3559 - Celebrating Michael Brooks on His Birthday w/ Milton Allimadi, Harvey J Kaye, Lisha Brooks & David Griscom

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Majority Report with Sam Seder
Episode: 3559 - Celebrating Michael Brooks on His Birthday
Release Date: August 13, 2025

---

Introduction

In Episode 3559 of The Majority Report with Sam Seder, host Sam Seder commemorates what would have been Michael Brooks's 42nd birthday. Brooks, a beloved figure in progressive circles and the host of The Michael Brooks Show, passed away five years prior. To honor his legacy, Seder invites some of Brooks's favorite guests: Milton Alamadi, author, journalist, professor, and co-founder of Black Star News; Harvey J.K., Professor Emeritus of Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, and author of The Fight for Four Freedoms: What Made FDR and the Greatest Generation Truly Great; Lisha Brooks, Michael's sister; and David Griscom, part of the production team behind The Michael Brooks Show.

---

Key Topics and Discussions

1. BLS Commissioner Nomination and Economic Data Integrity

A significant portion of the episode delves into the controversy surrounding Donald Trump's nomination of Scott Bessant as the new Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The discussion highlights concerns about Bessant's qualifications and the potential politicization of economic data.

• Sam Seder (09:02): "Scott Bessant apparently trusts the numbers enough to call for a rate cut, despite the fact that we're seeing core inflation go up."

• Emma Vigland (09:52): "We need to fire the people at Axios so we can get some more accurate headlines for President Trump."

• Milton Alamadi (14:19): "How dare you deprive the ruling planter class of their assets of their property. That is not a good example as well."

Seder criticizes Bessant’s expertise and accuses him of having a "Nazi battleship cruiser" background, mocking his qualifications with humor. The consensus among the panel is that Bessant is unqualified and that his appointment signals a dangerous trend towards data manipulation and authoritarianism.

2. Neocolonialism and France’s Withdrawal from West Africa

Milton Alamadi offers an in-depth analysis of France's recent withdrawal from West Africa, contextualizing it within the broader framework of neocolonialism and its impact on African sovereignty.

• Milton Alamadi (21:53): "France, in addition to the World Bank and the IMF, tied the currencies of the West African countries to the French franc... France was pretty much managing the economies because France was investing that surplus fund." [22:19]

• ** Miltion Alamadi (28:54):** "China has a very unique relationship with Africa because... they want either payment or they want a significant stake in your mineral resources."

Alamadi draws parallels between historical French colonial practices and current geopolitical shifts, emphasizing the rise of African leadership challenging traditional Western dominance. He discusses how young African populations are increasingly resisting external control, whether from France or emerging powers like China and Russia, advocating for self-determination and economic independence.

3. Impact of USAID Cuts on African Economies

Harvey J.K. addresses the ramifications of the Trump administration's substantial cuts to USAID, highlighting the precarious position of African nations reliant on this aid.

• Harvey J.K. (37:41): "In the short run it is going to be devastating. For countries like South Africa, for example, that depended on a very significant amount of that money to support their healthcare program... a lot of people that won't have access to the medicines are going to die."

J.K. explains that while cutting aid is intended to reduce dependency, the immediate effects are dire, leading to increased food imports and a resurgence of neocolonial economic structures where African countries remain reliant on exporting raw materials while importing manufactured goods.

4. The State of American Democracy and Authoritarianism

Harvey J.K. provides a historical perspective on American democracy, comparing the current political climate to the era of Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) and discussing the decline of the Democratic Party's commitment to progressive values.

• Harvey J.K. (46:57): "We've had this creeping authoritarianism ever since the 70s... and here we are. We are in one of the great crises in American history."

• Milton Alamadi (73:32): "The left has got to grow up. We have to come together around a radical... progressive, economy bill of rights because it is what Americans want."

The panelists argue that unlike the FDR era, where progressive policies were embraced and bolstered by strong democratic institutions, today's political landscape is marked by authoritarian tendencies, diminished party relevance, and compromised economic policies that favor elite interests over the working class.

5. Historical Parallels and the Decline of Labor Influence

The discussion delves into the historical shifts that have undermined labor movements in the United States, notably referencing the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 and its long-term effects on union power.

• Sam Seder (69:31): "Taft Hartley really narrowed the ability. It meant you couldn't have cross sector strikes. You couldn't have strikes outside of shops."

• Milton Alamadi (70:08): "The Democrats turned their back on it. So you know, and then last but not least, you have Ro Khanna... the progressive congressional caucus."

By drawing connections between past legislative changes and present-day political dynamics, the guests highlight the erosion of labor influence and the need for a reinvigorated, unified left to reclaim democratic and economic power.

---

Notable Quotes with Attribution and Timestamps

• Sam Seder (09:52): "We need to fire the people at Axios so we can get some more accurate headlines for President Trump."

• Milton Alamadi (21:53): "France was pretty much managing the economies because France was investing that surplus fund." [22:19]

• Harvey J.K. (37:41): "In the short run it is going to be devastating... a lot of people that won't have access to the medicines are going to die."

• Harvey J.K. (46:57): "We are in one of the great crises in American history."

• Milton Alamadi (73:32): "The left has got to grow up... because it is what Americans want."

---

Concluding Insights

Episode 3559 of The Majority Report serves as a profound tribute to Michael Brooks, encapsulating his passion for progressive politics, foreign policy, and global solidarity. Through the insightful dialogues with Milton Alamadi and Harvey J.K., the episode underscores the pressing challenges facing both African nations in their fight against neocolonialism and the United States grappling with democratic erosion and authoritarian strains. The guests advocate for a revitalized left, grounded in economic justice and solidarity, to confront these multifaceted crises.

Listeners are encouraged to reflect on the historical contexts provided and consider the pathways towards meaningful political and economic reforms that honor Michael Brooks's legacy of independent analysis and progressive activism.

---

Note: This summary excludes non-content segments such as advertisements, introductions, and outros, focusing solely on the substantive discussions within the episode.

Transcript

[Emma Vigland]

You are listening to a free version of the Majority Report. Support this [e-mail] and get an extra hour of content daily.

[Sam Seder]

The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Wednesday, August 13, 2025. My name is Sam Seder. This is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today.

[Milton Alamadi]

It is.

[Sam Seder]

Michael Jamal Brooks birthday. He'd be 42 today. To celebrate his birthday, we've invited on two of his favorite guests from the Michael Brooks Show, Milton Alamadi, author, journalist, professor and co founder of Black Star News. Also on the program today, Harvey J.K. professor emeritus of Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay. The author of the Fight for Four Freedoms, what made FDR and the Greatest Generation Truly great. Also on the program today, Trump's military troops occupy Washington D.C. didn't anticipate my ever doing that as a headline. Trump regime reviewing the Smithsonian exhibits to make sure they comport with the right wing's revisionist history and vision for America. New report. Texas Democrats plan to return in exchange for the end of this special session. Zelensky confers with Trump and EU in lead up to Trump Putin meeting where Trump primed to give away the house literally. Judge orders partial restoration of UCLA research funding. Juneau, Alaska braces for a record glacier melting, flooding, secretary of treasurer and about 14 other jobs. @ this point, Scott Bessant calls for a rate cut based upon employment numbers that the Trump administration supposedly doesn't believe. With hundreds now dead of starvation in Gaza, 27 nations demand Israel allow for permanent and immediate access for the union to provide aid. Minnesota teenager forced to show her breasts to prove her gender in a restaurant bathroom.

[Emma Vigland]

Feminism. Thank you Terfs. Thank you so much.

[Sam Seder]

New poll. Chuck Schumer at his lowest ever favorability rating. He is now underwater with New York City voters for the first time ever. Oh dear. We will be underwater. All this and more on today's Majority Report. Somebody saying audio is choppy.

[Harvey J.K.]

Refresh if your audio is choppy.

[Sam Seder]

Refresh if your audio is choppy. Meanwhile, sushi with the blood boys says we've already passed the record in Juneau. Welcome everybody.

[Emma Vigland]

It is hump day. Happy birthday, Michael Brooks.

[Sam Seder]

It is like I said earlier, it would be Michael Brooks's 42nd birthday. I don't know. It was a couple years ago we decided to in lieu of remembering his death, to celebrate his birthday. Michael, of course passed away five years ago in July of July 20th. And so today we have a couple of his favorite guests on. He had a lot of favorite guests, but these are, I think, two that I think and certainly he brought them to audiences that I don't know that would have a chance to hear from these folks. So we're gonna bring them on. We' also hear from Leisha Brooks, Michael's sister. And I think David Griscom will also join us briefly, part of the the Uber producer team, Matleck and David Griscom back on the Michael Brooks Show. All right, but let's get into it. Daniel from Virginia asked how would Michael Brooks have reacted to news that there would be a UFC fight on the White House. Is that true? I didn't hear that.

[Emma Vigland]

That's what Trump is saying, is saying.

[Sam Seder]

It, but I doubt it'll happen.

[Emma Vigland]

I mean, he's, it's, I think he.

[Milton Alamadi]

Would have just heard the binder on that one.

[Sam Seder]

Exactly.

[Emma Vigland]

He'll get distracted by something the next day. Although it seems like they are going to be doing some increasingly like integrated events with the White House and with ufc, part of why the Dana White or Dana White connection is being promoted. So I don't know, it's a little fascistic.

[Sam Seder]

Conveniently, they just got to deal with Paramount to ufc.

[Emma Vigland]

That's very convenient.

[Sam Seder]

Wow, is that weird. What are the chances? Let's turn to this. As you know, Donald Trump fired the, the head, the chief of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, when the abysmal, really genuinely abysmal jobs report came out about a week and a half ago, claiming that the jobs numbers were false based upon the fact that the BLS does what it does every time it releases a jobs report that is provides revisions for the two months prior. Because when they release their jobs report for any given month, they simply don't have all the data in. They have two different ways of measuring this, a household survey and a business survey, which is much more complete, or I should say more, more complete when all of it's sent in. But not all businesses send in their, their information in that first month. When it comes in later, they get revisions. It happens all the time. This was not a completely unique downward revision. We've seen that in the past 2008. There's been other occasions, but it was a dramatic one for sure. And so the White House was asked yesterday, what are you going to do? When are you going to release the new reports? I mean, Scott Bessant is now the acting head of bls. And here is Caroline Levitt answering that question. Money For BLS commissioner E.J.

[Milton Alamadi]

Antoni recently told Fox Business that the BLS should suspend issuing monthly job reports and only issue quarterly reports until the jobs data methodology is corrected. So does the president disagree with that assessment that his nominee has said there.

[Sam Seder]

Or suspending these monthly job reports a real option? Ms.

[E]

I think he floated the idea of possibly suspending until they can get the data and the methodology in order. And this president wants to ensure that the BLS again is putting out accurate and honest data that the American people can trust. Since you brought up the new commissioner, he holds a master's in doctor's degree in economics from Northern Illinois University. He's the chief economist in the Heritage Foundation's center for the Federal Budget. And in addition to his work at Heritage, he has multiple other roles. He's been widely renowned for his work on economic issues. He's been called before Congress to testify as an economic expert. So he's a qualified individual and the president trusts him to lead this important department.

[Sam Seder]

Two things. One, like I say, Scott Bessant apparently trusts the numbers enough to call for a rate cut, despite the fact that we're seeing core inflation go up. And two, let's look into EJ And Antony.

[Emma Vigland]

Respected expert.

[Sam Seder]

He is a respected expert, according to Caroline Levitt here. Actually, pop this article on the screen. This is a an Axios piece that came out yesterday. Utterly unqualified. Trump's BLS pick gets panned by conservative economists. Oh well, let's scroll down and see.

[Emma Vigland]

We need to fire the people at Axios so we can get some more accurate headlines for President Trump.

[Sam Seder]

Yeah, here we go. What they're saying Antonio's fellow conservative criticizes record as chief economist at the right wing Heritage Foundation's Herman center for the Federal Budget. Stan Vegar Vuger, senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute Institute, said Antoni's work, quote, work at the Heritage has frequently included elementary errors or nonsensical choices that bias that all biases findings in the same partisan direction. This is somebody from the from the American Enterprise Institute. Dave Herbert, who works at the conservative American Institute for Economic Research, wrote in a post on X that he's worked with Antony before and implored the Senate to block the nomination.

[Harvey J.K.]

Whoopsie.

[Sam Seder]

Quote, I've been on several programs with him at this point and have been impressed by two things things his inability to understand basic economics and the speed in which he's gone maga. Conservative economists have cited examples of Antoni, quote, appearing to misunderstand the data. He'd be responsible for as BLS head. Daniel DiMartino, a fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute. They are very conservative. Showed an institute of Antoni citing the rising number of Americans who aren't in the labor force without accounting for the role of aging population in terms of.

[Milton Alamadi]

My neurological capacity.

[Sam Seder]

Quote, this is one of the many elementary errors that show me Mr. Antony is unqualified for the labor market data collection and analysis role. He was nominated to Jessica Riddell, another person from the Manhattan Institute, senior fellow there. The articles and tweets I've seen him publish are probably the most error filled of any think tank economist right now.

[Emma Vigland]

Come on. He must be peer reviewed. And by peer reviewed, I mean he has a positive letter of recommendation from Ron Vera.

[Sam Seder]

Yeah, exactly. I'm sure. Or maybe he has a positive recommendation from Mr. Tony and Tony J. E, J, exactly.

[Emma Vigland]

Tony Soprano. It's A.J. soprano who's going to head the BLS.

[Sam Seder]

It's also, I mean, there's bipartisan support for this guy being an idiot. Jason Furman, who was on and Biden's White House chair, White House Council of Economics Advisers. I don't think I've ever publicly criticized any presidential nominee before. But E.J. antony is completely unqualified to be a BLS commissioner.

[Emma Vigland]

I mean, even on E.J.

[Sam Seder]

Alone, the RSM US chief economist Joe Brussels said that would be a serious mistake. In my estimation. It would only feel critic critiques of politicization of job market data. I mean, it keeps going on and on. EJ stands for economy genius. And just to top it off, aside from being at least judged by his peers both on the left and the right as being totally unqualified for this job, and despite the fact that the guy's talking about not releasing this data, which I would imagine is pretty important to some people, here he is doing a Fox Business hit and has chosen an interesting background. That being apparently a Nazi battleship cruiser. It is a German Bismarck wall. Art, art, canvas, printing, decorations. I mean, it cost 90 bucks. I mean, so maybe it was discounted, but to be fair, but there it is.

[Harvey J.K.]

Look, he's an economist, not a historian.

[Sam Seder]

Exactly.

[Emma Vigland]

But he's just very interested in that history, that particular part of history, one side of that history. In fact, he's just a collector. Like who was the sugar daddy for the rich guy?

[Milton Alamadi]

I forget what it was.

[Sam Seder]

Harlan Crowe.

[Emma Vigland]

Harlan Crow. They're just interested in history.

[Sam Seder]

But there it is. Remains to be seen if the Republicans in the Senate are going to kowtow to Trump this much when they have this sort of broad. I Have a feeling a lot of these guys are going to take vacation that day. They're going to basically like be out of town. There'll be 40 Republicans in the Senate and the Democrats will be able to block this nomination. I mean, otherwise it really is. I mean, it's off to the races time, I guess we are already off to the races.

[Milton Alamadi]

But.

[Emma Vigland]

This is significant.

[Sam Seder]

Seeing them openly and actively hire a guy explicitly to manipulate the data. Watching them also simultaneously do things like get the Smithsonian to change his exhibits based upon revisionist history and Donald Trump's proclivities. I mean, we are in an authoritarian state. It sounds dramatic to say these things, but you have military occupying Washington D.C. my guess is they're not going to last there longer than 30 days, but then they'll move on and they're just going to keep trying to extend the program. But that's basically it.

[Emma Vigland]

I mean, the bond market's a mess and you want to know why? Why would people buy long term US Bonds if the employment data, they have no idea if it's true or not. Or even the inflation data where a lot of our most reliable securities are pegged to inflation to, to encourage investment and to basically show that these are going to be very stable securities. It's like a $2 trillion market that's in jeopardy now because if you can't rely on government data, people aren't going to want to invest in the United States. Yeah, both like in terms of small business interests, but also like buying our bonds.

[Sam Seder]

In a moment, we're going to be talking to Milton Alamadi, author, journalist, professor, co founder of Blackstar News. First a word. First a word from our sponsors. As people know, I am a very carefree person and. Sorry, I'm a very carefree person.

[Emma Vigland]

You're always skipping around through meadows and things like that.

[Sam Seder]

And people often ask me, how come you're so carefree, Sam? Why is it like you're so laid back and so chill all the time? Well, I tell them the reason is because basically I am not worried about the one thing that used to freak me out. Reason why I come off as much more relaxed than I used to be, is because I have I got a will for just in case I pass away. I mean, eventually I'm going to. But that's the bottom line. A lot of us particularly, I mean, I didn't do this until I had a kid, but if you want to get the most out of life, you got to be prepared. A lot of us don't realize that a will doesn't cover everything. When it comes to estate planning, Trust and will can help ensure that your loved ones are covered when it comes to things like medical decisions and power of attorney. This is really important stuff actually. And I will also say important even if you have like a, like a kid who's just maybe over 18, you want things like medical decisions and power attorney for them too. So that it because they're their own individual, they're no longer minors and so you need to go in, I mean, God forbid something like that happens. But this is important stuff to get and more than anything else it just gives you peace of mind. It's one of those nagging things that you think in the back of your head, oh, I got to get this done. Go to Trust and Willcom slash majority. You get 20% off their simple, secure and expert backed estate planning services. For most people this stuff is fairly straightforward and Trust and Will makes it really easy. The website is intuitive. They walk you through everything. And again, just knowing that you've done this gives you a huge peace of mind. All your information, your documents are securely stored with bank level encryption. Each Will or trust is state specific, it is legally valid and it's customized to your needs. Estate planning, even if you have a very simple situation, can feel confusing and certainly can feel intimidating. But it's super easy to do. Trust and Will just walks you right through all of it. An overall rating of excellent. Thousands of five star reviews on trustpilot used by hundreds of thousands of families and counting. You can't control everything, but Trust and Will can help you take control of protecting your family's Future. Go to trustandwill.com.com one word slash majority. Trust and will.com majority. Get 20 off. That's 20 off at trustandwill.com majority all right, quick break. When we come back, Milton Alamadi. Sam.

[Milton Alamadi]

Live.

[Sam Seder]

We are back. Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland on the Majority Report. It is a pleasure to welcome back to the program Milton Alamadi. He is an author, journalist, professor and co founder of Blackstar News in Milton. It is Michael Brooks's birthday. You were one of his favorite guests. And so, you know, we've been trying to sort of like, I don't know, do what Michael would be doing or at least, you know, be talking about some of the things on his birthday. One of the things that he had that he really brought to the show, broadly speaking, was a wealth of knowledge when it came to foreign policy, but also a real knowledge base and curiosity of what was happening in the global south, and in particularly, you know, throughout Africa. And you were one of his, you know, primary sources of information. So really appreciate your coming on today.

[Harvey J.K.]

Thank you.

[Sam Seder]

And in that spirit, we'd ask you, like, you know, what do you think he would want to be talking about? What would he be following today? And one of those things you had mentioned was France's complete withdrawal from West Africa. Tell us a little bit about that in the relevance, and then maybe we can get into also, like, you know, what's happening in. In the wake of USAID coming out, but what your thoughts are on that.

[Harvey J.K.]

Okay, very good. All right. So I think when we had our first conversation about Africa, West Africa, it was focused on Burkina Faso. He was a huge fan of the late Thomas Sankara, and me too, by the way. So I think today he would be impressed to see that there is a resurgence of the spirit of Sankara wanting to take control of the destiny of African countries, wanting to kick out French neo colonialism. French neo colonialism was very special relative to the colonial experience in Africa. So when you compare with Britain, for example, the British withdrew. They relinquished control over their finances. Of course, they could still control it in a different way now. They could rely on the World bank and the imf. But France, in addition to the World bank and the imf, tied the currencies of the West African countries to the French franc. And it tied it in a very peculiar way. They were required to keep a portion. At one point, it was 50% of their reserves in the French central bank, meaning France was pretty much managing the economies because France was investing that surplus fund. And if it made money for them, good. If it lost, too bad. Right. So that's how dominant France was. And of course, the French also had military garrisons in those former West African colonies. And that's why it's even hard to, you know, all of these countries, generally, when you talk about independence, it's very superficial. They have their own national anthem. They have their flags, they have their state house, they have their president. They have all the symbols of statehood, but they don't really have sovereignty, generally speaking, even for the former British colonists. That I said. But add to that what I just factored in with the French arrangement. So you can now understand why the French presence is so widely resented, even by other African countries that were not former French colonies. So when Toa Sakana came on the stage in 1983, it was quite remarkable. Here is somebody in a former French colony where neocolonialism is so dominant. Coming into power and thinking, you know, what we can actually do for ourselves. We can run our own country, we can produce our own food. Why are we importing bottled water, for example? And it instituted agrarian reform. The land was made widely available to people that previously did not own land. Production grew. Within three years, Burkina Faso became self sufficient in food. So obviously France did not like this example that Sankara was setting and made it its mission to eliminate Sankara, using the leader at the time of neighboring Ivory Post, Felix, a very tightly controlled neocolonial leader. So then Sankara is off the stage. And now you see this resurgence. You see the current leader, Ibrahim Traude, evoking the spirit, memory and the practice of Sankara. You see it being duplicated in Mali as well and in Niger. So this is a conversation that I'm sure Michael would really enjoy extending with me.

[Sam Seder]

And I mean, what is leading to the. Is it that the French are being pressured out or is it simply like the French don't have the resources or are reorienting? Or is it a little bit of both?

[Harvey J.K.]

A little bit of both. And that's a really good question, actually. I think France, obviously, by virtue of being a member of NATO, by having a strong relationship with the United States, was able to project beyond its power militarily on the African continent. I think that is no longer the case. I think, for example, when you had the coup In Niger, the US had built a couple of years ago a $100 million drone base in Niger. So when the new government, the military government came in Niger, gave France an ultimatum, you have to leave by such and such a date. You've been exploiting our uranium. We are going to ban further exports until we come up with arrangement that benefits us financially. So the US with France, they're normally on the same page on issues like that, but the US realized, wait a minute, we need to speak a different language with them in case they allow us to remain and keep our drone base. So the US actually ended up staying an additional several more months while Niger was considering. And then Niger came to the conclusion that no US you have to go as well. So generally speaking, in the past, France was able to to flex more muscles than they really had because of US support. So that has made it much more difficult. And plus, I think the young people are much more aware now and much less willing of being exploited by the French. Unlike the older generation where we had a few, they select, they would hand pick the bourgeois African leaders to support, and those leaders would be able to maintain solid Control with French military support. But the young people are now showing that they're willing to come out on the streets and protest much more vigorously. And France obviously does not want to be seen supporting a government that is shooting down its own citizens.

[Emma Vigland]

How does that history or that understanding with young people translate to other countries now trying to invest in African countries, particularly China, as well as it builds out infrastructure across the continent? I'm curious if there's that same skepticism, rightful skepticism, that carries over now.

[Harvey J.K.]

Okay, so when we come to China, China has a very unique relationship with Africa because as you pointed out, China has built a lot. In fact, the African Union headquarters, for example, in Addis Ababa, that was built by China. A lot of the impressive roads, highways in Addis Ababa built by China, the bridges, the railways. It's invested a lot in rail. Something which the west has not been willing to do. Something.

[Sam Seder]

I was there 26 years ago and they were. And everyone was talking about how the Chinese were investing there.

[Harvey J.K.]

Yes, yes, absolutely. But of course that also comes with a cost. They're not doing this for free. This is not the China of Chairman Mao. No, this is a very different China. The China. Chairman Mao built that great railway connecting Tanzania to Zambia, for example, call it the Tanzania Zambia Railway. That was done much in the spirit of solidarity, because when they started working out that relationship, China was not a member of the United nations yet that we had, Taiwan. So China needed a lot of African support and solidarity in order to get seated at the un. Eventually that happened, and of course now China is part of the permanent member of the Security Council. But the China that we have today is very much market oriented China. So China comes and builds all these roads, but of course, in return, they want either payment or they want a significant stake in your mineral resources. So the young people are now questioning that relationship as well with China. Why are we mortgaging our resources for such a long period of time? So you have younger leaders, in the case of the military leaders in Niger, in Burkina Faso, in Mali. They know that, okay, once you kick out the French, you're going to need an alternative. So for right now, that's why they were building this tighter relationship with Russia. Not so much that they have a particular love for Russia, but if Russia can give them military support to withstand any possible aggression from France, they're going to take that. But then you have the case of a leader like Basilo Faye in Senegal, who is a civilian but came to power because of young activists who came out in the street when France wanted Mac Sal, who had served two terms but had a very neocolonial relationship that France was happy with. They wanted to support him to even extend into a third term, even though it was banned by the constitution. That's when the young people came out on the street, led by people like Basino Faye, and ultimately forced them to have elections which Basilo Faye's party won. So now he is trying to play off the Chinese relationship with the west, with the United States, with France. So that's the kind of tightrope that he's walking in terms of the difference between his approach and the approach of the leaders in Mali, Okinaw, Faso, but ultimately the young people also questioning the neocolonial control that the World bank and the IMF has over African countries. I think the best example of that was what we saw in Kenya last year when the government wanted to hike taxes because it wanted to increase its capacity to pay the World bank and IMF loans. And the young people are saying, we already being bled really to death. We can't afford to pay anymore. And the taxes were on items that you cannot live without. Food, fuel, and housing. So they organized on social media. It was very powerful, very effective. They forced the government to cancel those taxes. It came at a cost, of course. At one time, the government just seemed to lose control, and young people are being shot at with live ammunition. I think more than 50 were killed. But ultimately they succeeded. So that is the kind of change that we're seeing in the African continent right now, where young people are becoming much more vigorous in challenging the neocolonial status quo.

[Sam Seder]

And France seems to have a. They get a little white knuckled about this stuff. It feels like. I mean, you know, I have never been able to get over their claim on Haiti's, you know, gross national product up until. And people, I don't think, realize this. Haiti had to pay back France the cost of freeing themselves as slaves until, what was it, like, 1950? And maybe it was 1948 or something like that, but that's 100, and I don't. I can't do the math. 150 years or so. And that. That sets a country back a little bit. If you lose 150 years of essentially compounding interest in being able to reinvest your resources.

[Harvey J.K.]

Absolutely. Tragedy.

[Sam Seder]

A huge tragedy. And France is sort of like really the. They. They had that their grip was the last on some level, to go, at least from that era of colonialism.

[Harvey J.K.]

Yeah. And of course, you know, the Haitian revolution, you don't want something like that to spread. That is not a good example to be to allow to spread in places where Africans were still enslaved. So that was part of the reason that, okay, even though they kicked us out physically, militarily, we still have ways to make them pay the price and to set an example to other places where Africans may want to emulate or duplicate what the Haitian people did. And also it goes with the whole spirit of how dare you deprive the ruling planter class of their assets of their property. That is not a good example as well. So a lot of people were not aware until recently because now in recent years it's been the news that after the slavery was abolished in British. In Britain in, in, in 18. When was it? It was 1883.

[Sam Seder]

No, no, slavery was earlier than that in Britain. I believe it was like 1830.

[Harvey J.K.]

Yeah, somebody looked it up. I thought it was like 1883. But anyway, after they abolished, they compensated their former. Those were the ones who are compensated, not the formerly enslaved, you see. So it was consistent with what France was doing as well. How dare you deprive us of our assets the amount that Britain compensated the former enslavers. If you do it, let's say in 2024, US currency, it will come more than 2, 2 billion dollars. That's how much they were compensated, you see. So it goes with that whole mentality that you are not entitled to your liberty and to deprive us of our income, which we're entitled to from your sweat and blood.

[Sam Seder]

So it was 18, 1834. I knew it was before the States got to it.

[Harvey J.K.]

I mix it around by putting 83. I was going to say 38, something like that, but yeah, than what are.

[Sam Seder]

The implications of the aid cuts that we've seen from, you know, obviously from the Trump administration is basically all but abolished U.S. aid. And what's your perspective on USAID? Because there's, there's sort of a. It is another mechanism of control on some level, but also it saved a certain amount of lives.

[Harvey J.K.]

Absolutely. And that is the catch 22. And that is the tragedy. Of course, the tragedy is for the neo colonial bougie African elite leadership that emerged after independence to allow themselves to develop that kind of dependency with the World bank, with the IMF and with these institutions. The British have their versions of these institutions as well that have made Africa and the countries so dependent on these quote unquote aid organizations. So you have a situation where now, and I'm not saying it's directly tied to usaid Per se. But you have African countries that have abundant fertile land. And yet on an annual basis, Africa imports $35 billion worth of food. That is preposterous. They've never been this food dependent since even the 1960s. In the 1960s, they used to grow much more of their food than they import today. So in a roundabout way, to answer your question, I'm saying in the short run it is going to be devastating. Of course, in countries like South Africa, for example, that depended on a very significant amount of that money to support their health care program, the fight against HIV aids, a lot of people that won't have access to the medicines are going to die, you know, so obviously nobody can support that kind of unilateral overnight cut. Right? This is something that should be phased out, but definitely should be phased out so that these countries can develop their own capacities because they have the natural resources. They have the resources to generate wealth from that and get away from this dependency. And that also applies to the economies, for example. So you have today, in 2025, the same structure that was created and established in 1884, 85 at the infamous Berlin Conference when African countries were partitioned by the European powers, what did they set up? They own the territory. So it's like a new form of slavery. In fact, they own the territory, they control the population, they impose subjugated labor upon them. They take away their land. So now they don't have independent income to be independent because they're now dependent on working on the people that have now taken over their land. They produce raw materials that are shipped off to those European countries that have now industrialized. They manufacture products that they bring it back to African countries. So they have a captive market. The Africans have no choice but to buy those manufactured products from Europe. 2025, we have the same arrangement. There's not a single industrialized African country. Right. So the Europeans don't even have to be physically in control anymore. You know, you have the World bank and imf. You want to get a loan from them, they're going to give you conditions which preclude industrialization. So, so it's 2025, you're still selling raw materials.

[Sam Seder]

How explicitly do they preclude it? I mean, is it explicit or is it just that they put constraints on capital investment?

[Harvey J.K.]

Yeah, it's a very good question. I mean, they can't come and say, you know, you can't take this money and put it in this and that. So they use so called free market. Right. You know, they talk about the free market, as if we even have the free market here in the United States. Right. So they say you should put the money into the, what do they call it, what you have a comparative advantage in. Right. And obviously your competitive advantage is not producing cars. Right. You should import that from the US Or Britain or from European countries. You have competitive advantage in producing raw materials. And that's the argument they make, you.

[Sam Seder]

Know, and that's the constraints they put on the loans.

[Harvey J.K.]

Essentially. Essentially. And that's only half of it. And then that other half is, and this has been referred to as structural adjustment. Also, we don't want wasteful spending. So you have to lay off civil servants, you have to lay off teachers, you have to stop subsidizing education, you have to stop subsidizing healthcare. There's an interesting documentary. It's called the End of Poverty with a Question mark. It's pretty old, like 20 years. It needs to be. But I mean, you have Africans being interviewed describing the impact of these conditionalities, people dying of simple malaria. Because now when you go to health clinic, if you don't pay cash, you won't have access to quinine and basic medication that would save your life. That is just one of the types of impacts. Your people that have been kicked out of school now because they have to pay now because the government is not subsidizing education.

[Sam Seder]

It's fascinating stuff. Milton, we could continue this conversation and there's a lot other things, too, I think that, you know, we could be talking about. We have to, we have to move on, but let's do this again.

[Harvey J.K.]

Thank you for the opportunity. And we love Michael and we miss Michael and may he rest with the ancestors in peace.

[Sam Seder]

Indeed. And we will put links to some of the past interviews and conversations that you had with Michael on tmbs in our podcast and YouTube description. Again, Milton, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it.

[Harvey J.K.]

Thank you so much. Be well. Thank you, Milton.

[Sam Seder]

All right, we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, another one of Michael's favorite guests, Harvey Jk, professor of Emeritus of Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, and the author the Fight for Four Freedoms, what Made FDR and the Greatest Generation Truly Great, will be with us in just a moment. We'll be right back after this. It Sam. We are back. Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland on the Majority Report. Today would have been Michael Brooks's 42nd birthday. And to celebrate his birthday, we're having some of his favorite guests on and want to welcome back to the program. One of Michael's very favorite guests, one of the, like, I feel like one of the first people who actually in studio here, Harvey J.K. he is, of course, professor emeritus, Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, author of the Fight for Four Freedoms. What Made FDR and the Greatest Generation truly great. I think we just had you on with the letter hack for the Comic Strip. The Comic Strip graphic novel, I guess. I don't know.

[Milton Alamadi]

But we were hoping to get there. Yeah.

[Sam Seder]

And Harvey, you were one of Michael's favorite guests, and he loved talking to you. And, you know, we. You've been on the Majority Report many times, too. But I mean, you know, we were trying to sort of get a sense of, like, you know, what would he be talking about these days? It would probably wouldn't be radically different from what we've been talking about. But wanted to get your take. I mean, we're in. How unique of an era are we in relative to, like, authoritarianism? And then we could talk about, like, you know, what we need to do to push back on it.

[Milton Alamadi]

Well, first I'll just say, you mentioned in studio I always had an arrangement with Michael that if he would say, when you want to come on soon, I say, well, I'm going to be in Brooklyn like the next month to visit our daughter who lives in Greenpoint. And so I would end up in studio, which was always a pleasure. I mean, if I were in Brooklyn right now, I would rather be with you folks as opposed to zooming with you folks. And one of the things that was always the case, I mean, Michael talked about three mentors, Adolf Reed, Richard Wolff, and me. Each one of us had a kind of separate orientation. You know, Adolf was very much a political scientist, Richard Wolff an economist, and I was the historian of that crew. So whenever I was on, Michael would always ask, how did we get here? Okay, and this is. We're talking several years at the least ago when these questions began, maybe 10 years ago. And I remember using the term, well, for 40 years. You know, we've had this creeping. I used to talk about creeping socialism back in the 50s. Well, we've had creeping authoritarianism ever since the 70s and the Declaration of war, essentially by capital conservatives and the neoliberals who came into the show around then. And here we are. I mean, we've seen it for all these decades. And basically the Republican Party lives up to the worst expectations. The Democratic Party is hardly relevant and allowed themselves to become decreasingly relevant all these years. So how unique is this? Well, in terms of authoritarianism for the United States, this is actually very unique in terms of authoritarianism for large, you know, segments of the population. No, I mean, we had slavery, okay? Then we had the, you know, the reconstruction period, which everyone thought might be a moment of real liberation, but then they ended up imposing the bourbon regimes in the South. Immigrants had their own struggles to get along. Women, of course, always experienced versions of that. But this is a very. In its own way, every crisis, every moment is unique. And in many ways this is unique because we have done the nightmare version. We allowed ourselves, and I'm not saying you and I are responsible or am I responsible? We allowed ourselves to elect a man who already indicated his aspirations of dictatorship and authoritarianism. And most people out there either didn't believe him or thought he was comical when he would talk in those terms. They didn't imagine he might actually begin to pursue it. And if you think about the past six months, I mean, we are in. This is one of the great crises in American history, I think, really one of the great crises. And the action to get, to get out of this is a challenging one.

[Sam Seder]

I mean, it really, it happened very quickly when we crossed that threshold. I mean, it's very, you know, it's like a tough line to see crossed until you sort of see it in your rear view mirror. And, you know, the idea that we have troops on that are been deployed to Washington D.C. after being sort of deployed to LA, right. And this stuff with the Smithsonian, with the BLS, with the massive federal police force that ICE is going to create, with the deportations and making law firms and universities, you know, bend the knee, essentially. And so it seems dramatic. And in terms of like a fascistic movement. Put aside the authoritarianism for a moment. We've seen this kind of fascism, though, rise in this country, right? I mean, you know, like we had the KKK at about 10% of the population in 1920. And we had a. I don't know how far in the attempt of the coup of fdr, we got, you know, with Smedley, Butler, et cetera, et cetera. But where does it rate? Along those. Along that line.

[Milton Alamadi]

Along that line. I think this remains unique. Here's what I mean, okay? If we assume for the moment that he has the MAGA base, as it's called, okay. And I'll be generous and say the MAGA base might be 30% of the American people, although it's probably shifting a bit in light of events that's rather unprecedented. So if you go back to the 30s, for example, with the attempted coup to take out FDR and the attempted coup from above, which that is investing huge sums of money in the 1930s by way of the American Liberty League. The billionaires of the day, the multimillionaires of that time, invested heavily to try to take him down. But what FDR had, okay, and this is to his advantage, and it's not to the advantage of Trump specifically, or ever would have been to the advantage of Biden, is that fdr, by the time of two years into his presidency, they loved him. The American working class loved him. Whatever reservations they might have had, because he had already begun to show that his party was committed to addressing not just. Not just the economic depression, but the inequalities and the authoritarianism of capital. Okay? I mean, right away, in the first hundred days, we all talk about the National Labor Relationships act of 1935, which empowered collective bargaining and the right to organize unions and place the government at that time solidly behind those efforts. But in fact, in 1933, FDR had already signed into law the National Industrial Recovery act, which included just those kinds of rights. And sadly speaking, capital found a way around it by way of creating, for a while, companies. The other thing was that FDR made it clear when he signed the National Industrial Recovery act into law. He said quite publicly, the time has come for corporations and businesses to pay nothing less than a living wage. Now, these are the kind of signals FDR sent. And Americans mobilized hundreds of thousands and millions ended up joining the labor movement. Civil rights organizations actually began to rev up in a significant way in the 1930s. I mean, there was a massive national housewives movement that took place when they found that companies were often trying to jack up prices in order to cover what would have been the higher wages. So in that sense, the tumult of that time favored FDR and the Democratic Party, which, other than the Southern Democrats, had decidedly moved in a direction that, though the term wasn't used by FDR or the Democrats, Social Democratic direction, Social Security, National Labor Relations act, housing, I mean. I mean, across the board, those kinds of dramatic changes. So this is unique because we have a man in office right now who was elected and, you know, if I can just, you know, sidebar a moment. To me, the critical moment was probably when Obama was elected at least to have shifted gears. I mean, if Obama had pursued half of the promises that, yes, we can, implied, we might never have arrived here. Okay.

[Sam Seder]

And just, yeah, from a structural standpoint, I mean, there was A really started when he was the nominee. They began to coalesce power, I mean specifically the word went out. Do not support outside groups. We're bringing it all in house. And then Obama for America basically was, you know, led into a dungeon as it were after and, and I mean there was a specific agenda, mean a tactic in their mind to disempower the organizing the populism that had built around Obama. And I mean I don't think it was ever his agenda to be populist, but as evidenced by the fact that they did not want any other power bases outside of the White House to exist. And we ended up seeing the, the results of that both in how hard it was for them to get the ACA through even with ultimately with 60 votes, but also how many elected officials in the states were lost over that time. A thousand, I think over the two terms. And you know, you know, that's why we lost the governorships. That's by, by, by 2, by 2010. All that redistricting happened at that time. You know, there was some state comptroller who left politics because they didn't know where to go because the whole bench was wiped out. Well, so let's talk about the sort of like the, what FDR did as a proof of concept in terms of like the electoral power of this. Because you know, I think there's a. We operate, not everybody, but there is one mode of operation where the Democrats are trying to figure out how to win and they can't figure out how to do it. And they argue that, you know, we need to moderate and you know, but, but the Democrats know we have proof of concept. Right. I mean even if you look at it the most cynical way, it's there the people don't realize this. I mean at least you and I do, cuz we're old. But people in this office like Democrats controlled The Congress until 19, what was it, 95 and I mean four, 40 years straight. They controlled, 50 years straight. They controlled the House because of these reforms. And so it's out there. It's just there are certain percentage of Democrats maybe over 50%, maybe less, who use this question of how do we get elected As a way of making sure of really saying how do we get elected with a set of policies that are not going to disempower our benefactors.

[Milton Alamadi]

Yeah. You know, clearly they're all praying for a Cuomo victory in or you know, possibly even Eric Adams victory in New York. You know, God forbid. I'm joking. I don't know. Well, how do you pronounce that name? I was, I think it's Sliwa.

[Emma Vigland]

But I did find out the other day he lives in a studio apartment with like over a dozen cats. So I don't know if I trust that guy fully.

[Sam Seder]

Well, I have a feeling that's a function of divorce.

[Milton Alamadi]

I've heard New Yorkers who are progressive say, hell, better him than Cuomo or.

[Emma Vigland]

Well, fair enough, yeah.

[Milton Alamadi]

Yeah. So look, I mean, what's interesting is people look our. Well, I'm a generation ahead of you, Sam, but our generation. Yeah. Well, to me you got. Everyone else has stayed younger while I'm getting older. The thing is that we were taught wrongly about fdr, Americans, you know, of the post war years, those of us who were baby boomers, so to speak, we were taught that this was all because, you know, FDR was a liberal, okay? And he saved America from capitalism, et cetera. That's what made him great. And they really did not want to make the case that. Well, the point is that FDR had said even before he took office that he needed to make America fairly radical for at least a generation. In writing, he had sent to a friend who was like the foremost figure in the field of social wealth, academic, social welfare questions. And then from the very that first hundred days immediately challenged Americans to try to live up to that. Now, there's no doubt that at the outset he made accommodations with capital, but when they made it clear they were not going to give way, he turned and in 1936, and you can imagine how much the working people loved it, he said at the Democratic National Convention, 1936 in Philadelphia at a stadium of like 100,000 people nationally broadcast, he said, you know, they complain. And when he said they, he meant the economic royalists complain that we want to overthrow American institutions. And he said, but what they really complain of is that we want to overthrow their power. And to paraphrase, and guess what, they're right. I mean, he made it clear, however much, ultimately much it didn't happen. Maybe as people on the left today would have said, jeez, but he didn't do this and that. The fact is that was a remarkable 12 year presidency. And you're right, not until 1995. I mean, they briefly lost Congress in 1946, but they got it back and right all the way through. I mean, even Dwight Eisenhower in 1954 said when his brothers asked him who was a conservative down in Texas, when are you going to start doing what we put you in office to do? And he said, Anybody, any party that tries to get rid of labor's rights, of Social Security, I mean, he went on and on and on, will never be heard from again in this country, okay? And then, of course, our generation was involved from the bottom up, so to speak, watching our parents generation elect the most liberal, indeed progressive Congress since the 1930s. And one advantage they had is that of course, they had experience. And what they knew to do was to have a president who surprised them, okay, and became the most progressive president since fdr. Again, the war, and I can give you other reasons in which, you know, I have real criticisms of the Johnson administration. But they did institute a second effort at least of approaching a new Deal. And then what did the Democrats do in the 70s? It's like they said, well, I guess it's time, you know, we gotta turn our back on labor, on the working class, on the FDR tradition. By the way, that included the likes of Gary Hart and in time, well, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and on and on and on and on. And it is amazing. It isn't that the Democrats, I used to think, well, the Democrats forgot, right? They didn't forget. They literally sold out and bought and were bought up.

[Sam Seder]

Right.

[Milton Alamadi]

Okay, but not. But here's the thing, and this is the amazing thing that people also don't realize, and I don't know how many times it shows up in the media, they occasionally do make it clear the majority of Americans still want exactly the kinds of things that FDR pursued and promised, especially in 1944, with the idea of an economic bill of rights. I mean, we actually had polling done, those of us who were involved in this project of creating an economic, economic bill of rights. And to our, you know, to our pleasure, we found out that, yeah, you know, the majority of Americans want any essentially an economic bill of rights. And at least in the Democratic side of the thing, they really want it. The great majority wanted it. But what do the Democrats do? What do they do? They, sorry, I'm getting revved up here as if I was with Michael back then. You know, what do they do? They allowed Biden to stay in office, you know, as long, you know, say he was going to run. They then choose or position Harris to take over, even at the moment where they might have done something when she chose Waltz, you know, they send him out against Vance in a debate. This is like that moment where you see it happening. And they probably told him, just shut up.

[Sam Seder]

Right?

[Milton Alamadi]

Don't say anything. And that was like the final straw in some ways because the election was Relatively close. But seriously speaking, the demo, it's like when people used to say, well, you know, the Democrats really don't want to win. The consultants make more money as losers. And I used to joke about it and I used to laugh at them, say, come on, don't be ridiculous. But it isn't that. It's that they don't want to lose the donors, period. Okay? And the fact is we are the majority, Progressives are the majority. And the point now is to try to organize. And as I sent the note to Brian and to you, look, the left has got to grow up, okay? We have got to come together around a radical. And I say radical because in this day and age it sounds radical. A radical called the progressive I don't care vision that approaches or actually endorses and embraces an economic bill of Rights because it is what Americans want and Democrats especially want it. And by the way, you can't work without it. We have got to align these progressive organizations with larger and smaller movements. We have got to get labor to remember that in 1944 when FDR called for an economic bill of rights, they launched national campaigns in pursuit of it. And they never gave up that vision until at some point they were so smashed, I don't think they could imagine anything after the 70s and 80s with Carter and Reagan. So you know, I mean, and then last but not least, you have Ro Khanna on occasionally, do you not?

[Sam Seder]

We haven't, but. But.

[Milton Alamadi]

I mean he and I spoke together a year ago at the pre convention progressive thing and I think people like him in the congressional caucus, Progressive Congressional caucus. It's about time they came out bluntly, not policy by policy bluntly, and said in a manifesto like way to the Democratic Party, this is what we stand for. We stand with fdr, period. And that's what we want.

[Emma Vigland]

Right. And then you can hit the Republicans on being the party of the robber barons of the current era and then you make it a full circle historical kind of perspective here.

[Sam Seder]

Yeah, I got two questions for you. One was one. One historical and one just referencing what you had mentioned. But let me just start with this. Where's McGovern in that? I mean I know where Hart is, Gary Hart and Clinton and the sort of like rise of the more austerity, corporate oriented Democrats. But McGovern, McGovern was, you know, and I've always perceived McGovern as being sort of like the, the, you know, the. He's been smeared as being the hippie choice. And I, I mean he was very Progressive on a lot of things, but he was somewhat anti. I don't know if he was anti labor, I guess, is what I'm asking you, because he certainly was. He was in charge of a commission that moved. That introduced democracy, more democracy to the Democrats in terms of their primary process, but also specifically to disempower labor leaders at that time. So where do you put him in? That's the piece I've never fully understood about McGovern.

[Milton Alamadi]

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

[Sam Seder]

They democratized it. I mean, it used to be sort of like more of like a smoky back room type of situation.

[Milton Alamadi]

And that's first to remember that. Well, actually, it's the second thing that George Meaney, the head of the AFL CIO was shocked by. I mean, absolutely shocked. The first one. You gotta go back a little further. In 65, 66, a law, a bill appeared before House and Senate. Okay. And the bill was to finally bring an end. I should have mentioned this earlier. An end to the Taft Hartley act of 1947 that disempowered labor in the sense that it made it extremely difficult. I won't go into the whole thing. To organize in the south, which, by the way, also utterly hampered the civil rights movement. Okay. For those years. Okay. So anyhow, the bill comes up and it's before the Senate. And needless to say, there's a filibuster. A filibuster being pursued by a combination of especially Southern Democrats and perhaps some Northern Republicans. So McGovern was from South Dakota and he didn't know what to do. South Dakota, I believe, had already become a right to work state. And he actually asked for permission, I think, from who? I don't know. He voted to not bring an end to the. To the filibuster that began the animosity that labor started to feel for him. That would have changed, by the way. Those are the kinds of things that would have changed the course of American political history.

[Sam Seder]

Right. I mean, people have to understand. Taft Hartley was like Empire Strikes Back against the National Labor Relations act in really current. And started the essentially was the beginning of the end of union dominance in this country. It took a couple of decades, but Taft Hartley really narrowed the ability. It meant you couldn't have cross sector strikes. You couldn't. You couldn't have strikes outside of shops. I mean, it really limits labor's ability. And, you know, if we. If we had gotten rid of that at that time, we'd have a very different country right now.

[Milton Alamadi]

Yeah. And people often say that it was the civil rights and the civil rights movement and then the riots of the late 60s that brought an end to the Democratic Party hegemony, so to speak. But if you actually look at the surveys and polls of the period in the 70s through the 80s when Republicans asserted themselves and neoliberalism emerges as the powerful force in the Democratic Party, most Americans were still saying, the majority of them, they wanted great society, new deal kinds of policies, but the Democrats turned their back on it. So anyhow, so we get to 72 at the convention, and they choose McGovern and Meany. Not all of labor, but Meany and the AFL cio, you know, representatives there, they walked out and they sent a signal to the Democratic Party that, you know, you can't depend on us in the same way.

[Sam Seder]

And part of that wasn't just a personal animosity to McGovern. I mean, there was a sort of like a cohort of people would ultimately be known as the Reagan Democrats.

[Milton Alamadi]

Oh, absolutely.

[Sam Seder]

Yeah. Who were responding against the emancipation movements of women and of black people and of otherwise marginalized people in our society. But do we see that strain today with Sean o' Brien and the Teamsters who are now moving towards the republic? I mean, this is the sort of the dilemma. Have we alienated labor to the extent at this point with the Democrats not being the party of the working class enough that, like, we're gonna have to do something radical to reorient and get back? I mean, there's no returning to the status quo, it seems to me.

[Milton Alamadi]

No, thank goodness. The scary part is that there is no returning. But that's also the challenge. Okay. I mean, if the Democrats want to go on in the way they have, it's not the end of the Democratic Party. It's literally the end of American democratic life. Okay. I mean, when you have. Look, sorry, I'm pulling slightly away, but I know you've mentioned the presence of troops in Washington, D.C. right. I mean, they're there essentially to antagonize. Right, Okay. I mean, not all those guardsmen are saying to themselves, yeah, I'm going To antagonize. But that's Trump's intention. Okay? He's looking for an excuse. And when he pull, and after the 30 days, I think it was, you said it, they're pulled out, he'll go to another city. And he's already implied, you know, whistleblow. What do they call that? Dog whistle, like, way he'll go to the cities where African Americans govern, okay? He'll push it and push it. So, I mean, it's going to take a hell of a lot of patience not to blow. But on the other hand, on the other hand, the Democrats better realize their job is not to moderate. It's. It's literally to get out of the way. Sorry, that's.

[Sam Seder]

I mean, it's all. Lastly, you said on the left, we have to grow up and unite around a progressive or radical social Democratic vision. Who's gonna grow up? What is involved in that? Like, what do you mean?

[Milton Alamadi]

You may have noted when I sent that message to Brian, I said liberals and liberals and the left, the liberals are going to have to grow up and start. And stop. And stop talking about simply worrying about, if you like, the politics of it, they're going to have to start realizing that behind the politics of it is the point of the economic royalists. Okay? So it's not a matter of persuading. It's not a matter of how you sell the party. Like, I mean, think about just. I don't even know how anyone can bear to listen to my fellow LSU alum. What's his name?

[Emma Vigland]

Carville.

[Milton Alamadi]

Carville. Gee, you know, I thought you were.

[Emma Vigland]

Going to say Pete Buttigieg, because he's the new version of what we're talking about here.

[Milton Alamadi]

I mean, I've got my target, so to speak, but I chose the one that really just turns my stomach when I hear him, okay? I mean, those folks literally need to be displaced. They need to be sent home. And, you know, if they have any Democrat anywhere along the way has acted like a neoliberal in any fashion, we should make it clear we're not going to buy it, but we got to start making it clear now. So I'm talking about, you know, there are still militant liberals, the militant liberals as well as, for lack of a better way of putting it, socialists who show up in various places and the progressives who have their organizations, pda, okay, our revolution, and others, they need to sit down and say, okay, it's not a matter of compromise, it's a matter of winning. And the time has come for us to organize around. And I use the example of the Economic Bill of Rights because you've had Alan Minsky and Neon, the co Authors of the 21st century economic bill of Rights, you've had Matt, you know, Strachbine on and myself, and we put it turned all of that into a comic strip. I mean, it's got to be around something like that, by the way. It won't be simply around one policy, health care for all. It's got to be broader because health care for all may not actually attract the unions that are central pivotal to this coalition.

[Sam Seder]

Often they're behind it because so it's got to be a set of principles that so that A, everybody's on the same page in terms of an agreement on some very basic principles and B, so that you can almost give a certain amount of, like, grace regarding specific issues that are not addressed within the context of those principles so that you can move forward and organize around some of those.

[Milton Alamadi]

And you guys have to win in New York. Okay. That's gotta be the message. Okay. It's something like that.

[Sam Seder]

Yep. Well, Harvey K. Always a pleasure. You brought a lot of joy and knowledge to Michael. He would cite you often. And we will put a link to some of your appearances on the Michael Brooks show in our podcast and YouTube descriptions today. Again, thanks so much for coming on. Really appreciate it.

[Milton Alamadi]

Good to see you guys again. Don't hesitate to ask. Great to see you.

[Sam Seder]

Bye.

[Milton Alamadi]

Bye. Bye.

[Sam Seder]

All right, we're going to take quick break and we're going to hear from Alicia Brooks, Michael's sister in Just a Mom, Sam.