to be able to present to you an understandable analysis of what's been going on in the economy we depend on. I want to begin today's program with a recognition that it is the 50th anniversary of the death of Martin Luther King, a man who devoted himself, as we all know, to doing something to correct one of the gravest injustices of our country's life and history. Racism in all its forms and all its consequences. Martin Luther King learned in the course of his efforts to deal with that problem that. That it was inextricably intertwined with another problem. And that is an economic problem. And that's why I'm talking about it. The problem of having a mass of people, white and black, in a subordinated position as workers confronted by the enormous wealth and enormous power of a tiny minority of people that own and direct the enterprises upon which we all depend for. For the output they generate and the jobs that we need. And Martin Luther King 50 years ago made the ultimate sacrifice of his life to pursue that connection. That's why he had gone to Memphis. That's why he had worked with the garbage drivers and the garbage picker uppers in. In that city to correct a problem that afflicted them both as African Americans and as workers. I think if he were here with us today, he would recognize what I have to recognize, which is a great deal of what Martin Luther King sought to achieve remains to be done, because this country has been unable and unwilling, under the leadership that has governed it, to really address the inequality and the injustice that has accumulated across our history in an effective way. Which is why the wealth, average wealth of African Americans is lower today than it was 20 years ago. A statement that is stunning in the history of modern capitalism and attests more loudly than anything else I can say to a problem that remains central and foremost to this country's life. The first update I want to share with you today has to do with things going on in France. Masses of people, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, have been in the streets of France, not just Paris, but in all the cities and towns across the country. Vast demonstrations against the government, against the presidency of Emmanuel Macron. This man who once was a socialist politician in his country has decided that the French economy needs help. No one disagrees on that. That the French economy needs to be given by boosting and support to compete effectively in the world. And nobody much disagrees with that either. But here comes where the disagreement arises. How do you do that? And his decision is to bring you'll love this flexibility to the labor market. Let's look at what those fancy words mean. He has proposed labor reforms. What they basically amount to is to allow employers to fire employees pretty much at will. Up until now, the working class of France has imposed rigorous limits. Employer cannot fire employee without providing reasons, can be brought to court if those reasons are not acceptable, and will have to pay big fines if it was found that the firing of an employee was unjustified. These are rights of the laboring people, the vast majority. Mr. Macron wants to cut them back. He wants to make it easier for employers to hire and to fire. And there are a whole host of other things like that he wants to do because this will make business more profitable and that will help the French economy. He says masses of people are in the streets to say no, no, no, no, no. And before I tell you what the alternative they propose is, let's first face what I've just said to you. Because similar things have been going on for years in the United States. But there are no masses of people in the streets to fight them, to fight the damaging of working people 10 different ways. We don't do that in this country. Nothing like the French. And we ought to face what that means, what participation in democracy means, what the effect of all of this means. Let me remind you what the French working class has achieved. They have a work week much shorter than here in the United States. They have a completely nationalized health insurance program that gives everybody complete health insurance from the day they're born to the day they die. They are given by law five weeks of paid vacation for every working person that has to be paid by their employer. They have a system of daycare provision for parents that has no rival in the world. I could go on, but you get the picture. The decision by Mr. Macron is an attack on the working class. And let me explain to you why. Because to reinvigorate the French economy, there are other means than attacking the the benefits of the majority of people. Let me give you just a few. If you didn't allow the highest paid people in France to walk away with tens of millions of dollars, that money would be available to do all Kinds of things in the economy that would help the economy. Improve technical education, provide more people with access to college. Buy more modern equipment for your production. Here's another way to boost the French. Lower the prices of French goods in the markets of the world. People will buy more of them. And how might you do that? By lowering the salaries of the people at the top who take a disproportionate amount. And if you didn't have to pay them the big salaries, just say 30 times what you pay an average worker rather than 300, you could make savings on the prices of goods and that would make French goods more competitive. You get the picture. There are a lot of ways to boost an economy. Whacking the mass of people after they've won certain benefits that shape their lives doesn't have to be the way to go. And the French people are letting the French government know. No business as usual. Schools closed. The rail system closed. Students have walked out of school. Grocery store clerks have shut down the stores. You get the picture. It's almost May 2018. Fifty years ago was something called May 68, when workers and students didn't just close down this in that industry the way they're doing it today, they closed down France. It's springtime and capitalism is shaking. Let me turn to another economic update, very brief and scary, but I have to tell you about it. The crash in 2008, the crash that reverberated to this day as capitalism's second worst breakdown in 75 years. We're still only number two to the Great Depression of the 1930s that was brought on by the collapse of financial markets. This is a fancy way of saying the collapse of mortgages. People had been given mortgages who couldn't afford them, whose salaries weren't big enough to sustain them. Those mortgages were then bundled together in something called mortgage backed securities that were sold to people who invested in them, who invested in them, not understanding that the people who had taken out the mortgages which they now owned wouldn't be able to pay the monthly mortgage pretty soon. And that all blew up in 2008. And for a few years after that. Mortgages were not bundled into securities, at least not the mortgages of people who couldn't pay something called subprime mortgages. Mortgages. Mortgages taken out by people whose credit wasn't good because their income and their family circumstances made them poor bets to be able to own their own home. The last two years has seen a sudden resurgence. Call this capitalism that can never learn. And they're doing it again. The growth in subprime mortgage backed securities being marketed in the world has soared in the last two years, suggesting that memories don't go back very far. We're heading down the same disastrous road that we have been before. Another statistic that came out this last in more than half the states of the United States, students now pay more than the government does for tuition. And at public universities ever since the end of World War II, the importance of educating young people in America, the importance to them, to their families, to their communities and to our economy. Because as you all, I hope, know, the most important resource for the future of the economy of the United States in the larger world economy hinges on on the quality and the quantity of our trained young people. And the number one institution that trains young people in the United States are public colleges and universities. Over three quarters of all graduates of college and university go to public colleges and universities. And that was considered a social benefit, you know, like a public park or like anything else the government does for usthe roads, the harbors, the securityall of it. We benefit all, we share the cost. That was thought to include higher education just like it already includes elementary and high school and so on. But we're pulling back. In this capitalist country, the rich don't want to pay anymore, so, so they've got the politicians cutting their taxes and to get away with it, cutting everybody else's just a little so they don't pay attention, so there isn't the money. And so we're not going to support our college students. We need them more than ever. Our future depends on them. But in this strange capitalism, we are shooting ourselves in the foot. So the first time in half the states students have to come up with their own money to go to college more than the government kicks in to help them. Crazy behavior, self destructive behavior. And like with all self destructive behavior, you have to ask what leads people to do such a thing to themselves? In the end, a narrow mentality of saving my money and holding on at the expense expense of the society. Which is going to punish you for that? Sad, but it's in our society. Will young people learning perhaps from the French do something about this? Well, teachers are I want to shout out in my next update, I have celebrated what was accomplished by the West Virginia teachers few weeks ago when they pulled off a fantastic strike across every single county of the state of West Virginia, won themselves a 5% wage increase and no messing around with their health benefits. And boy was the lesson learned over the last week or two in comes the Oklahoma, Arizona, Kentucky. If I had more time, I'd go through the basic details on each of those three states. But those very different states, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Arizona, have one thing in common. Their teachers are not going to be told no. They're making the demands long deferred, that they get the respect as educators that they deserve and that they can do their job to educate the young people even if the police political leadership focused on tax cuts doesn't care anymore. Serving the big businesses whose interests are abroad, whose interests are somewhere else, and who don't care anymore about the mess they leave behind as they move their business somewhere else. I want to turn next to a wonderful piece of research that was actually done by the cbpp, the center for Budget and Policy Priority. If you're interested, they do a wonderful chart I just want to report to you about. It's a chart on poverty in various countries, but it does something unusual. It doesn't just measure how much income people earn and then decide whether you're poor or not. It looks at how much you earn, but then it asks how much of that do you pay away in taxes and how much in addition to that do you get in the way of social programs, rent, vouchers, food stamps, whatever it is, in order to get a sense of after taxes and what are called transfers, money from the government to people, how do you shape up in terms of the poor poverty? And in every country that they looked at, these folks, the poverty rate before you took into account taxes and transfers was much higher than what it was when you took them into account. Because after all, the point of the transfers is to reduce poverty, to alleviate poverty. So let me tell you about these countries. And in all the cases, these are countries that are considered high, high income, industrial developed countries. The country that takes care of its poor people, you might say best, is Denmark. There it is again. Their poverty rate, after you take into account all the transfers, 6%, that starts going up. France, it's 8%, still pretty good. Ireland, 9%. Okay, not so great. United Kingdom, 11%. But then we get to the highest percent, the country that accomplishes the least by means of its tax and transfer system to alleviate poverty, you guessed it, the United States, 18%. One out of five people in the United States is qualified as poor. That means a household income that is half the national median income. It's the bottom quarter of the population. Basically one out of four, maybe one out of five American families remains impoverished. Even after all of the food stamps, all of the vouchers for Rent all of the help that they get, we still rank at the bottom. Wow. Before I go on, I want to remind you, as I always do, that we maintain two websites where all of this kind of information and much more is available to you. The first one is democracyatwork. That's all one word, democracyatwork.info and. And the second one is rdwolf with two f's. Com. You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. You can communicate to us what you like and don't like about this program. And basically you can partner with us, use what we do, the work we do and that we assemble for you to share with your friends, your neighbors, your relatives, your co workers, which is why we do this program, make use of these two websites. They're available to you 247 at no charge. And for those of you that are listening to the radio show, if you're interested in seeing this as a television show, we urge you to visit patreon.com p a t r e o n patreon.com economicupdate the name of the show and you can see this program as a television program. And I want to take this opportunity to thank the whole Patreon community that we've developed to support this program. Your interest, your support is absolutely crucial to us and we appreciate it. I also want to remind you that we have our newest podcast about Puerto Rico Forward that you can find available on Apple Podcasts and Google Play as well. In the remaining time we have, I want to bring to your attention a very remarkable researcher whose work I urge you to look at. Her name is Virginie, the French version of Virginia and her last name is Perrotin. I'll spell it for you. P E R O T I N Virginie Pierrotin. She is a professor in the business school at Leeds University in Great Britain and she has written many books and articles and research reports that I want to bring to your attention. Because she studies worker co ops and in particular she studies what the difference is to a community that has worker co ops as the way they've organized businesses rather than top down hierarchical capitalist corporations. She looks and competes these two kinds of corporations and what she finds and what she documents in real systematic way is the superior benefits to the community, the greater efficiency and the greater human satisfaction people derive from democratically organized enterprises. If you want to see that research done, go find the work of Virginie P E R O T I N Business school professor at Leeds University in Britain. I've left some time to give you this last update because it teaches you so much about the American economy. This last week, President Trump proudly announced a new trade agreement with the country of South Korea, an important trading partner. And one of the items in that agreement struck me, and I want to tell you why. It has to do with tariffs on trucks. It turns out, for those of you who may not know, that the United States has imposed tariffs on trucks imported into the United States for the last half of century, since 1963, to be precise. The tax is enormous. This tariff, 25%. So whatever it costs to produce a truck in any other part of the world and bring it to America, we have to pay that price that it costs to produce the truck with a profit to the company, plus 25% tax or tariff on on it. This is a way to do what? It's a gift to the American truck producer because it makes foreign competition too expensive. They can't compete because we have to pay an extra 25% for a truck that comes in. That's 25%. We don't have to pay if the truck we buy is made here in the United States. The idea that Mr. Trump pushes and people like him, that we are only now threatening tariffs because other people discriminate against us, is nonsense. We, like every other country, manipulates foreign trade as much as we can get away with. We are not some innocent lamb that has been victimized. That's a silly fakery that we are adults and shouldn't indulge in anymore. So I want to tell you about trucks because it's so important. Here we go. Trucks in the United states account for 15% of all vehicles sold. Okay, the three best selling vehicles in the year 2017 were the the Ford F series truck number one, the Chevy Silverado number two, and the Ram Chrysler car number three. They were the most profitable sources of money for the automobile companies. And you know why? Because they're protected by a tariff. They could jack up the prices of their trucks because there was no danger to that. Cheaper, better trucks could come in because they were held out, because they had to pay an import duty, a tariff of 25%. You want to know why? Their advertisers filled the air in this country over the last 50 years. Every TV show imaginable with a cowboy getting off the back of his truck or putting a horse on it or otherwise looking very manly. We advertised trucks to the American people who bought them like it's going out of style, for one, because of the profits that were involved in trucks. And those were Only there because we put a tariff wall to prevent others. We made other truck companies come here into the United States to produce their trucks here so they wouldn't have to pay that. And we think that's created jobs in it did for a few. But the profits from all of that are in the hands of those foreign companies who can and do use them elsewhere in the world. What I want everyone to understand is something as American as the truck is a protected device. We have paid more for trucks produced in America than we should have and than we needed to. We could have had trucks much more cheaply if we would have allowed foreign truck companies to compete on a level playing field with Americans. On 4th of July, we have speeches about competition and how our leaders believe in competition. Don't be fooled. The American truck culture, which, by the way, has a lot to do with guzzling fuel because the fuel biting and eating of a truck is much worse than of a car. Remember it. The pollution we have, the use of fossil fuels we have, has been worsened by the truck, which has made profits for the few companies at the expense of the prices we all have to pay. They got protected. You got ripped off.

[B]

Off.

[A]

And that's because we use tariffs that way. And when Mr. Trump says he's going to use tariffs, that's what he's doing, too. This has nothing to do with protecting American jobs. This has to do with making a lot of money and charging Americans more for polluting more and all that goes with it. It's important to understand how the economy really works so that you don't get taken in by fairy tale stories about how it works that make us all beneficiaries, rather than understanding who the winners are and who the losers are in the way. Capitalism as a system works, and it works like this. All countries manipulate trade. All that's going on now is that Mr. Trump wants to manipulate it some more and to muscle his way forward, which he may or may not succeed at. But don't be fooled. This is not new. This is not helping us all. This is an old game being run on you again. We've come to the end of the first half of Economic update. I hope these updates have been interesting and provocative. That's what they're designed to be. Please stay with us. In a very short time, we will be back for what I believe will be an extraordinary interview with Dr. Harriet Frad having to do with an important news story connected to Stormy Daniels that I think you will all find intriguing. Welcome back, friends, to the second half of Economic Update, as I'm sure many of you now know, at the beginning of every month I have as my guest for interview Dr. Harriet Fraad, a mental health counselor and hypnotherapist in private practice in New York City. Before I give you the full introduction, I want to entice you, maybe even tease you a little bit, that we're going to be exploring the significance, the implications of the Stormy Daniels situation here in the United States because it has powerful ramifications and meanings to where we are in the economy and the politics of our country. Dr. Harriet Fraad, in addition to being a mental health counselor and hypnotherapist in New York, writes a great deal. Her articles have appeared in alternate in the book Knowledge, Class and Economics that was published in 2018. She appears regularly on the radio TV show Economic Update, as in Today, and also on programs such as Redacted Tonight with Lee Camp. Her work can also be found on her website. HarrietFraud that's all one word that I'll spell. H A R R I E T F R a a d.harrietfraud.com so it is with pleasure that I turn and have my conversation with Harriet Fraad about Stormy Daniels.

[B]

Hello.

[A]

Hi. Thanks for being with us again.

[B]

Glad to.

[A]

So tell me a little bit about this case that has obviously entranced the United States. I think you were telling me about the enormity of the very size of her 60 minute interview. Tell me what it is and why you're interested in it.

[B]

Well, I'm interested in it because it is a phenomenon that is accompanied by other phenomena. The first place, let's establish that Stormy Daniels interview on 60 Minutes got more viewers than the Golden Globes, than the Grammys, or than President Trump's post inaugural interview. She got 20 million Americans tuned in. Why is this significant on Economic Update? Well, this breaks the lines of dominance and submission in our society. Stormy Daniels, AKA Stephanie Clifford, is a porn star. And yet even as a sex worker, she feels entitled to stand up to the president when his smarmy lawyers try to trick her and make a do not disclose clause that keeps her from revealing his affair with Stormy Daniels 11 days before his inauguration. That is the non disclosure clause. It also was enforced by threats. She is speaking out anyway. Those who are at the bottom are speaking up. And if we take that further, we can look at the MeToo movement, which is also a movement of millions of women who were shamed and kept subordinate and kept embarrassed by men's powerful men's sexual advances towards them. We Also can look at another movement that has swept the United States, which is the youth movement against guns. In the case of the youth, they are saying the powerful forces of state and local government will not protect us.

[A]

So what you see in common is a kind of rising of the oppression of those disadvantaged because of their gender, because of their youth, because of their position in the workplace. Hierarchies are pushing back, in a sense, that becomes very important for economics and politics. If that's really going on, that would mean that the Stormy Daniels case really is a kind of symptom, a kind of expression of something. Is that your point?

[B]

My point is, yes. When the people at the bottom stop feeling ashamed and start feeling angry that they've been denied and start accusing the system that denies them, you have real possibility. And that has swept the country on three different fronts. Louis Althusser, the famous French philosopher, had a really good point. He pointed out that more powerful than the police and the army, if you want to keep a people down, is to keep disciplining them from the inside. To make them ashamed of who they are, to make them feel inferior, to make them feel low so that they don't even dare imagine standing up, no less do it. And that's what's happening. That's very powerful. When the whole apparatus that gets you to be ashamed of yourself so you shut up and obey collapses, big changes can happen. And that's happened with three different very media and imagination capturing events. Two of women, Stormy Daniels and the MeToo movement, and one of the youth of America. And when I saw this Stormy Daniels phenomenon and also, frankly, got a major thrill out of the way, she stood up for herself as a mental health counselor, I thought, wow, good for her. I thought, why? Why now? Why are all of these three things happening now?

[A]

Before we get into the why, And I'm very interested in that, I want to nail this down a bit more. Tell us what you think would have been before they're standing up that you're talking about. What would have been the reaction of Stormy Daniels, of the women in the MeToo movement, and of the young people like those in Florida at that high school. What would have been the reaction that you're now saying has been broken out of, has been left behind, has give us just imaginative. What would Stormy have done?

[B]

Stormy would have thought, I'm a lowly sex worker. Who am I to stand up to the President of the United States? He's the most powerful man maybe in the world now. And he's also very rich, and he Has a powerful lawyer to keep me quiet. And I'm told, which she cites, that she's told, they have a way of making your life a living hell. Who am I? I better be grateful I got some cash and shut up. And the women would be thinking, he's my boss.

[A]

People, the women in the Me Too.

[B]

Movement, the MeToo movement, he's got power over me. I better submit to his advances or get another job. Because I am nobody compared to this powerful. Roger Ailes, President Trump.

[A]

Harvey Weinstein.

[B]

Harvey Weinstein, Morgan Stanley executives who were outed last week. Every day there's another one, who am I? I'm just a woman and I'm being humiliated by my womanness, by my sexuality, and told I better shut up about it because these people are entitled to grope and assault me because I'm only a woman. That has changed. The same thing with these young people, because it was a million young people. Because although 500,000 were in Washington D.C. there were 80 marches around the country and 80 demonstrations of students. I saw them in New York when I passed, holding up the signs of the dead with their names and signs that say their name murdered. So every walker who walks by and in New York, that's millions of people has to witness that snuffing out of young life. That is, they are not saying, well, the lawmakers know better. Who am I? I'm only 16, I'm only 17. I'm only 18. What do I know? The state government is more powerful than I. And so when one of the broadcasters, I think it was on Fox News.

[A]

Yes, Laura Ingraham.

[B]

No, that was Laura Ingraham put down on her Twitter account, put down David Hogg, who is a leader of the movement. So he connected instead of feeling ashamed because she said he didn't get into all the colleges he wanted. And he's not much. He contacted his 600,000 Twitter followers with a list of all of her sponsors on her program on Fox and asked them to write in about this atrocity and say they will boycott the products advertised. There are 15 people at least who advertised. At least 12 of them have already withdrawn.

[A]

You mean companies, companies?

[B]

All sorts of companies, large and small. Well, large and larger. And what happened was she then apologized and he rephrased her apology to say, I am so sorry on Twitter that I've lost ad revenue. And he encouraged people to continue their letters, their emails, their calls to those sponsors. He was not going to be humiliated. When Emma Gonzalez was called a lesbian, she said, I am proud of who I AM One of the ways I got to speak out is I practiced by declaring myself bisexual and being the head of the gay and lesbian club at my school. And I've got a voice and I'm proud. So that they refuse to be crushed back into humiliating subordination by these pundits who tried to make them less that they are not going to knuckle under to authorities and the media.

[A]

So you think this is a really a major shift as a psychologist, as a person in that field? You think this is a major shift in the consciousness of a majority? I mean, if you put together women and young people in school, that's a majority of the American people.

[B]

It certainly is. It's a majority of the American people who are no longer going to be kept in a subordinate and humiliating submissive place in our society.

[A]

That has enormous implications for this whole society and for the economy as well in terms of how people are going to behave differently.

[B]

That's right. They're sort of like the unemployed in the 30s who, instead of feeling, oh, I'm inferior, were marching in the streets around the major cities of New York demanding jobs and demanding changes in the economy to get jobs, which is one of the reasons that FDR created those. What is it? What would be 22 million jobs?

[A]

All right, let me turn then, as you were about to, because I interrupted you. Let's talk about why. Why now at this moment in history, do we see women not accepting their subordinate positions at the workplace, not accepting sexual harassment, not accepting being terrorized by lawyers of rich men and students, not being willing to go along with the society imposed on them by their elders? Why is this? Give us some sense of how you find the explanation, the causes of this.

[B]

Well, both groups, as I looked at it and tried to understand it, both groups have changed their social status. Women are no longer at home. At least white women, minority women couldn't afford to be at home on minority male salaries. But while. And most people were white in the society for most of the time, but white women are now out of the home. They're not subordinate and dependent. They're not at home needing to obey their husbands. They have financial independence they don't have.

[A]

Because they've gone out to work.

[B]

Because they've gone out to work and they don't want to have to then take orders at home as well as on the job. And they have the financial means to be independent. Most divorces, for the first time in our history are initiated by women. 70% of college women's divorces are initiated by women. And about 60% of blue collar divorces are initiated by women. Women don't have to be subordinate anymore. We're in the workforce, we can stand up. We have positions outside, we have support outside. We're still paid less, but we have financial independence nonetheless. More than we were if we were utterly dependent on pleasing a man and doing domestic work and emotional work and sexual work at home. That's changed. So women have found a voice. Plus, and very importantly, from the late 60s, early 70s on, we had a movement behind us that said you don't have to be subordinate. What started out as the women's liberation movement and then became the feminist movement supports women having positions of authority all over the place, having equality in jobs, having equality of voice, having equality in all government positions. There's a bumper sticker that says a woman's place is in the House and the Senate and the presidency. It's a different way of looking at things. So that has changed and allowed the MeToo. We don't have to submit to sexual harassment and assault.

[A]

But let me push you a little bit on this. You say this sort of started in the 1960s and 70s. Well, it's now 40 years later. Are you saying that it has taken kind of a long time to have these economic changes, the job out in the world, all of that, the economic independence. It has taken all this time for it to kind of come up into the consciousness of women that they are now kind of feeling their oats?

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Is that the point somehow?

[B]

The consciousness of the mass of women. And don't forget, it's not just Hollywood stars that join me too. The 20,000 strong campesina movement of Fruit and Vegetable Pickers also joined and stated that they too suffer from supervisors and overseers and who control their work allocations and whether they work or not, sexually harassing them. It's taken all that long to get to the point of power and of consciousness that it takes for people to speak up and speak out. The same thing is happening with the.

[A]

Youth, but it would be a little bit different.

[B]

Well, it's a little different because what has happened is that in the 60s everyone could get a job. You may not get exactly the job that you wanted. If you were college educated, you'd get a better job. If you were a minority, you'd get a less good job. Or if you were only high school educated, however, you got a job. A steady job with benefits and an eight hour day. Unheard of these days. But an eight hour day and some benefits, that deal is off. These young people are having the doors of opportunity slammed right on their fingers. They are looking at massive college debt and no jobs. One of the bigger groups that are now signing up for food stamps are people with master's and doctoral degrees who can't get jobs. So, you know, to be a barista at Starbucks, you have to have at least a college education. That's a change. Why should they obey the rules that are keeping them down? What do they have to worry about? People have said, aren't you worried you won't get into a college because you're standing up? And they say, I'm not worried. First of all, I'm standing up because I don't know what good college will do for me. In any case, I don't know what chances I'll have. That road has roadblocks all over it. And so that they're thinking, no, these people have failed us. They've failed us in terms of costs of education, they've failed us in terms of jobs, they failed us in terms of advancement. So why should we stay down here and obey? And now they failed us in terms of murder. Emma Gonzalez, in her wonderful speech in Washington, called out B.S. the President and his ilk have tears and prayers. B.S. $30 million the NRA gave President Trump. Now he has sympathy for us B.S. and she called out all sorts of official pronouncements. And as BS Wow. She is saying, no, we don't believe these people, and what have they got? What have they offered us? What is our future? We have to take the matter into our own hands. And that's pretty much what women are saying. We're not going to get protected here. This is a patriarchal system in which we're supposed to be subordinate and accept assault in order to know our place and in order to inch ahead.

[A]

In a way, I'm getting the message that the economic system really shifted in the 70s, but that it took a long time. And maybe that goes back to your quotation of the French philosopher Louis Althusser, that you could keep the system going even after it had changed, so that the mass of working people's opportunities were being cut by and limited and families were being broken down because both adults had to go to work and both adults were away and all of the things we know, but it's still the old ways of subordination that you were used to, that you grew up with, that you inherited from the previous generation that takes a longer time to begin to dissolve. So that we're seeing kind of almost a delay Reaction to the economic shifts. And maybe one more thing, and I'd like your comment, maybe the economic shifts towards a new consciousness of women's sense of their own power and young people's sense of their own entitlement being destroyed and wanting to do something. Maybe it's also provoked by having a government at this moment that seems to want to go in the opposite direction, that seems almost to affirm the very things these two populations are rejecting, that this is a collision course.

[B]

It is a collision course. Betty DeVos is now cutting back on public education, taking away opportunities, allowing for profit colleges to continue to bilk people. And on the woman's front, you have a pussy grabbing president who is unabashed in his predations around women. And you have a Republican Party that supported Roy Moore, who had, I think it was seven women talking about teenagers.

[A]

Also young, very young women, his pedophile.

[B]

Sexual assaults on them. You know, it's the same mechanism that's getting rules changed about the sex abuse of priests. People don't come forward for many years. They don't allow themselves to realize what happened to them. They don't feel empowered. Then a few of them come forward in 2000 in Boston, it started. And then more and more and more when they feel that they don't have to submit, even though somebody is a holy Father and they're told to shut up. It takes a long time to change your consciousness from a consciousness of submission to a consciousness of, no, I will have a voice and I will stand up for myself.

[A]

Where do you think this is going? What do you think? You know, I know it's speculation, but what are the 20 million Americans who watch Stormy Daniels on that program and who watch it in the press and the whole thing unfold? What's the takeaway from any of them? What do you see as the. And I mean that in terms of the MeToo movement and the young people's fighting against guns. Where's that going? Where is that taking us?

[B]

Well, who knows where it's taking us? But what I think is happening is that all over people are saying, me too. Women are saying, I will not be debased by my female sexuality. This is a sex worker and she's standing up to the president and his lawyer because I don't have to be humiliated by being a woman or having a woman's sexuality.

[A]

Did her appearance, I know you watched it very carefully.

[B]

I did.

[A]

Did her appearance make that point, do you think? Did she get across that she was not ashamed, that she was self affirming? In her bearing.

[B]

She totally did. On another program, one of the retrograde hosts said to her, you know what? If things come to when a dumb whore can defy the President of the United States, she said, whoa, lucky, I'm not dumb. In other words, I'm proud of my intelligence and I'm not ashamed if you call me a whore, because that's an old term to humiliate women. So forget it. I'm not going to keep myself chaste to serve a man. Forget it. And she was very proud that she's been very successful as a porn star and an entrepreneur. And she now has a special stripping tour, Make America Horny Again, where she is charging much more than she used to and she's proud of it. And she's saying, but I didn't just do this for the money. I might be out 20 million. I did it because nobody's going to call me a liar and get away with it. Whoa, that's the President of the United States. So that I think people saw it for the vicarious thrill. And when they heard those students, 16, 17, 18 years old, standing up and saying, no, you don't. We're not going to wait till you protect us, because you haven't protected us. And of course they're looking at all the levels of, of protection. Protection from murder is primary here, but also protection to have a decent future in this country free from debt and with a steady income. All those protections are lifted. So why should they be subordinate anymore, be submissive? And the same thing is true at the workplace with the MeToo movement. These things are changing. And I think what they're saying to all Americans, because the mass of Americans have really suffered as they've lost the eight hour day that was so hard fought for, as the loss for a right to a job with job security and pension, as they've lost the right to be in powerful unions because the unions are weak. They at first were ashamed, felt inferior. What's wrong with me? If you're so smart, why aren't you rich? I must not be smart. They're now saying, wait a minute, I've been robbed and I have a right to stand up so that these things are contagious.

[A]

There we go.

[B]

Because there is change in America across the board. Now the change is in the top 10% who are raking it in from their, from paying Pakistanis and Bangladeshis the $3.10 a day they pay and exploiting the world and taking away the jobs that people counted on in the United States. They're certainly not rebelling, but the 90% are or could.

[A]

So you see a real possibility that what Stormy Daniels did what, in a sense, the MeToo movement represents the young people, that this is infectious, that this could be the opening wave of a, dare we say it, of a working class of Americans. Now that the middle class has evaporated on us, it could spread. In a sense, it is the beginning of something that could really change the society.

[B]

I think it is. I think it's a spark, and it's a spark that could create a fire because it sparks such interest and sympathy across the nation. Although Fox News condemned the youthful demonstrators against murder and against the proliferation of guns in the nra, the mass of Americans were enormously sympathetic. Me, Too has garnered sympathy across this nation as well as spread the the same thing is true for Stormy Daniels, who in another era wouldn't have dared do what she did. She's a porn star. Sex work was really debased in the old days as shamed women who weren't then eligible for the holy matrimony.

[A]

Well, we've come to the end of our time, but I want to thank you because in addition to all the particulars, the critique we sometimes get that it's a little hard to digest some of the things we have to say about our economy and that we need to point to positive possibilities. Well, you've certainly done that today, so thank you very much.

[B]

Thank you.

[A]

And for all of you, thank you for participating. I hope you found this as interesting as we did in preparing to present it to you. I want to thank truthout.org that remarkable independent source of news and analysis that has been a partner with us for many years. And as I often do, close by asking you also share what you have learned, what you have thought about as you watch this program or listen to it. That's the point. Talk to your friends, your neighbors, your relatives, share it, make it spread, and be yourself a partner and a force for change. I look forward to talking to you again next week. Sam. Sa.