tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN January 16, 2012 5:00pm-8:00pm EST
we all know somebody that is struggling. the work that we do, we do the biggest research around hunger in america. it shows that it has doubled since the nerecession. the people that are coming to our food banks and into food stamp offices for the first time has grown by 30%. that 30% are people that are visiting that have never been there. it is the middle class. i was thinking about this as your getting ready for the panel. it is solving some really big issues. this is an issue of leadership.
this is half of our country. if we do not do this now, we never will. >> i want to have some fun. vicki offers me a wonderful segue. she said what many are leaders. we need leadership. we're sitting in washington right now. i know five under 35 people who think they are leaders. i know a another guy i could definitely thinks he is a leader. there are some folks in this town who regard themselves as leaders. what we are lacking is leadership. why is it that there seems to be a bipartisan consensus and this town that the poor do not
matter? >> i hope you all noticed the tears in the ski -- in vicki's eyes. it has to do with someone who cares. the tears have to do with recognizing the condition of poor people in america. it is a matter of national security like iraq and afghanistan, like whatever foreign-policy we know. part of the problem is we do not have elected leaders who understand the tears. >> i want to jump in quickly. you say that poverty is an issue of national security. >> namely that if we do not come to terms, there is not the external threat. it will lead toward a collapse
of american democracy. it is an oligarchy of hypocrisy. poor people are at each other's throats. america goes under as we know it. am i right about your tears? >> i am right. >> i feel it. one reason why we do not have a leadership among the 536 is that they are not leading in a way that they make working people a priority. when investment bankers are in trouble, and they lead. they saw the problem. when the banking is a problem, if they lead. we need to go to war. >> you're not going to pay for it. that is the kind of leadership. it is narrow. it leads to a catastrophe. what we need is a courageous,
progressive leadership. his starkly in america, it has been primarily black folk -- historical in america, it has been primarily the black people that have shown the leadership. it taught the country how to love. this is what they look like in public. the top is about love. right now the bac folk -- black folks the tradition is weak and feeble. you do not have to be black to be part of that tradition.
you have to be connected with it and used to be a part of it. it is not a matter of stereotype. it is tradition that has taught american the best about itself on how to love others even when you are hated and revenge is coming in. it is not just a political question. we have 536 leaders that are so obsessed with power and money. how are we going to get the lobbyists satisfy? how we get money for the next election? when it comes to the condition of our precious children, it is an afterthought. they talk about it during the election. we're going to go under.
>> it is so brilliant what you just said. let's redefined the term. >> the five under 37 are not leaders. their followers. they follow the money. they do what they are told. as long as we have money in politics, is still be so hard to do any of these things we want to do. they are just a servant to wall street. wall street says do this. "park my car. ."p me some more supe that is why the movement is not
called occupy washington. it is god occupy wall street. that is where you go. they are the puppets. >> it raises a fundamental question. if michael is right, both parties are beholden to wall street. we are now in a presidential race. mr. obama is raising money respectively. if they are both beholden to the wall street money, no matter what they say, what do we do? >> i do not want to break into the panel.
i want to push michael and cornel on this. he is like my leader. he has been tell me what to do. i've been following him around and trying to do it. you are a good leader. you are. however, i want to see the discussions move past leaders. whether we're talking about the ones in congress, a so-called leaders, or whoever we are talking about. we took a huge leap in the last few months. we had for the first time a liter less movement. a proud and leaderless movement. was a crazy? was in not so -- was it nuts? no. everybody became a leader.
by ourselves, we will not do much. you're saying anybody can get out of poverty if they have the right knowledge and skills. i am not going to argue with that. we have discovered something in the last few months that is bigger than the power of any individual. that is the power of solidarity, people working together. defend youroing to house against the share of one for closure time comes. -- against the sheriff when foreclosure time comes. that is our strength. it is a very strong part of the american position.
it has been kind of a race for a culture that says you can get yours all by yourself. don't hang out with losers. it to be a leader yourself. we're going together. we're going to do this together. we have the strength of "we." >> of want to come back to suze now. i bought this -- i brought this up because when you say people can let them out of poverty if they have the tools, what kind of tools are missing? >> to come out of poverty you also need help. you need to believe that you can come out of poverty.
it only takes one. if one person can make a move toward it, then you start to get the solidarity. if you all keep thinking there's nothing i can do and there is no hope, then there is no hope. i was at the national press corps today. somebody came up. i said "what is your name." she said "just another one of those unemployed people." that is how she introduced herself. it means she has no hope. if you have no hope, we have nothing. it takes one person to just have hope and the people around them to get the spark that true change come about. to the one thing that the tool that i think is important that i am trying to work on, i do not
know by will be successful, it seems that many people do not want me to be successful with this, but the main thing i want to change in the united states of america are fico scores. [applause] the way that fico score is used to be calculated was a lot different than we are in now. to no fault of your own, you lost your home, you lost your car, you lost everything. you lost your ability to pay. a of taken everything. they're even taking your fico score. so now you are really fico-ed. without a good score, if you happen to own a good car, no matter what kind, your premiums
are high. landlords will not reach you. employers are starting not to hire you. if you want to do anything to change the situation, good luck getting a loan at all. if you happen to get a loan, it will be at the highest interest rates possible. the main thing i am trying to do is that get people who pay in cash or bond debt that to change. if you pay in cash are on a debit card, it does not report to a credit bureau. there for you do not have a score. therefore you are a non entity. you do not exist in the financial system at all, people. if you want to just pay your way in cash, you do not count. if you count the time if you run
up your credit cards and have a minimum paid do every month. then you really count. you are paying their way with 20's arm and 30% interest. -- 20% and 30% interest. i am trying to change things of that a debit card create a fico store so we can get rid all together.ards when you are tempted to do something when it comes to money, you tended to. i want to get that temptation out. i want to go back to america and build up your fico score so one
day he can have a car or a home. the you can one day get that job or rent an apartment. you are now an entity because you have paid with what you have obverses with what you -- versus with what you wish you had. all i can tell you is that i and many people who do not want me to succeed. there is serious money and credit cards. there is serious money in prepaid cards that charge exorbitant fees. i am trying to do something that is a little out of the ordinary. nobody wants me to do it. and they want to keep everybody down so people that take advantage continue to do so. i am going to continue to fight for you. [applause] in two years time from this date, if this works, you will be
able to get a credit score simply if you have a debit cards. that is my goal. >> i want to come back to you. i want to ask something that is a bit elephant in the room. since to open the door to it, i want to come back. i'm not asking this to beyond the spot. to many americans are suffering from poverty right now. the group that is being hurt the most and being hit the hardest, and the numbers they clearly are
african americans. you lived in oakland. it is an pedometer african- american city. there are other pockets across this country. black people right now are catching the most hell. to my mind, they lovingly and respectfully are the most [inaudible] about the they are catching. it it is about our love and supports of barack obama as president and the effort to get him elected. i get that. i do want to put this out there. i am curious as to whether or not the historical power in the black prophetic tradition, if the people catching the most hell are not saying anything and
giving the president cover, and then how did the other folks who are trying to find the courage to raise their own voices to keep themselves from being invisible, we have done this historically. what happens if we continue to be as silent as we are? i am not saying that the president has to be demonized. i am saying when they are doing that in silence, it raises the question as to what the paying the threshold -- pain threshold really is for black folks. >> we talked about what you're going to ask. i was hoping to give it to somebody else. let me first tell you about how i feel about how i become
president. i am extremely disappointed, more so than i ever thought i could be. i think part of the reason i am disappointed is because i had hoped for a light. the disparity between what he has done and what i hoped, some of my hope was based on unrealistic expectations. [applause] and so even though i am very disappointed, i was born when roosevelt was president. i do not think that there has been a better president for our people since i have been alive. i am very mixed. because he is black, i still have very high expectations.
some things are well done. i think he has done some things that are well done that they did not say much about. my biggest disappointment is that i do not see a leadership on the issue. i do not think you go around talking about race. you do have to go around talking but issues that affect black people. not just black people, because we are just a canary. it is everybody. everybody is experiencing now is something what we have been expressing for a long time. what do we do about that? one of the difficulties now is looking at the alternatives. you really do not know. would you rather have him are one of the others?
i am clear on the republican side what i would rather have a. i would rather have barack obama. my hope is that he does get reelected. but that because it will be his last term, at least the first two years he will turn out to be a great president. right now he is a social president. i do think that we have to keep the pressure on. i am glad there are people that can go out and say it. that is not what all of our roles are. i do not think if he gets reelected and there is not substantial change that people will be quiet. we're going to lose because of that, people are not going to be supportive of the democratic party.
>> let's take a step further. black people are catching the most heall among -- hell among the president's space and they're the most loyal constituency. there is a larger problem year, which is democrats more broadly -- how do you lovingly and respectably push the leader of the free world to say and to do more about poverty? i have never asked. i'm never asked the president to walk around talking about black, black, black. but when americans of all color and race and ethnicity and gender, etc., when all americans are now falling into poverty, it does raise a question as to what they do more
broadly to respectively push them to use the pulpit during this campaign year to say and do more about the poor and about making poverty a priority. do you have any magical way, and a great idea, about how we go about doing that ta? >> yes. i have an optimistic answer. bac in election day dump the 2008, everybody remember going into the voting booth. i looked down at the ballot. i saw this man's name. i never thought in my lifetime that i would ever have a chance to do what i was about to do and vote for him. i cheered up. did anyone else have that experience? [applause] up.terally teared i was literally moved.
in mich., weak color a circle with a felt pen. smeared the tears ballot. >> a you voted have for mccain? >> no. my wife was outside asking what the is going on in theire? it was such an emotional day. we had just under eight years of our country being driven down the toilet. [applause] we had gone through 8 years of after the world feeling our pain and being on our side turning against us after we became a country that invaded other countries. to finally have someone that was going to stand up to this, and yes you're right about the expectations and the rose colored glasses that maybe we wanted.
we also knew that goldman sachs was his number one contributor. we thought it did not matter. we know the man had a good heart. we know that. he still has a good heart. we know his conscience. we know that. we know his wives conscience -- wife's conscience. we know his family. i am profoundly disappointed. those tears on election day have continued through these past three years. here is what i would like to say. we are live on c-span. we are just a few blocks from the white house. it just in case he is watching, which camera would he be on? president obama, here is the deal. the republicans have done as a huge favor.
they have run the circus. i do not understand why wall street did not put up somebody to remove you because they are not really entirely happy with you. yet they have not run anybody who is going to be you. [applause] therefore, without chasing the election, without providing clips for fox news to run the day after the election, let me just say i think there is a pretty good chance you're going to win this election. [cheers and applause] therefore, let's not lose another year before addressing the issues that we're discussing. you do not have to worry. you are going to have another
four years. you have the opportunity to be the roosevelt of the 21st century. if you remember throughout and to brought this country to the place we should be, even though it was genocide and slavery, that somehow it took this african american to bring us to be place where we always knew we could be and to help treat the american dream for every person that suze is talking about. if i put an eight hour day, i can try my own car and semi kids to college. that is all they're asking for -- and send my kids to college. that is all they're asking for. [applause]
>> the irony is just overwhelming for me that you get a white brother from michigan expressing the best of the black prophetic tradition to a black brother in the white house. [applause] who's the head of the american empire. it is not about stereotypes. it is about what type of human being you're going to be when you move from your mom is going to the tune. i do have -- when you move from your mother's womb to the tomb. i do it to say this. even when we knew the mean- spirited republicans pushed as to the brink of catastrophe, we also knew that the system itself was broken.
just like when the black mayors took over cities that were in the process of breaking down, you get a black president in the white house and the process of a national system that is breaking down. we got to keep our focus on the system and the bodies and souls that come together and mobilize. in the end, and this is what elected martin luther king making an indispensable, that it is not about one person or president. it is about a fundamental transformation. we need a transfer of power from unaccountable oligarchies to everyday people. that is what we're talking about.
if you know enough about the future that you're willing to take a risk and live and maybe die. my first prayer for barack obama is the safety of this family. his precious two little ones and his wife. white supremacy is a real. it is very real. all of those who have lived under those threats, and they know exactly what their getting into. most of your friends aren't dead. they're willing to sacrifice. most people do not want to die. they would rather sell out then die. what we're talking about is not just one individual. we are talking about what kind of people we are. if we do not have enough
ordinary citizens of all colors to fight for your democracy just like a fight for it in afghanistan under leadership formulations, then we're going to lose the democracy and poor people will still be caught. that is the challenge is seems to me. people were willing to fight for the british monarchy. they pushed up the imperialists. the second was slavery. they pushed out slavery. it is just another form of slavery. that challenge in america is in the oligarchy. we have to have leadership that says we love oligarchs. they are human beings and make choices and they can change their minds. they can choose to be white
supremacists or fight white supremacy. you have to make a choice. >> i want to ask barbara. to those watching right now see your passion but would suggest it is a bit hyperbolic to say that you have overstated the case by suggesting that the future of our democracy is at stake, that sounds anti-american and you do not believe in the idea of american exception listen. are you overstating the case that our democracy is at stake? >> i was a look at the elections. democracy is all but gone anyway. all you need to do is look at the super pac and the supreme court that is happening for the money flowing in. we have to somehow renew it.
it is not hyperbolic in this sense. >> there is a threat that we're to left. you are correct. he was actually being kind in terms of how it is. >> the overwork him. >> are you building on my optimism? the of the awful truth is that our democracy is hanging on by its last one or two threads. it is paid for a controlled by the banks and wall street by corporate america and by the 1% that rule this country. what are the water to threads that are left? -- one or two threads that are left? they still say it is one person and one votes. they can run ads aand keep suze from getting a good credit for, but she is talking about
something so revolutionary. the current debt in student debt have been fighting each other for number one. [applause] >> what i want to say to anybody watching or listening, and that one thread that is still there, the one person/ one vote, the one thing that they cannot do is come into that booth with me or you once we close the curtain. at their hand is not on our hands. it is our hand. we still get the choice. the problem is the lack of choice. the problem is that in a nation of 300 million people, we have
only two choices. one is a nice choice, but they are both feeding at the same trough. 01 will appoint better justices but they are still feeding from the same corporate trough. until we remove money from politics and have more choices on the ballot in go back to voting on paper ballots so there is a real count so we can see to be voted for, until we get rid of the electoral college -- [applause] until we moved election day to the weekends -- [applause] let's make it easy. the reason why the 1% are trying to get all the laws passed this year to repress the vote to make it more difficult, and the reason they are doing it which
is kind of a positive thing is a why would they be doing that if they believed that the majority of america agreed with them and fox news tax if they honestly felt that the majority of america believed in wall street and the 1% and right wing, and some of casting voter suppression laws, they would be passing laws put in voting booths in every aisle in walmart. they want as many people voting as possible if they thought they were the people supporting the values. the majority of americans are with us. the majority wants the rich to pay their fair share. the majority wants regulations put back on wall street. the majority what somebody arrested for the crap. that is what the majority wants.
we're not going to get our third or fourth in this election. where not going to be able to take the money out before november. what we have to do, all of us, this great movement that is taking place that had stem billion liters that has 10 million -- that has 10 million liters is they have to figuratively put their hands on the third of every leader running and say i want a promise that you will make your priority to remove money from politics and not the money from the banks. if they feel the heat from that. there's a desperate to be elected, that is more powerful than the money than they're getting. they cannot win without your vote. you have to let the democrats
and barack obama played that card of where else are you going to go? they do not want to do that. they really do not want to do that. they saw what happened in 2000. there are enough penstock people that will actually go somewhere else and can cause a huge ruckus. they do not have to go very far to think of an example of what happens when you pump on those that have left. imagine obama calling a press conference in going "i have decided that this year i am returning all the money i have received from wall street and i'm not taking one dime from wall street in this election right now." what you think would happen? think about the support he would have. how many in here went door to
door and phone calls and everything in 20008? as, many people can wait to get back on the phone banks? it is not there. he could turn that around by not waiting until after the election but changing it right now. the majority is already with him. >> for those watching right now you are saying that -- who are saying that we have tried to eradicate poverty and we have for more money at poverty, there are more poverty programs than there have ever been, we have done this since the johnson era, it ain't worked. for all of you guys on the stage, put down the crack pipe and get a life, if there has to be another way to do this. we have tried this, it has not
worked. >> i would say, this is my own point of view, this is really not surprising that there are so many people in poverty when you consider wages and policies. it is not even surprising in the way that we provide so little of a safety net to people who are falling. the disgusting and shocking thing is that not only do we not tell people who are having trouble but we kick them a little further. the whole system is rigged so that if you start to spiral down you're going to spiral faster. there is no latter going up -- ladder going up, ther eis re isa free shoot going down. employers not like to hire people with poor credit scores.
most employers now check credit scores. what is that about? they do not want to hire people who need money? they don't like to hire people who are unemployed. that is so weird i have to say it again. did they do not want to hire people who need jobs. go figure. once you start down, these are going faster and faster. your debts mount. it is the possibility of legal trouble. it is something i was looking into today. it is so horrifying. you apply for food stands in most states. your information enters the criminal justice system computers. if there is a warrant out for you caught red that is it. they found you, right --out for
you, that is it. they found you, right? it is part of a dragnet to bring in more peo =-- poor people, aka "criminals." when we see people who were down, we have a system in place that takes them down further. >> is it an overstatement to say that there is a war on the poor right now? >> no. you can say that. you can quote me. >> roger, i saw your hand earlier period's >> --i m your -- i saw your hands earlier. >> this conversation is seductive. we're talking about poverty.
we ought to talking about people being economically secure, something much more positive. it sounds like we are also saying let's go back to the good old days. i do not remember any good old days. i do not want to go back to anything. if i go to these 1970's, 1980's, 1940's, it was not good. not talk about that. let's talk about what we will do going forward. it may have been good for some people, but democracy has never worked for most of us. it is more visible now. the thing about occupy is that it is 99 as opposed to 50% or 40's there.
american use the word hope earlier. americans are really good at hope. the way we do hope is that it is delusional. poll after poll says that most americans think they're going to be rich. for that reason they protect the rich. it is changing now because it has gotten so bad and you have different people that are poor. people of color have always been in this situation. democracy is the other word. what we have to do is change the systems. the systems create war. the key people pour.
we need a totally new system. i will say what i am optimistic about. things will get so bad that we will actual treaty different system. that is what i am optimistic about. i think over the next tender 15 years we can do that. it is not going to happen anytime soon. we're talking about things used to be better. by so want to talk later about how we imagines that better america. how we imagined going forward and not having to think about the good old days. we will do that later in this conversation. >> no. wanted to go back to what barbara it said. there's a lot of programs that support people living in poverty and people that are
poor, people that our food and secure. for most states to fill out a food stamp application, it is 30 pages. it is easier to get a gun. can you imagine being a single mother going into out reach office what you are working and having to rest their filling out the food stamp application. we cannot even seem to organize around simplification of a simple form like a food stamp application. syndication of benefits is something that we can work on. another met bought a round these programs predict another man -- another myth around these programs is that we are spending too much money on these families. the reality is that food stamps for a family of three are making $22,000 a year. did they get a benefit of about
$135 a month. think about the price of food today. we all know it is at record highs. that is a reality. how far do you think living in washington, d.c. or in new york or washington, how far does that go? when you start hearing people talk about we're spending too much money on programs that are supporting people that are living in poverty and food insecurity, that is absolute nonsense. that is absolute nonsense. [applause] i am really concerned that many of these programs are really up for grabs. the reason they're up for grabs is because that politicians, especially new politicians, do not look at the individuals they
are affecting. they did not look at the humans and the stories behind the people. they did not know the families. they do not know how hard people are trying to work. they look at the numbers. they think "we can cut 5% our or a box of food to a senior citizen that is making $9,000 a year." you try going to a senior citizen in michigan and saying "cannot give you a food box." that is reality. >> i want to ask suze the first part of this question. i want to ask a question specifically about students. michael raise this point early, suze, about student loan debt.
i want to do this real quick. it seems to me you get into college, which is what everybody tells you to do. that is if you want any chance in making it in america. you have to get a college education at a great school like george washington. you come out of school and you have that coming out of your ears. then you cannot find a job in this economy on top of that. you are supposed to somehow still believe that you can achieve, that you can have, that the american dream is still for you. talk about this issue of student loans and how that is setting another generation of americans so far behind in pushing them so much the for it and -- deeper into poverty. >> here is what makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
student loan debts is the only debt that in 99.9999% of the cases cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. the federal loan debt that can occur from the stafford loan, usually does not pay for the cost of a university education, so you end up getting private student loan debt from banks. banks are not regulated like the federal government, were the m.a.c. chairman -- with a maximum interest rate is 6.8%. on a plus loan, you are looking at 7.9%. bank loans have the ability to go to 15, 18, 19%, and the u.s. government bankruptcy laws protect those banks.
so the banks can screw you with the interest rates that are charging you, and you do not have any rights whatsoever to say i cannot afford this. then the system allows you to defer your student loans, up to do forbearance on your student loans. what does that mean? it simply means that you don't have to pay it right away, but the interest continues to accumulate. listen to me closely here. there are not a lot of safe places to make money today, and they know that. many of these banks and institutions by them at 0% and they are lending to you at 6% or 8%. when you don't pay it back, they are thrilled, because it starts to compound and compound, and $40,000 turns into $80,000 turns
into $150,000. in you think you have been getting away with something because you haven't been able to pay it, and then they contact you and you have got to pay back that $150,000. you cannot. what did they do? they will garnish your wages, they will garnish your social security check. so when you are taking out student loans -- parents out there, when you are cosigning a private student loan, you better be very, very careful, because some of the private student loans state that if the person you cosign for dies, they don't care. you are stuck paying the student loan for as long as it is going to take, even if the student is no longer here. all the rides are going to the institution.
if you think expensive education is going to get you a job when there are no jobs out there to be gotten. [applause] >> this is the best thing i have heard up here tonight. this is going to continue. even if we stop them on this scam, the beast will come up with the next scam. the monster has to be fed. until we change the system, and we are talking about capitalism. not the old kind of capitalism, work hard, do well, everybody benefits. we are talking about capitalism as defined in the 21st century. set it up so that just a few succeed, and everybody else suffers and service them. this ultimately has to change.
the way we structure this economy, this has to change. this has to be a democratic economy where you and i control it, not wall street you have done these symposiums for so many years. . won't have this hair if we don't thing that we did change the thing that is at the core of this evil -- >> until it changes, we have to be educated not to make the mistakes they want you to make. >> this is very important. that is why you have this the first panel appear. we also need to talk the larger
thing that has to change, which is an economic system that is unjust, unfair, and not democratic. until that changes, we are screwed. >> is a global affairs, not just a national affair. you cannot really look forward until you look back. what you look back at are the great, courageous, loving, sacrificial people who shake to, like my mother and father and your mother and father and grandparents. what the black tradition has taught you is that if you don't have a sense of history, if you don't put yourself in a narrative that is rooted in something deeper than just money and fame and quick success and instant
gratification, then the very capitalism we are talking about has produced such shallow people that they are never going to straighten up their backs and take a stand against anything because they are up for sale. >> i totally agree that history is very important. i am very proud of my history. native american history -- i don't understand how they are not crazy in terms of what happened to them. all i am trying to say is, we don't want to go back there. we want to learn from there, but we don't want to go back. we have to go forward. the world is very different than it used to be. it calls for a term elite -- totally different method, totally different tools. in this country, with the changing demographics, it
changes everything. race cannot play quite the same role that it played before. >> love, courage, integrity, willingness to serve and sacrifice, that is rostov, and we don't want to lose any of that. -- the at israw stuff. >> i am says the about the students, but i don't want to leave out the babies, these children -- i asked susie about the students. the data is abundantly clear account. simply put, the younger you are in america, the more likely you are to be in poverty. it is just that simple. the younger you are in america, the more likely you are to be in poverty. the indiana university white paper _ is that as well. --underscores that as well.
what we say in this present moment in america about and to a nation that allows that statistic to be the reality? >> is one of the major indictments, they are more likely to be in the worst social conditions. what kind of people are we, when we examine ourselves and acknowledge that reality? that is not just that, that is pathological. it really is. i am anti-in justice in america. that is not the same as anti- american. the question becomes, if we are really serious about being poverty abolitionists and calling for the eradication and abolition of poverty, we got to target the young people from
birth to five years old. all the evidence talks about the shaping of their minds and hearts and souls. this cannot just a matter of programs. it is a matter of civic society. what kind of discourse -- does this kind of discourse take place in churches and synagogues? no. there are other priorities at work. what is going on? the renaissance of compassion and the nonviolent, democratic revolution we are calling for against oligarchy is across the board in every sphere of our society. that is part of the consciousness raising that needs to take place. >> this has been interesting. what struck me, i want to go back earlier to susie's point, because this will be
revolutionary. let's look at what is, working within the system which is the capitalist system. maybe -- i don't think i am one of the only people who embraced their inner capitalist. we all participate in some way, shape, or form. the question is, what can we do in the interim before somebody abolishes it and comes up with something else. in the meantime, what are we going to do right now? i come from one of the poorest congressional districts in this country. people are not having this conversation. they are having conversations about what is really impacting them. that is what i am hoping we can actually get to the root of right now. how do we make poor people less poor? jesus said there'll always be the poor among us.
that't think he ever said have to stay that way. that is where we start thinking about within the confines of the system we are in right now, what can we do to actually help our leaders have vision? how do we be the leaders with vision ourselves and show that there is another way of doing things? that is what we really need to be talking about, in ways that are practical. with all the vision i have, i am practical. i want to make sure that people are doing accessible jobs that allow them to move up and out of poverty in ways that are real, meaningful, and have lasting impact or their families and communities. i struggleddon't -- with the idea of gentrification and displacement in a bunch of different ways. when people talk about it in so many ways, it is like, you are
going to push the poor people out. poor people don't like living in poor places. can we talk very seriously about that? [applause] when we think about what happened with integration, i don't think dr. king was thinking that when people have the ability to live wherever they want, they should not leave the other people behind. i don't believe that was on his mind, but that basically is what happened. why is that happening? what have we lost? what have we not done? what did you say, for 40 years we have not had black
unemployment any better than it was? that is a scary, scary thought. really? really? >> yes, really. >> why are we not thinking about different ways of saying -- we can come up with ways to create new opportunities in our inner cities, in their rural and poor areas, the kind of places that need the economic development to support or people and move them out of poverty, so we are not talking about them like a thing that is demonized and criminalize, but allowing them to actually move that experienced the american dream. [applause] >> in the tradition of the black church, i would say amen to everything you just said. i have heard seven or eight practical things, a very real
things on this stage in this conversation tonight that can be done and ought to be done to make the poor less pork. -- make the poor less poor. dr. west a moment ago used the term poverty abolitionist. juxtaposed those of us on the stage who are, but there are also poverty deniers in this country. there are poverty deniers and poverty apologists. i wonder what we say to them tonight. with all the data that is out there, how can people still deny that poverty is real and is as real as it is, and yet you see
them on television and in the media all the time, as if this is some sort of fantasy. >> let me say something about that. you cannot do anything about the people that are so clueless. if they are denying this fact, we are in the country. that poll that said that 21% of republicans believe that "barack obama maybe the antichrist." 21% of them actually believe that. there is nothing you can do about that. you just have to say we are a big country. there are 30 million people that are just don't cold crazy. but there are 270 million that are not. [laughter] you just made such an excellent point. while some of us are trying to abolish capitalism, or if it is
a more comfortable work for you, agreed -- that is just another word for it. the practical things right now, if they do have cable and are able to watch this. [applause] if not, it is on pbs next monday, tuesday, and wednesday. [applause] >> you ask about all these party programs and people complain about poverty. here is a poverty program that everyone should get behind, jobs. isn't that really at the core of what everybody has been saying? if you have a job and you are paid a decent wage, a livable wage, isn't that really the eradication of this poverty, if
you are paid a wage so that you are not in poverty? how do we create those jobs? corporate america, 4500, are sitting on $2 trillion cash in their bank accounts. in the past, that has never happened. " corporations do when they make money is they then spend that money to create more jobs. factory andanother we can make more of that, and employ more people. that is how we used to work, kind of. now what they are doing is, they are making record profits and putting money in their bank account, and doing it in part because it is their rainy day fund. they know the other shoe has not dropped ticket they are still doing credit defaults swaps and derivatives and all this crazy stuff on wall street.
they know another crash could happen. any of a number of things could happen. they want to make sure they are protected. if we force them, if congress could force them to say, you have to release that money, you cannot afford it money, if i live in a town in northern michigan where it is very cold in the winter and there is no natural gas, you use heating oil to heat your home. if the heating oil company down the road was hoarding all the oil and not selling it to people so they could heat their homes in the winter, what would those people do? rise up. if that heating oil company doesn't want to sell your their oil, they don't have to. well, that has to change.
that $2 trillion has been taken out of circulation. it has to be put back into circulation. we need a roosevelt-style jobs program right now. we need real jobs with real wages. we need to start the eradication of poverty. >> let me challenge that. i don't know in this era, i don't know a single corporate co who gets rewarded for hiring anybody that he or she does not have to have. take that argument to its logical extension. one could argue that this economy is never going to come back, because as long as ceo's know that they can do the same with less and they get rewarded for squeezing more out of the
shareholder, nobody gets rewarded for hiring more people. you don't get rewarded for putting more people back to work. >> the whole discussion about a jobs creation and who is going to create jobs is so silly. all the rewards of our form of capitalism have been for the people at the top who can reduce the number of employees they have. that is all they know how to do. romney is not an exception. the idea is to get lean and mean. that is all they know how to do. really thatk it is we want to destroy capitalism. it is destroying itself. this cannot work. you cannot have an economic system where your and your people can participate as either workers or consumers. clay don't earn enough or they don't have jobs. that is one of the reasons we had the crash of 2007-2008. there was so much poverty that
was behind the mortgage crisis. you cannot run things like this. you cannot have an economy just based on the 1% plus their -- i don't know how it would work. it is not a matter of if we like capitalism or not. fiscal matter of how we survived when it isn't working any more -- it is a matter of how we survive when it isn't working any more. >> you can either have all the wealth concentrated with a small number of people, or you can have democracy, but you cannot have both. >> part of what we are talking about is that we move from a state of monopoly and industrial capitalism to monopoly finance capitalism. 40 years ago, the banks only
had 9% or 10% of the corporate profits in the whole economy. today they have 43% of the corporate profit. when you have banks that are not primarily interested in lending any more, but rather trading on casino like operations in which they make big money but they don't produce any products, they are making billions of dollars. general motors was making big money in producing products and providing jobs. now they are just a collective. that is what finance capitalism is globally. we have to be honest about that and then say we have to be practical in terms of how we preserve our dignity and integrity. you have to tell people the painful truth of the kind of system we are living in. unfortunately, it is very rare that they even get a chance to hear that kind of truth about capitalism.
people are debating about bain. that is the tip of the icebergs. bain is not some isolated unit time to private equity. this has been happening across the board. in that sense, it does look rather bleak at times, but this is another reason why the black traditions are important. if you have been under slavery for thousands of years, it looks kind of bleak. if you have been jim crow for over a hundred years and the land of liberty, it looks bleak. here comes the people telling you how to blow the struggle for justice with your head high in the middle of darkness. >> this is what i want to say.
we have been sitting here now for a few hours, talking about poverty and the system and getting out the truth about it. but i am also looking at 1500 people in this room, and i have to ask you, each one of you individually, what are you doing to stay out of poverty? how knowledgeable are you about the money that you are making? do you have the documents in place today to protect your tomorrow so that if something were to happen to you, the little amount of money may have does not go to some lawyer to probate what you have. what steps are you taking to keep yourself out of poverty? the more people that go into poverty, the harder it is going to be for everybody to get out. have you ever been on an airplane and you hear them say when the oxygen mask falls, put it on your face first before
your child? that is because if you cannot take care of yourself, you cannot take care of your children. tavis, you asked me about student loans. he asked everyone about children. we are passing a silent message of debt down to our children. we don't talk about money. i am talking about your family money. what you do that, where you put it, how you get more out of what you already have. if you don't learn about money, if you don't learn about -- i am just talking about personal finance now. then you are setting yourself up to be a victim to a system that wants you to fail. so i hope all of you leave tonight not only thinking about what we do for the entire system and how we change the world, but i hope you go home and have a good sit-down with yourself and say, what am i doing in my life
right here and right now to stay out of poverty? that you can still do, so you better start doing it now, people. i could be looking at 1500 people in poverty sooner than later if you don't get powerful over the money that you do have. how you think and feel about it and what you do. i am asking you to turn toward yourself to solve that problem in your own family, because nobody else is going to solve it for you. [applause] >> we would like all of you to take your credit cards out now. ushers are bringing scissors down the aisle. [laughter] >> i totally agree with everything you said. it is just not sufficient. i don't think we are disagreeing.
i want to go back to what my good friend roger said about jobs. you are absolutely right, in the short term, the think we need to do is get as many people to work as possible, but they have to be good jobs. that have to play -- have to pay well and have benefits and mobility. if we do that, we still have not done a damn thing, frankly, because the system is still the same. we are staying in a nice hotel, and i talked yesterday to the person who was cleaning my room. i could tell she was in poverty. when barr wrote her book -- win barber wrote barbara 10 years ago, our unemployment rate was pretty good.
the topic was not jobs. if she found a bunch of different occupations and different people who clearly were in poverty. so merely getting down our unemployment rate to 5%, that is totally insufficient. again, we have to figure out how to change the system. i am assuming we'll have time to talk about what we would do that is very different to change the system. >> i had a question for you and for dr. west. having just finished the tour, what was your sense of what you are seeing, feeling, hearing from americans around how frustrated are they a round of the issues we are talking about? how focused are they on really creating a movement to change the system? what is the outcome of the tour?
>> one was that the resilience among poor brothers and sisters of all colors was profoundly inspiring. we went in knowing they weren't sophisticated, so, inadequate, magnificent, and fall like anybody else, but their resiliency came through strong. mainly in local forms, in very practical forms of expression. in madison, wisconsin, people wake up in different ways, different times, and so on. i came away tremendously fired up, not just because of the
occupy movement. this was three months before -- about a month and a half before. i also get a sense that poor people know that the system is so deeply --, and it will take a fundamental system change, and how that will come about, nobody really knows. >> how do we mobilize those people to vote? how do we get them motivated to see the other side and again in practice the want right they have, around voting? >> i guess what michael said earlier a, it comes down to choices. a lot of people don't see the kind of choice they really want to make to help lift them up out of poverty. that is one reason why this conversation is so important, to put poverty front and center in
this political season. >> the 1%, of want them to vote and have a political party that represents their interests. they are americans. but the fact is, we have two parties -- the 1% gets to parties. the 99% have no parties. the 1% have the two--- have the two parties. the 1% should have their own party, and the 99% should have two or three or four parties that represent the broad spectrum of political thought within the 99%. >> stop yelling and being rude. >> i want to go back to something that roger said.
i don't think anyone answered it or maybe heard what he said. when he said i don't want to go back to the good old days, because the good old days for african-americans, latinos, or native americans, there are no good old days. when so much of the discussion talks about getting at home in the suburbs and the way used to be, and my dad was a factory worker at gm -- that is a bad example because the uaw is one of the few unions that integrated back in the 1940's and insisted that blacks and whites did the same jobs. generally, my question to and to anyone of pure who is african-american is, if we are able to succeed and find that
these fixes in the present and future, the system itself, do you worry that that new system, which is going to put people back to work and create a middle-class again, is that you are going to find yourselves still out there in that group that is not allowed in to the new party, to the new system? what is your fear of that taking place? >> it depends on the time you are talking about. in the short term, probably in my lifetime, i don't think it is going to get a lot better. in a longer life time, i think it is. the way i tend to approach our work is to look to what can we do today to have a good society for the kids today when they are
grown? i would start with young kids and ask ourselves the question, what do we want this country to look like in 20 or 30 years? i start at birth and then move up. . probably won't be around one of the things that is optimistic -- i am optimistic about the 99. things have gotten so bad for so many more people, it is not blacks and latinos crying in the wind. i think other people are beginning to understand. it is not going to turn around quickly. i think tavis was saying people are thinking about going back to the old labor market. our economy has changed. the longer people are hard work, the more it is changing.
we are going to have to come up with a different work force system. >> i think it will be better for the next generation. the young people sitting here tonight. >> we have more mixed race people, and a lot of them are influential. they are married and to families that have more power and money. they are not as racist. >> the only white age group that president obama one was a 18-29 year-old. he lost every other white age group. the young people are going to fix this. our kids are not bigots.
they are not homophobes'. they don't look at this the weather grandparents and great grandparents -- that don't look at it the way the grandparents and great grandparents did. >> i want to ask a question about labor. a want to ask about how the attack on collective bargaining and unions and what some see as a diminishing of unions and labor in this country does for poverty in the long term, beyond today. since i happen to be an african- american -- >> it happen to be that god made you a black man. >> and i am glad he did. [laughter] shout hallelujah. [laughter] >> it is wonderful thing.
did you sing that song in church ♪ i am glad, glad, glad, that me. made nik i am glad roger made that point about optimism and hope. optimism suggested that there is a particular set of facts, circumstances, or conditions, something you can see, feel, and touch, they give you reason to believe that things are going to get better. so you say i am optimistic. that has never been the case for negro in america. hope, on the other hand, sestet craig is the substance of things hoped for -- said that faith is
the substance of things hoped for. i cannot look at the condition and the state of black people ellay catching the most h in this economy. i cannot find any reason to be optimistic. what i can find reason to be is hopeful. when hope got to us, it was already stillborn, and yet we are the most hopeful people in this country. optimism and hope are two very different things. i don't have reason to be optimistic, but i am hopeful. since you ask, i am going to be frank. it troubles me -- it almost the
presses me at times when some folks don't understand the critique of obama from those of us who happen to be free, black men who want a more progressive view of this country. the reason i am on this is because i think in many ways, this is the last, best chance that my people have, and if the numbers continue to petworth and we keep thinking in falling hole, there isis whol a chance we may never come out of this. and i love black folks too much to sit and watch this happen to them. [applause] >> the history plays an important role. under slaver, it was a crime for black people to love you love your child, but you either go
crazy or get some spiritual fortitude. it was also a crime to hope. we could not worship god without what supervision so you would steal away to the creek. that was a crime. in the land of religious liberty, no matter how dark it is, even in the present, it is hard to conceive of what my great great grandmother and great great grandfather had to wrestle with in the abyss of american slavery. i cannot conceive of it even being worse, as bad as it is, but with this proviso. i have learned a lot from young people. all will say this about young
falcon a critical way. -- about your own fault in a critical way. i don't know of a wave of young people who are commensurate to the grandmothers and grandfathers and those ancestors that shaped me in terms of who i am. i just don't. the reason is because young people have been so penetrated with that capitalist culture of instant gratification, overnight success. in that sense, there is a shift from the john coltrane and sarah vaughn and curtis mayfield and aretha franklin into the bubble gum music that is dominant. that is a shift. when we talk about the young people who are going to make this fundamental social change, you are going to get bought out. you are going to sellout quick.
you will not be a long-distance runner. you'll be so obsessed with instant success and superficial status that you will make your grandmother week from the grave. she will want you to have earned great as, not quick success. she doesn't care about what your position is or how big your crib is. this.e still agreeing on desk >> i worry that whatever fixes we come up wit, that is part of it will not get fixed, because as you said, there is nothing to prove or justify any optimism
that black america is not going to be left behind again. >> there is symbolism, and that is what obama represents. as yet, there has not been a substance that can fuel that hope. a lot of symbolism, and i celebrate symbols. barbara, i wanted to ask you about labor. there are many of us who are concerned about the attack on labour, on collective bargaining. there are those who think the labor movement is dead. your assessment of what ever the condition of labour is and how it parallels where this poverty conversation in america is or is not going to go. >> it was the unions that brought my family up. the butte miners union.
they were not paid well. they had union and they began to do better. finally getting into home ownership and things like that. that is the only thing i know about the upward mobility. it is true. i don't even pay any attention to my personal finances. that is another area. [laughter] but the one thing i did grow up with was the idea that people could get ahead by sticking together. in fact, and my family was very prejudiced in a way, i guess. they said there are two things you could never do in your life. one is vote republican, and the other is cross a union picket line. you can do either of those
things are you go straight to hell. michael mentioned there is a class war. one of the first targets was unions, because they did represent so-called little people or working people and everything. and the have been terribly weak and -- they have been terribly weakened. maybe they have been institutionally weakened, but we still have to take the lesson from them that people standing together in solidarity can take on that 1%. can make changes. [applause] >> i am watching the clock and we have about 15 minutes left of the conversation. let me start by saying there have been all kinds of suggestions of what needs to be done right now.
we have had some short-term suggestions, short-term solutions, that is. we have had some long term solutions. we have in title this conversation "reawaken in america from poverty to prosperity." since you put this question now about if we don't replace, have certainly fix a broken system. your thoughts about how we do that or what? >> the media is jobs in the public sector, jobs in the private sector, supporting business, especially small and micro businesses. then we have to start working on our systems that create poverty and keep people in poverty like
our educational system, the criminal justice system. but the bigger idea is trying to figure out how to spread the wealth of this country throughout all of its people. one of the ways i think he can do that is something like a well account where things that we all own, such as oil, and i will use alaska as an example. they get money it serves people that has lived there for a year. when sarah palin was governor, it was more than $3,000 a person. the idea there is that they all -- they all on the oil, so they all get it. there are natural resources like that, but there are other things like patents. if you want to invent something
and put on the market, that is fine, but if you want the government to protect your for 50 years passed your death, then you have to pay for that. the way i would have it paid 4 is essentially give an ownership interest in every patent to people in this country, and i would distribute the money to everybody, no means test, no nothing. if we did that, so that everybody would get another $10,000 or $50,000 a year automatically, we could get rid of food stamps and other government programs that are a safety net, because we would get rid of the need for part of the safety net. i think that would be a fundamental change. i also think it is possible, and i think we could still call it capitalism and democracy. but we would be fundamentally changing the way the resources get distributed to everybody. >> i like the way you think.
[applause] >> if you were going to be imagined america, you would read imagine it in what way? >> while we are working on the longer-term, and as we think about poverty and all the things that affect and are part of poverty, hunger is the one issue that we can solve in this country. there is enough food produced in america not only to feed every person in this country, but most of the developed world. what i would do is find a way to work on the food system so that we can get what farmers grow to the plates of people that need food. it is criminal that we live in this country and that there are 17 million kids that don't eat
and cannot learn and cannot be educated. it is actually giving dollars back to people to try to get on their feet. if you don't have to worry about groceries, you can get back on your feet. a perfect world to me, and this is a big stretch because these programs are under fire on either side of the aisle, a big stretch -- would be to seek children and families have enough food to eat in the united states of america. [applause] >> suze orman. >> there are so many things, but i concentrate on personal finance. my job is rebuilding america, one wallet at a time [applause] . i really believe in my heart that if you all want to stay out of poverty, you have to really
get involved with the money that you have today. you have got to learn how to make more out of less. you have to really turn toward your money than away from. so many of you will get jobs, you have jobs, and you take this hard-earned money and you turn it over to wall street. you turn it over to the banks. you turn it over to the people that are helping keep you in this situation of not getting ahead. so you need to know what to do with money, who to give it to, how to invest it in your retirement plan, and how to be able to take care of yourself in the future. my biggest fear is that they are just going to keep pushing all of this down the road. you are not going to have medicare, social security the way you think is going to be.
you are not going to have pensions from the companies you are working with. they will be taking the 401k they have and you will have to work until you are 75 or 80, just to be able to possibly retire. i am asking you, and the america i see is one where people really deal with their own money. they are powerful over their own money. then when you are powerful over yourself, you can help others around you so that you can pick everybody uppe. the only other thing i would love to see happen is because until the housing market comes back, it is going to be very difficult for america to come back. the housing market is not going to come back until the job market comes back. everything is contingent on one another. however, i do not understand why
all the people who hold the mortgages, what we just don't reduced every single mortgage out there on every single home in america to the fair market value of that home today, so the people that have homes and want to stay in their homes, they cannot help but they are under water. it is no fault of your own. why can they not take a $750,000 home in tampa and make it a $100,000 mortgage because that is what it can be sold for today. i don't understand why they are willing to not do that. that is my vision. >> let me say right quick, suze was gracious enough tonight not to raise this issue because she did not want to come across as proselytizing, and i appreciate that. the announcement she made today in washington at the national
press club is called the approved card. just go online, you can find it under her name. it is being talked about everywhere. the story broke today. go online and read more about the proof card and what -- the approved card. >> and don't believe the naysayers and what they say i am doing, because that is not what i am doing. >> i have five minutes left and c-span is going to turn the cameras off. >> i want to read imagine america in a way that allows every single person in it to see their own value, to see their dignity, and understand that there are ways that we can create economic opportunities to move people up and out of poverty. in particular, using the tools that we already have.
real estate development, idea create communities that meet the needs of everybody. opportunities to not degrade our a -- environment. we have those tools out there. we could be growing food in our cities in using technology in a way that helps redefine what are regional food system actually looks like. we can do these things right here and right now. i am also very interested in the idea that we know our climate is changing. doesn't make any difference whether man did it or not. people know there are problems out there. we have to address the fact that we do have a class of people that are under educated and have been left behind, and we have to create jobs for those people.
we absolutely can do it. the best social service dollar spent is actually a job. >> we have been talking about eliminating poverty. my final thought is, a lot of us in this room at one point have been poor, war in the future are going to be poor. sari, that is just how is. my final thought is, the poor and proud -- be poor and proud. we represent something. we have prided ourselves that has nothing to do with our network or credit score.
>> make poverty a priority in the national house and in the world house, so that everyone's humanity is accepted, abilities are accepted in such a way you can see theirself development and self realization, their voices are heard at the highest level. righteous indignation, anger channeled through love and justice. there will never be changed if you don't get mad with love and courage and be willing to live and die for something bigger than yourself. >> thank you, cornel west. final word, michael moore. >> tax the rich and end the war. take the money out of politics.
corporations are not people. let me say this to the 1% who might be watching. how many gated communities can you build? you have made 150 million americans poor or nearly four. i am a nonviolent passive this person. you have the communities across this country who are full of love and wanting to work together to make this a better country. how much more are you going to make them suffer, because some day they are not going to take it anymore. q. are going to wish you had dealt with that now could find the courage to deal with it now with peace and nonviolence. that is what we prefer. that is what we all prefer. [applause] >> let me ask you, in the 30
seconds i have left, i want to thank george washington university for having us. number two, let me ask you to thank c-span for carrying this conversation live around the world. thank you, c-span. no.and stand on your feet and tk this entire panel for being here tonight. c-span, thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]
were able to celebrate at the memorial in washington. the memorial was covered with quotations from his speeches and as a can see on the side of the sculpture, one of those quotations will be changed as it was found to be taken in context. the main part of the memorial is a sculpture 30 feet tall and depicting emerging from a mountain of despair. based on one of the lines from his "i have a dream speech."
martin with a king and the speech that inspired a nation." it examines it as a political treatise, an improvised sermon, and worker portrait. >> there is this tech not -- tectonics' if that happened on line where people's privacy is no longer owned by them. it is currency that we use to get access to facebook for free or gmail. >> what will the digital future look like? the impact of changing technology on business, the media, and everyday life. "the communicators" on c-span 2. >> nancy pelosi will talk with political correspondent mike allen about what to expect out of the second session of the 112 congress and we will have coverage from tomorrow morning at 825 eastern -- a 20 5:00 a.m.
eastern. on wednesday we will highlight major magazine stories. the attack of the superpacs. we will talk about the article and the landmark supreme court decision that is affecting spending in the 2012 presidential race. >> i believe that it is important to emphasize that while it is great to have this memorial to his memory, and it is great to have a national holiday and is great to have streets and schools and hospitals named in his honor all over our nation and world, it is also important to not place too much emphasis on martin luther king, the idol, but not them -- not enough emphasis on the ideals. >> tecolote that the life and legacy of dr. martin luther king, jr.
on line at the c-span library. what you want, when you want. >> the south carolina primary is saturday, january 21. since 1980, the winner has gone on to be the republican presidential nominee. there are birds take you to the candidate events. >> this has been a filled pres -- failed presidency. >> we have a message that can appeal not just in south carolina but across this nation and in particular come in the states that are necessary for us to win this election. >> as candidates get their message out and meet voters -- >> we do not know why we're there. it is a bigger mess. >> if we are using national security, are elements of power, we need to make sure it is in our national security interest. that we are not spread so thin
that we cannot do it right. >> take a picture. >> we want to put this in our newspaper. >> find more resources at the campaign web site with more video and read the latest from the candidate, political reporters, and people like you from social media sites at c- span.org/campaign2012. >> the nation's highest-ranking officers spoke about president obama's to cut funds from the defense budget over the next 10 years. general martin dempsey is the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and an alumni of duke university. it was his first public speech since the new strategic defense review was announced in his speech is over one hour. -- and his speeches over one hour.
>> thank you. i never really thought of myself as the commander-in-chief before but i will begin to hereafter. let me just say what a great pleasure it is to be asked to introduce the family lecture and to have our guest in the front row. what a special honor is for me to introduce the man who will give a lecture, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. the 18th chairman to hold that position. as i thought about it, there is a much one could say. one -- there is some way in which the speaker embodies in a powerful way what universities are all about. universities to a million things. at their core, replaces the -- gives them an education so they can go forward and assume responsibility in the world. shoulder to difficult -- the difficult challenge that will arise in their time and you
would agree this is a person who has done that in spades. martin dempsey was born in new jersey. had his college education at the -- west point and a graduate in 1974. after his first tours of europe -- beauty he was sent to do where he got an emmy in english literature. -- an m.a. in english literature. they had a child born at duke. welcome home. subsequently, after his career, martin dempsey went forward to assume command at every echelon of the armed services. he has served in war, and peace and served at home and abroad, most recently, his work, his leadership during the second iraq war led barry mccaffrey to refer to him as the best combat division commander of the
he became the acting commander east. more recently, chief of staff of the army. he is now the chief of staff. he is the highest ranking officer in the armed forces in principal military adviser to the president, secretary of defense, and the national security council. we could think of other ways to describe his job. he has the well-being of the 1.4 million people on active duty in the armed services under his authority. he also has another 1.4 million in the army reserves. he is this nation's leader in facing all security threats, including the familiar ones, none of which ever seen to go away, and the many new and unfamiliar ones that emerge. he has had the further challenge of having to face new challenges and old challenges at a time when the underlying
budgetary realities of everything in this country have become newly challenging. that is irresponsibility and a half to take on. these are jobs to need someone who is smart, strong, has a real leadership gives. i would say general martin dempsey, thank you for your service. welcome back to one of your many homes. [applause] >> no one has referred to me as a young man in a long time. in the spirit of it, i would like to clear you the supreme allied commander of durham. [laughter]
thank you so much for sponsoring the lecture series. i am honored to be part of its. thank you for what you do to encourage thinking and conversation. i would characterize this tonight as the conversation or discussion about the topic of strategy. strategy in this century with the complex issues, to suggest someone with lecture about it or try to impart any particular bit of wisdom on it might be a bit of hubris. peter feaver's eighth steps notwithstanding. i thought that was a wonderful piece of work. professor feaver, i mentioned
you. thank you for your collaboration especially on the issue of civil-military relations. that has been enormously helpful in helping me understand that and my responsibility as a steward of the profession. michael sean filled, chris simmons, melissa, the congressman, the senator are here. i am not sure why you are all here tonight. there is a duke basketball at some point in the near future. my own recollection of my time at duke suggest that before basketball games i would not find myself in a lecture hall brother down at shooters. [laughter]
if i did not have this lecture tonight, i would probably be back there trying to find my favorite stool. [applause] this is my first public speaking opportunity since we've ruled out what was described by the secretary as a strategic guidance. as it comes to us, it takes the shape of an emerging defense strategy. it is a great opportunity for me to crystallize my thinking. i will leave time to see if we can interact a bit. i will reflect a bit about my arrival here at duke in 1982. we drove over from fort carson, colorado, where i was stationed
as a captain. and remember at the time that the coach was a hanging an effigy in the quadrangle. " the chronicle" was talking about his imminent demise. i think what he has accomplished here has been remarkable. it reminds me that in this age of technology and information, the unblinking eye, i wonder. i have always wanted to ask the coach if he thought he would have survived to become the person he was capable of becoming in this environment today. it should give us all pause if we think the answer to that is no.
you have to give a strategy time to succeed. i will speak more about that in the future. as part of the english program, i had to take a foreign language exam. i have taken french in high school. i signed up for french believing i could set that requirement off to the side. in subsequent semesters, i failed the damn thing twice. the rule was if i failed it the third time, i would be sent packing. i got serious about studying french or i would not be here. i have often thought about that aspect of development.
i do not know that i had ever failed anything up to that point in time. as we look at how we develop the young men and women who will have to deliver the strategy we're talking about, i think it is important we give them the opportunity to see what failure looks like so they can come to the conclusion it is not something they like and that with the right attitude and work, they can overcome it. in the context of the strategy, it has got to be given time to work. we have to make sure as we step off to execute it -- we know there will be mistakes. you have to underwrite that. ultimately, we continue to grow and develop emotionally through diversity. opportunities of out there for diversity. i studied a bit of william blake. i considered myself to be -- i was going to be the next results man for the army.
i studied blake a bit because i was intrigued by the way he merged the written word with his illuminated manuscripts. i pretty much decided i had figured it out. i spent a semester working on what i thought was an incredibly thought-provoking and thesis- worthy paper only to find out i got a c-. i really worked hard on it. i asked the professor where the reward was. he said they did not reward for the effort. we reward you for the outcome. that was one of those light bulb moments.
you have to deliver. you have to produce. you have to achieve the outcome necessary in whatever line of work you have or you do not succeed no matter how hard you work. these are lifelong lessons now applicable in the job. the last thing related to my experience is that i chose william butler yeats as the poet i would study. i am irish. he is irish. i thought we would have this mythical linkage and it would be easier. if i got into trouble, i could always quote my grandmother and maybe the professor would take pity on me.
what i learned about yeats that i did not know going into it -- that is another lesson. i learned he was unique in that he allowed himself to change and reflect about that change as he went through his life. he did bizarre stuff at the end of his life. but that said, he was always a man who could understand his time and himself. he understood the context in which he was living. that is the point i want to pull into the discussion about strategy. strategy is the ability to predict what will happen. it is also about understanding the context in which it is being formulated. you have to be open-minded to the fact you will not get it right at the beginning.
you have a certain context in which to operate. you apply yourself to that. it changes the environment and introduces another set of complex challenges. it is a fascinating issue, this notion of strategy. i want to lay the groundwork to suggest that i think my development to become capable of thinking strategically starts in ways that sometimes unexpected and quite surprising. let me tell you about becoming the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. people ask what it is like. i say it is pretty good. i am a general. i have a nice house, an airplane. angelina jolie came to my office and wanted advice about her acting career. [laughter] actually, she did come to my
office. she is and humanitarian. she wanted to get up to speed on issues in africa in afghanistan. we have been married almost 36 years. when i became nominated to be the chairman, i was serving as the chief. i had about two weeks between jobs. we decided to go back to our home town to see friends. we went to high school together. we pulled into the gas station. in newark, they will not let you get the gas yourself. this guy comes out who it turns out she had dated in high school and just before she dated me. i was polite, a great guy, by the way. when we drove away, i was
feeling my oats a bit. i was thinking to myself, hell, yes. [laughter] i did not want to be boastful, but you have got to feel pretty good about the fact you chose me and not bobby. she looked me in eye and said if i had married bobby, he would be the chairman of the joint chiefs. [laughter] [applause] i had to concede she was probably right. the fact i am not pumping gas -- because there is a basketball game, i will not let the remarks go into overtime. i want to make some assertions about the topic and then get a chance to interact with you about it.
if you have not read dr. feaver's comments about grand strategy, they are extraordinarily important. the way i communicate with my joint chiefs and bosses is simplistically somewhat on the instruments of national power to achieve a particular outcomes. it is the integration and relationship of the four instruments of national power that do and must define a grand strategy. the one i scratched my head about the most often is the "i" -- information.
i think there is worth it to be done to understand the impact of information. the way it is passed, absorbed, and generated that has an effect on our strategic desires and aspirations that we have not come to grips with. we have come to grips with the inter-relationship of the instruments. if you are wondering why our grand strategy is being renegotiated in terms of outcomes in the face of the nation's budget crisis, it is because we are only as strong as those three pillars -- diplomatic, military, and economic -- related to each other to achieve the outcome. if one is weakened, they all are.
we have to rebalance ourselves. that is what i would suggest to you about the issue of grand strategy. let me talk in military terms. the application to achieve different outcomes depends on what was told to close to the 19th century. he said strategy is a triad, the interaction of ends, means, and ways. in our system, we have truly never been denied the means. it has been a great strength of our nation because of our
economic well-being that the means were never a limiting factor. we spend most of our time thinking about what we want to achieve. then we apply the means to its. we were not forced to confront the issue of whether there was another way to do it. i think the most important part of the emerging defense strategy and where we're trying to get between now and 2020 is that we are confronting the fact that in a constrained fiscal environment, and given that the ends are changing and being shifted, the real question is how we can look at changing the way we deliver the objectives
given the means available. it is an enormous opportunity. i am not being pollyannaish, but i do think there is as much opportunity as liability. as chiefs, we do not feel victimized by this. it is healthy for us. because we have not to confront the issue of "ways," i think we have missed opportunities in the past. if we have not learned anything over the last 10 years, shame on us. we have to take the last 10
years and how things have changed and how we have accomplished tasks that are different. we have to leverage that to deliver this grand strategy that i mentioned. i want to mention some continuities and dis- continuities. we have to recognize what will endure. we have to recognize there are dis-continuities that we cannot see it. sometimes i think we are bashful or loathe to remind ourselves of who we are or what we stand for. half of my career was lived in foreign countries.
i have interacted with partners. publicly they will not say they have it all right and we have it all wrong, but privately they understand what we stand for. they understand that when we show up, we show up to try to make the situation better and not worse. that is for them and us. that is a value system that provides incredible leverage as we decide how to change from a foundation of strength and not weakness. the second thing is our u.s. geography. it is not the 19th century. we are not protected by the two oceans. we are not protected from cyber attack that is ubiquitous around us. the geography of the united states provides a continuity on which we can rely.
u.s. homeland is no longer sanctuary. we are vulnerable. part of our strategy is to understand that vulnerability and lower the risk. the third thing is our demographics. we are a diverse society. we do have the ability to allow people -- we provide an example and enormous strength to our nation. we are trying to capture that in our strategy. the fourth continuity is resource competition. as the world's demographics and economics shift toward the pacific -- if you have been in new york, you will drive by the big sign at the u.n. about 7
billion. it will only take 10 years to get from 7 billion to 8 billion. you can figure out what will happen as this accelerates. what will it mean for the world economy? resource strength and competition is a reality. it is a continuity. we have to be alert to that. the fifth thing is violent extremist organizations. i will not pass judgment on any particular ideologies, but there are groups networked, de- centralized, and syndicated that act against our interests around the world.
between now and 2020, that is a continuity we have to confront. the final continuity for the military is that we are a profession. i just left 400 young faces of the rotc cadets from surrounding universities. if you feel like you are not sure where we are heading and not feeling good about the direction of the military, go a chat with those young kids and you will come out with a different feeling. they are terrific. they have sworn allegiance already as cadets to a set of ideals embodied in our constitution. we are unique on the face of
the planet in that regard. it is the strength of our profession. it is a great continuity on which we can build. dis-continuities i will mention. there is this thing out there called the arab spring. number two is the occupy movement. what does it mean to our system of governance? the third thing is north korean regime change that recently occurred. that will eventually stabilize. we describe them sometimes as black swans. they manifest at unexpected times and in unexpected ways. the fourth one is information technology.
this some thought that information technology has flattened. others will tell you we are about to increase again exponentially. 10 years ago, "cyber" meant something different. they might have called you a geek. cyber is now a reality. it has security implications. there are the potentials for breakout technologies we have to be alert to. the last one will make me sound like i have potentially lost my mind and given up my roots as a literature scholar.
that is non-biological intelligence. you probably saw the "jeopardy" show. there is a book that talks about a test that pits humans against computers trying to figure out which one is the computer and which one is the human. the human has always won, but the computer is getting close. as non-biological or artificial intelligence increases, what will it mean across all sectors of society? many believe we are at the knee of the curve and it is about to spike. others believe it is flat.
there is a dis-continuity in the issue of non-biological intelligence we have to be alert to. strategy, is it hindsight or foresight? some believe it is knitted together after and you take credit for strategy. i do not think it is either or. i do not think it is a dichotomy. aspects of it are backward- looking and aspects are 4- looking. is it en during or opportunistic? should it be entirely clear or should it be introducing ambiguity? strategy should not be entirely ambiguous. we need balance.
strategy is about context and choice. choices have consequences. consequences produce new contexts. it is dynamic. you have to appreciate it, accepted, embrace it. you have to force it or your strategy will not be with the nation needs in its security forces. i became interested in context during my tours of duty in iraq and afghanistan. i grew up in an army that was centralized and hierarchical. i have the expectation as a
young officer that the best information i could receive would come from the top down. the echelons above me always had the best capability to grab information come and gather intelligence, analyze it, and pushed it to me. this was through the cold war. i was in the business of consuming intelligence and information and in acting upon it. what i found in iraq and afghanistan was that the best information available to me did not come from the top down. i was at the top. rather, it came from the bottom up. i came to realize that over the last decade, this hierarchical organization had become, had adapted. it had become the centralized, networked -- de-centralized, networked. now some of the best
information comes from the bottom up. i also realized we had not changed the way we develop leaders. they were doing it on their own. when i was chief of the army, i said that the environment has changed. we're no longer centralized, her coat. we are global and networked. we are de-centralized. we have to figure out the new set of leaders attributes necessary in this environment. we have been adapting our leader and developmentparadigms. when i go into a meeting to discuss policy or strategy, he
who has the best context generally prevails in the argument. it is not necessarily who has the best facts, it is too has the best context in which those exist. we have got to develop leaders who can take the facts of the situation, apply context, and understand. remember what einstein said, march 14, same birthday. i consider it an omen of some kind. he said if i had an hour to save the world, i would spend
55 minutes understanding the problem and five minutes solving it. that was true in the middle part of the 20th century. i would say it is even more true in the 21st century. we spend far too little time understanding problems before we try to solve them. i am in conversation with one of the leading advocates for the changes to the public- school curriculum to develop leaders who can understand context and problems before lurching to find the answer. that is extraordinarily important. the last thing i will mention before i say a few words about the new strategy and what it
means to the nation is the idea of cost as an independent variable. the military is not being victimized by the budget issue. some are speaking about it in those terms. we clearly have a role to play as citizens in helping the nation address its economic crisis. i will not be the only one who goes to the altar and put something in the basket. we understand for the nation to overcome the debt crisis and economic challenges, we have to get a hold of costs as an independent variable in the development of our organizations and modernization programs. we will. i want you to know we are not being victimized. this is something the joint
chiefs have embraced as what is best for america. we will figure it out. cost is now an independent variable in our decisions about what we will and will not do. it is probably the first time in my recent memory that has been the case. cost has always been a variable. it has not been an independent variable. it is. that is ok. we will adapt and figure it out. we cannot underestimate the
impact of cost. that is among the things that are new in our environment. what about our emerging defense strategy? it is a real strategy. it is non and edited cousin of its former strategies. we have taken real ownership of it. it seeks a balance of principle and pragmatism. it looks out to 2020. we have decided what we've want to do between now and 2017. the secretary of defense will submit the budget through 2017 at the end of this month. the work will not end. we're looking to 2020. what is so important about the mid-future? nobody wants the mid-future. if you go to a cocktail party, see if you can get somebody in the conversation about 2050. no problem. talk about global warming, demographics, life on other planets. it is not hard to get somebody to talk about 2050. get them to talk about what happened today or tomorrow or
yesterday. it is not a problem. people are up to speed and connected on the issues of today. ask someone about 2020. crickets. it is intimidating because we have the opportunity to shape it. we will own it. we will submit four budgets. whether we intentionally and deliberately build towards 2020, i will be the chairman that delivers deliberately or inadvertently the joint forces of 2020. that is what we need to be thinking about, what the nation
needs in 2020. we are working on that. it is a combination of changed in relationships, the emerging components, the lessons of the last 10 years of war. it is a new relationship among the services. that gets at what i was saying about the way we approach security challenges and not just dialing up or down the resources. there are shifts in geographic priorities. you will here we are more interested in the strategic challenges emanating from the pacific it does not mean we will reject our traditional
partners in europe. it means we have to understand how to engage with them in a different way than just plopping large numbers of u.s. troops on their soil. we will shift our view of the strategic challenges. there is something powerful about that notion. dr. feaver in his article said you have to have some sort of a bumper sticker to describe it or people will not be interested in it. the idea of shifting our strategic priorities to the pacific is probably profound enough for now. it is up to us to determine what that means. the two-war construct, we have
said since the demise of the soviet union that we have to be able to fight two nearly simultaneous wars. we have taken that language out. they say this because we will only fight one war. the nation needs a military that can do multiple things at the same time based on the needs and to give as many options possible. i can do it because we have freed ourselves from that tyranny of language associated with the two-war construct. we had this construct that said you must fight two wars simultaneously.
i am the chief of the staff of the army and take two potential. there were always two scenarios where you had to be prepared to fight. you would apply combat power and then enablers. you would have to make judgments about how many days of supply and ammunition you would need. there's not much wiggle room. you have to be in to fight two wars conventionally and simultaneously. the army ended up with 264,000 trucks. you might say that is absurd. three days of supply, ammunition, spread out over two conflicts for three days.
it was a mathematical drill. there truly was a tyranny to the construct. that was fine when the world was like that. it was fine when resources were not an independent variable. it is no longer find. by freeing ourselves of that tyranny of vocabulary, we have allowed ourselves to think differently about how we achieve the outcome over time. we are not where we need to be. i am suggesting that by freeing ourselves of the tyranny of that particular language, you will find is to beat a better force. we have to keep it balanced. we have to invest in manpower. we have to invest in our
leaders. we will do that. if i had to pick one placed on which the strategy will succeed or fail, it will be on the ability to develop leaders to execute. even in the face of resource constraints, we have to redouble our efforts. no strategy will ever be executed as we intend, and it will be the leaders that adapt and make it work in whatever circumstance they find themselves. i went to a funeral yesterday for one of our very famous generals, a guy named don star who served at the end of world war two, vietnam, became a four-star. he was credited, for me, with taking the army of vietnam and turning it into the army that became the army we know today.
we are at another one of those inflection points in history. listen to what he said about how he kind of gauged what was important in life. if you want to think about your future, perhaps you should do it in this region these terms. i've got this extraordinary. down this extraordinary. i found this extraordinary. "i suggest your life takes on meaning only to the extent to which the causes you attach yourself have meaning. to something that lives after its. in the end, you become what you are for some caused you have made your own. in many ways, it is a far higher ideal to live an ordinary life
in an extraordinary way." as i sat at the service listening to those words, i think it captured what we should all be about, not just those of us that serve in the military. but anyone that considers themselves to be a citizen of this great nation. god bless you all, i look forward to taking your questions. [applause] >> thank you, general. we have some time, and we have microphones down there. if you would make your way to the microphones. i will ask the first question. last week, when you were speaking about the president's strategy, you mentioned risk. managing risk. can you talk about what you think is the biggest risk in the strategy? what are the risks you would
want to focus attention on? >> i'm held accountable annually. the chairman, just after the budget submission, i have to submit a document cleverly called the chairman's risk assessment. it is against the strategy, will this budget deliver the strategy? i think about strategy in two important ways. one is almost mechanical. you take a look at the likelihood of something occurring against the consequences of that occurring. take the easiest example, the consequence of a global nuclear exchange is extraordinary, but the likelihood is quite low. that allows you to determine, as we did in the recent
negotiations, to determine where you are willing to take risks. that is true at any point along the spectrum of conflict. what is the likelihood and what with the consequences be? the other way to look at it for this particular strategy, since we are getting smaller, we are taking a risk in time and capacity. i will elaborate very briefly. time that means it might take us longer to go to a fight. it might take us longer to finish a fight. in terms of capacity, how often can you use the force, will we get into another protracted stability operation? the active component would not be capable of taking a protracted stability operation because once you get into a protracted conflict, you have to rotate people in and out. this has been done to mitigate
the risk of time and capacity. >> general, thank you for your remarks. my name's steve kelly, a retired officer that teaches here at duke. you talked about continuity, specifically the competition of resources. i would like to ask you about energy in general. the pentagon is very focused on becoming more efficient. you consume 80% of the energy that the federal government consumes. i would like to know your thinking on that as a way forward to save money and work with a smaller budget. related to that is energy and the relationship with u.s. national security. your take on events in iran and nigeria, the impact on oil supply for the united states over the coming months or years. >> thank you for sharing your
nightmares with me, i share them myself. you left off one or two points, but you got most of them. energy is the right thing to do. three reasons we should be serious about energy. one is that it is the right thing to do. i am not a card-carrying member of greenpeace, but i recognize it is the right thing to do for the planet to become alert and aware and concerned about energy. the other is cost. we consume enormous amounts of fossil fuels. the reason i am passionate about energy and i have made it a focus area for myself, i would describe it as operational energy. i might be off by a few, but 250 either forward operating or outposts in afghanistan. everyone requires power,
energy, logistics, all the things that sustain life --all the things that sustain life, and every one of those generally requires us to drive it in or fly in or drop in. we have a remarkable system of parachute extraction. it is physical, we have to get it there. and by doing that, we have people at risk. we would be more effective if we had a brigade combat team that was self-sufficient, net zero in terms of energy consumption. every service has a program, i can only speak for the army. we have the five installations in this country that has a goal of and by 2015 or 2017, achieving a net zero energy consumption goal. there are the operational aspects of that, and there are programatics as we put out a
request of my particular vehicle, we introduce energy into the peak performance parameters. all of that is somewhat aspirational. it is part of the joint force 2020 vision that we will become -- or we are trying to benchmark it. we are trying to become energy efficient. in terms of the security environment, there are those that believe that that is the issue over which the traditional and the emerging powers will find common interest. another reason to try to break this kind of paradox, it's also related to what i mentioned to you earlier about demographic trends as well. i don't know if you have a more
specific questios, and not to be trite, but i share your concern that energy could become the issue of the last half of this century. >> my name is julian specter, i was surprised to hear your english background from duke, i was wondering if you can talk about how the humanities experience influenced and translated into your subsequent military career? >> [inaudible] i think dick planted that question. >> yeah, i get asked that a lot. when i came to duke university in 1982, i might as well have been planted on the moon. here is why i say that. i had grown up in a series of catholic grammar schools, i went to catholic high school, west point, i never had to
think about what to wear. [laughter] i got to duke and i was in a panic. what was i going to wear to school? i am way overdressed, by the way, people are walking around in shorts and i stuck out like a sore thumb. one of the funny things that happens to me, on the first day of class, i am an army guy. i'm doing intelligence work and on the list of incoming graduate students, there was a priest, an air force guy, and army guy, and several students that had just graduated into matriculated straight into their graduate degree. i wonder who the priest is. i realize everyone in the class is doing the same damn thing. which was the priest?
i got the most votes as the priest. [laughter] i swear to god. the priest got the most votes as the army officer. to your question, it was incredibly broadening. every place i went to school, you could label it as somewhat conservative and maybe dramatically conservative. i came to duke and i was confronted, in a positive way, with viewpoints i had never been confronted with. that was in the interactions with students. i was reading things. i felt woefully inadequate. the priest was working on his doctorate in literature and he was quoting things from his master's program and i felt completely left behind.
i clawed my way back. one, it gave me enormous confidence. second, it opened my mind to seek, not just accept, but seek other ways of thinking about things. the third way, it helps you communicate. when i got to west point, they held up the dictionary in the works of shakespeare. he said, this will tell you the definition of the words. the dictionary will tell you what they mean. i found that to be extraordinary. i have been an avid reader and i am always looking for ways to phrase things in a way that is persuasive. you heard me say that even in our government, he or she that has the best context prevails. and he or she that is the most
persuasive will prevail. it has helped me a lot. >> let's take two questions at a time. >> i served with you in third armored division along time ago. i have a question as it relates to volunteer force. the willingness to serve will be based on how we take care of those that have served. what would be your recommendation to help transition soldiers back into the workforce as well as take care of their long-term care after the wars subside? >> i am part of the occupy movement.
i identified with the quotation you shared. i guess i was really curious to hear, you mention occupy wall street as a key discontinuity that you feel like there is a military need to respond to. i was wondering why you feel like it demands a military response and what the response might look like? >> i think she misunderstood. thaty, i'm glad you asked question, because if you have doubt, i need to clear it up. i am not in any way advocating a military response to the occupy movement. that would have made news. there is this thing called the arab spring that has changed in the security environment internationally. the same kind of technology has produced this occupy movement changing the internal political dynamic of this country. not necessarily military, but it is almost linked to your question. how do we make sure that changes
in the political climate calculation that we can preserve, the volunteer force to continue to make sure that we have the right kind of man and women. we are not going anywhere near a military response to the occupy movement. when i look at the environment in which we live and function, it is not just about things military. it is economics, political change. it is information proliferation, and i am trying to figure it out. the same kids that are out there on the street -- think about it this way. there are kids connected 24
hours a day, kids that will sit in the middle of a football field with a laptop computer and they are by themselves but connected to the world. how they will come into the army and we will say, you can't do that. these kids come in with a different set of expectations. i tell people that as the chairman, i will manage three significant transitions. the first is a military that has been generally fighting will go back to being a military that continues the fight and is deploying less. the next transition is bigger to smaller budgets. the trend line is pretty clear. the third, because we are going to get smaller, we will transition tens of thousands into civilian life and it is our obligation to manage their transition. i will give you an example. we are working with the veterans administration and we are trying to think of transition not as an episodic
event at the end of your service. the last six weeks, we fill your head with the transition stuff, we are trying to think of transition -- when you agree to serve, we will start to do things that will prepare you to transition out, even if you never do. we have to look at it as a continuum and not episodic. we have partnered with business industries and academia. >> i am afraid we have run out of time, but you have started a conversation that i am happy to report we will continue all semester long. we will have another lecture at the end of the semester. you have proven to us in the business of strategy, where