i'm peter labelle . one didn't love polls, particularly when polls further a certain political agenda, but polling has a checkered history. as of late the last 2 election cycles tell us as much, should we put much stock into polling anymore. it's so then why i crossed talking the public mood. i'm joined by my guess, richard barrett's in gainesville. he is director of big data pole and in los angeles we have p e, and he is a strategic planning consultant and equity advisor, as well as an independent economic analyst. hard gentleman crosstalk rules and effect, that means you can jump in any time you want, and i would appreciate it. all right, let's go to richard 1st in gainesville, you're the master of polls. your polling is actually quite good. but your, your competitor, hers and your peers, are not nearly as up the snow, but before we talk about pulling richard in, you get the human touch, the, the touch of the public. here are we in a change environment right now, cuz people tend to change collections.

they want to live peter, they want it. well, i wouldn't say i would just say i was a sinner, drug people, people don't mind being lied to as long as it doesn't affect their overall way of life, their pocket book, their prestige, their status at work and within their industry. they know at some level that, that it's, it's a charade, but it's a charade that they're ban, wagging on because it's, it's a better quality of life than they'd have elsewhere. yeah, but i mean, why you're absolutely right because that's one of the things i mentioned the culture wars because you know, you can look at the co written house case and you can have an opinion on it. it may be even a strong opinion, but it doesn't change to material well being in this moment in time. but if we're talking about gas prices and you're a lower middle class blue collar worker, you may have an opinion on cow rittenhouse, but you have a really hard, strong vested interest in the, in the policy when it comes to energy that, that, and i think that's one of the discon

i'm peter lily. this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing the public mood. ah okay, let's go back to richard in gainesville. i mean, if we look at the polling right now, i mean, one of the things that came to my mind is that would be look at the generic poll for a congressional our seats. i mean, i think we're seeing it's double digit now in favor of the republicans. do you think that the, if the, if they continue to beat this drum about the generic poll, that it will actually suppress republicans going out because it will be like the whole, you know, when hillary said, you know, everybody thought i was going to win. that's why they didn't vote for me. i mean is, is this, is there a danger for this? for the g o. p. you know, i think both parties have their own ways to suppress the vote with the republican party, the base. i think they're going to vote, i really do, peter, no matter what, they're weighted the press republicans is to tell them their vote. doesn't count a way to depress democrats to tell them they're going to win. that's the, that's the differe

i'm peter bell. this is the home addition to minute we're discussing site guys. ah. okay, let's go back to john in france. i'm gonna use another extended metaphor for our program here. you know, looking for the root origins of something is very, very difficult as academics, it's kind of, it's very important exercise. when you know, where are we at the way the way you see change going about are, are these tremors we're feeling right now? have we already had the earthquake, or are we feeling the aftershocks of origins? we could look at like briggs in the advent of trump. ok, because we seen so much reaction to both here because i'm trying to get a field where we're going that you can, you tipped your hand in the very beginning. the problem my saying is n times, which i think is a very good description, but i mean, is, are we going into a more massive change or we are feeling the after effects of a huge change. it's happened in the last, almost 24 months. i call it i call 202-020-2021 is the long 2020 i a lot of things have happened in that time, but it's the same as i

i'm peter labelle. how should we describe our times? what is the zeitgeist, as they say? do we have a sense of direction and purpose? we also hear a lot about the desire to return to normal. what does that mean? now? are we actually living in the new normal? ah, to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, lionel in new york. he is a legal in media analyst. and in paris we crossed to john laughlin. he is a university lecture in history and political philosophy, right, gentlemen. crosstalk rules that affect, that means you can jump in in time you want, and i always appreciate it. okay, let's start with john. what is our zeitgeist today? because it seems to me we're in a transition at our transistor, dora period right now. certainly we've left something behind. i have no idea where we're going, but i also have a difficult time describing where we are your thoughts? well, to be honest, it feels like wherein the end times pizza, because so much seems to be going wrong. both in internal politics across the world . and of course, in the international situation. it

peter was very, very good. i believe that coven is a religion, the vaccine or boosters, whatever vaccine is the sacrament sound she is. the pope and the cdc is the vatican . and i'm trying to be a good i'm, i'm, i'm serious. this gives people something to believe in something to fear, a sense of belonging, who has the latest busher, who has the latest vaccine document in new york right now, people are running, running to, to vaccine testing site to see whether they have the a micron variant. which i heard is basically last. we are now in an endemic versus a pandemic. like nobody wants to hear the good news because they are so caught up in the almost sexual fetishistic titillation of fear and dread it. i'm not exaggerating. that wasn't meant to be a cute if the answer. i mean it, it, let me, let me go back to john. yeah. me, it would say the echo what you said an answer. your 1st question you, this is re put this, this melodrama that it's being played out. this is, this is a really poor thing. rule substitute fo

peter, in your, in one of your questions, i think that's a very big problem. i think we all go up and buy by fools by chances, by opportunists, by people who come into power without having any real sense of the responsibilities . and these people have been taking the can down the road for a very long time. as we all know, all our states will, our countries are heavily indebted. and yet, the repayment is always, as i say, kicked down the line to all these things have been building up slightly under the surface. with this sudden explosion of totalitarianism. that's i think is, is a water said, because it shows the extent of all decline. it brings it into focus. it brings into focus the fact that what people want now is not freedom. they don't want, they don't want freedom. they don't want to be able to do what they want, at least not in a noble sense. they may want to have very sort of basic freedoms like to go to a restaurant. they don't want to freedom in any noble sense. instead, they are afraid of freedom. and that is the beginning of totalitarianism. it is

george you some right that excellent peter. i think that's exactly what the russians saying, which is that we have been saying the same thing to you over and over again starting from 1991. when a go or assurances from the west of the west will not expand into space left. i believe the withdrawal so ok and you know, with complaint again and again the west is treated complaints with content and just say, you know, you lost the cold war, you know, then the brakes. and now that the geopolitical situation has changed very much in an adverse fashion. where was this so playing this game of coming up with these silly, legalistic arguments like, well, every country has the summer and right to decide its own security arrangement. and in any case we, we never promised you anything. and even if we didn't promise you anything, we didn't put it in writing. and in any case, there was a defensive alliance. how much it made span all the way to central asia. the chinese all is still a defensive alliance. and so coming up with this kind of nonsen

i'm peter lavelle with 2021 rapidly coming to an end to this time for some reflection. what will we remember about this year? how did our lives change? also? we look forward to the new year. what does 2022 have in store for us? will we be living in interesting times? ross stocking 2021. i'm joined by my guest. georgie brower in bristol, she is deputy leader of the workers party brittany, as well as the author of the drive to war against russia in china. and in paris we cross a john laughlin, he's a university lecture in history and political philosophy, or across hoc rolls in effect, that means he can jump at anytime you want. now it's appreciate john, let me go to you, person in paris. some. how did the neo liberal project, neo liberalism is as an ideology fair in 2021? because i, i would say it did very, very poorly as it should because it's an ideology that m a is collapsing all around . is an every facet of the every facet. it touches go ahead, john. well, i think 2021 was the year in which the oh well deletes. but i'm not sure that i would call them their liberal a

i'm peter developed from and you were discussing 20212022. ah. okay, let's go back to john in paris. you know, one of the events of 2021 that i found really quite fascinating was this rather ridiculous democracy summit. the virtual one i think of. everyone remembers here and you know, it all of this talk about a democracy, but for me it was just, it was a very, very much an ideological show to data maintain, had gemini, because is the, it was presented as, you know, a confident western lead world. i with, with that while back by their ideology, the course they don't call it neo liberalism, but you know, they call it democracy, rule of law, all of this type of thing. but i actually thought it was more of a, a virtual presentation out of desperation. but they're losing at their losing control. okay. and they're trying to maintain a narrative here. and of course, you know, i mean, you know, everybody likes puppies. everybody likes democracy. i mean, you know, it's, it's one of the, it's ridiculous facade for me. and it was a ridiculous exercise, but

so we know this is all the tricks and you're absolutely right peter. they refused to recognise nicaragua, they continue to sanction their the entire country. people are living in dire need right now i just got back from there. i also got back from under as, and we were really covering that as well in elections as well. the united states is refusing to recognize any of these countries and the job by the job, by them is in charge. really. that's the point i want to make. this is the continuation of the u. s. department, and of course their foreign policy. this is really nothing to do with the mocker. see, it's more of an, it's more of the tricks. and by the way, the united states government, the united states military, is very rich in talking about democracy when they're jailing journalists like julian assigned. and i mean, it's just, it's just to larry us to, for them to talk about a summit on democracy. when in reality the united states is the number one, you know, per persecutor of journalists and any sort of descent. and they're basically trying to f

i'm peter lavelle. there is no such thing as unilateral security. all real security is always collective. this is precisely how russia abuse, endless. western hostility and nato expansion to the east. moscow is presented ways to avoid conflict and assure all security is the west asleep at the switch. ah, discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, marcus papadopoulos in london. he is a historian, analyst, and author of the book arise, receive the return of russia to world politics. and in budapest we have to work semi well. he is a podcast to read the gaggle which can be found on youtube and locals are generally cross off rules and the fact that means you can jump in any time you want. and i always appreciate it. i start out in budapest here. george, it's been about a week now since the russians have sent 2 proposals to the united states and nato. we've gotten mixed reactions from the foreign policy blog appear apparently in july, there'll be some kind of talks in geneva again, really that information on that. and it seems to me that the,

i'm peter lavelle . you as president joe biden is hosting a virtual global summit on democracy. apparently, washington intends a nuclear said to save the world for democracy, at least as the foreign policy blob understands this political term. critics of this study claim, it's all about strategic polarization and an attempt at values based diplomacy. ah, cross sucking democracy summit, i'm joined by my guest, scott ritter and dollar. he is a former intelligence officer and the united nations weapons inspector in orlando. we have fiorella, isabel. she is an independent journalist and co host of the convo couch. and here in moscow we have alexi. now i'm of, he is an expert at the russian international affairs council, or it crosses rosen effect. that means you can jump any time you want. now is appreciate scott, let me go to you 1st year. what's the point of best summit? i mean, i am really at a loss. i mean this is, it's not if it's like 1950 or 1980 and the cold war is still going on. and can you actually in a, have a, a, a principal, a union uniting principal around democracy i

i'm peter lavelle . again, there are rumors of war. there are rumors of invasion and again, the country is ukraine. there are allegations of a russian military build up within the countries borders, though it is a fact, ukraine is receiving lethal aid from nato countries who benefits from this stratagem. i cross sucking ukraine. i'm joined by my guests, alexander claxon in london. he is a researcher at the university of lancaster in philadelphia we have walter melodic . he is a organizer with the answer coalition, and in otto, where we have paul robinson. he is a professor in the graduate school of public and international affairs at the university of ottawa, hard gentleman, cross hoc rules and effect. that means he can jump any time you want. and i'm, i always appreciate, paul. let me go to you 1st. in ottawa, i don't know, it seems like groundhog all day again to me. i mean we had this in the spring leave in extensions. we're flaring a lot of our bombastic cabella coast rhetoric out there. what, what is the strategy from nato side? t

i'm peter labelle, focus on ukraine. joe biden says i don't accept any one's red line, rushes foreign ministers out again. margaret says the nightmare scenario of military confrontation is returning on this edition of the program. we examined the significance of both statements. ah discuss these issues and more and joined by my guess, george m u l. e. in budapest, he is a podcast or the goggle which can be found on youtube and locals. and in oslo we have gland deason. he is a professor at the university of southeastern norway as well as author of the book, great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution, or a gentleman cross hoc rules in effect, that means you can jump any time you want, and i would appreciate it. again, it's glen 1st the in our slow i, i don't think we can, you underestimate the significance of the 2 sentences that i cited in the introduction. i don't accept anyone's red line and the nightmare scenario of military computation is returning. i don't think anything we have heard anything like that si

so quite frankly, peter, a pledge from nature even in writing is absolutely yes. no charge to find another way to find really frustrating. you know, we've been talking for 6 minutes and 3 seconds already in this program. and all of us have mentioned dates, agreements, or conversations that are documented, i mean, and then i look at western coverage and all of this and none of it. but, i mean, we're sourcing this all the time on a microscopic level. and again, you know then, so the well, we never said, nathan, when expand what is that supposed to mean? and why should i care? i mean, is natal into international law as it's the prism in which the globe sees it security? absurd, but they don't. they want us to believe this. george, i'm frustrated. i think you have absolutely right. now that has been a create. and of course, what, why does the getting away with it for 30 years? is that they were convinced in 998, that russia is now a hopeless weak basket case. it's not half of the size of the soviet union. it doesn't have any kind of economic clout. and you could just

i'm peter lavelle. what is the national mood? i suppose it depends on what kind of media you consume to say the nation is divided in highly partisan is an understatement. this is certainly what the national media wants us to think. but are we really so divided on what really matters cross sucking the public mood. i'm joined by my guess, martha bonita in palm beach. she is president a boat america 1st and atlanta. we have d. dawkins, hagler. she is a political strategists and a former georgia state representative. and in boston, we cross a rory riley, topping she is an attorney, a conservative commentator and a contributor at the hill heart ladies cross hoc rules and effect, that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciate martha, your this is your 1st appearance on cross. ok. so i'd like to go to you 1st. i'm calling this program angry nation. what is the mood? because, you know, i'm a media attic, so i watch everything from cnn and miss nbc fox, everything you know, and i get the impression people are angry, but

i'm peter labelle, to remind you we're discussing the democrats. ah okay, let's go back to kevin in washington whit with an eye on next year's mid terms and in keeping in mind what happened in virginia during the governor's race here. does the ghost that hans the democratic party known as donald trump? is it effective any more? because i hear that all the time, i mean and miss m b c still makes a lot of money off of trashing tom. so, i mean, is that it is overplayed card in the democratic in a democratic play book? oh, well, i think it is, you know, he's obviously not on twitter anymore. so we don't get his offensive sort of random tweets that i think i rile up and organize the people who don't like him. he's not really on tv. i think the more donald trump is in front of the camera and the more he's on social media, the better for the democrats. i think that's largely why joe biden, one because donald trump did such a horrible job and was widely disliked of. so with him not being around, i think we're, we're seeing as voters are not going to put of

abolish slavery long ago with ah, welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered on peter level to remind you we're discussing ukraine. i okay, let's go back to paul in ottawa, it's something alexander already brought up in the program and i want to delve into it a little bit more. this mantra that you, ukraine, is a sovereign country and it has the right to decide what military alliance is it wants to join that, that it's, that, that's a ridiculous argument to make. it sounds really nice, but all through history, this is what countries have done. no, i can't join your side because i'm too close to the other one. okay. i have to, i, you know, it, the security is not a 0 sum game. i mean, security is something that is relative here and i, every time i hear this from a nato official, it's absolutely nonsense. it may, this is a, these are people that don't understand strategy and balances of power because that's exactly what we're in right now. it making that kind of statement. it's a political statement, it's, it's a virtue signaling and it doesn't help us resolve the of the

i'm peter lavelle at the end of every year across soc answer some of your many questions. not surprisingly, many of your questions, concerns politics, the current international situation, and whether we should trust legacy media will do our best to answer as many questions as we can ah. raw sucking q and a i am joined by my guest gland deason in oslo. he is professor at the university south eastern norway as well as author of the book, great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution and in plymouth. we have patrick hennington. he is the editor and founder of 21st century wired dot com. all right, gentlemen, crosshatch, rules and effect. that means you can, joan, any time you want, i got a lot of questions. let's see, we can get to as many as possible here. the 1st question is, let me go to glen 1st. what are the chances of an arm conflict involving russia and nato in the new year? thoughts? well, i think it's unlikely, but it's becoming increasingly likely and i did. they are a good the good. the news is that the recognizing actually difficulties we have in europe an

[000:00:00;00] ah, ah hello and welcome to cross stock, were all things considered on peter level in terms of security and defense, europe stands at a crossroads. should outdated cold war air structures be maintain like nato in over reliance on the u. s. or should europe define and shoulder responsibilities for its own defense? and what about russia? ah, to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess when decent in oslo. he is a professor at the university of southeastern norway as well as author of the book . great power politics in the 4th industrial revolution. and here in moscow we have maxine schwarzkopf. he is the director of the center for advanced american studies at moscow state institute of international relations. gentlemen, cross up rules and effect, that means you can jump any time you want, and i always appreciate it again. let's go to glen 1st here. you know, glen where does, where does your stand right now? because, you know, it's 30 years after the cold war. we still have nato, but we have a lot of the cold war agreements like on missiles and defense and th

welcome back to cross stock where all things are considered on peter level. to remind you we're discussing this ears. q and a. ah . okay, go ahead. add back to patrick. here. patrick, you want to answer? should trump come back in 2024? your thoughts? go ahead. i think on some level it's, it's inevitable if you take the temperature of half the country right now in the u . s. certainly. all the signals are there of you watching a media and so forth. but you know, you have to consider a couple of extenuating circumstances. the 1st being is age. i don't think it's a, a major problem and compared to joe biden, it would be a 2nd term. so he's going into a 2nd term a rather than his 1st term as opposed to bind, but the trump agenda is already kind of a baked in to the republican party. so in that sense it wouldn't be i'd, i don't think there would be any surprises with a trump presidency in the 2nd term. i'm so i think it on that side, it's good. but then if you want to bring in new blood, it would most likely come via a vice president appointee on the ticket. so th

i'm peter le bell. this is the home edition from budget. we're discussing some real news. ah. okay, banker, let's go back to you in plymouth. one of the interesting things is that what we hear from the head of nato seldom berg. he's almost default every other sentence. and he begins every paragraph and ends. every paragraph with nato as a defensive alliance. so can you explain to our viewers why a defensive alliance needs to expand? because i think the definition of defense is that you defend what you have. am i wrong? go ahead. well that, that's the whole premise of nato is a defensive alliance, and it has been an offensive alliance in recent years. but if you, if you look at what's behind that, what is behind that change in, in, in orientation by nato is there's a lot of pressure, especially in the u. s. in britain to drive military defense sales for instance. so they need markets and they need situations where this can happen. and if you look at the amount of weapons that the u. s. has been pumping and military aid, they've been pumping into ukraine. this is effectively fro

but as you said, peter, it's unacceptable too. i mean ukrainian uncritically for a number of reasons, including the ones he just said, which means that we're, we're, we're, we're in a serious impasse because the, the only possible way out of it peacefully which sees dom bass becoming a part of his crane again is unacceptable. to one of the parties. ah, and what do we do at that point? it's, it's, it's, it's not obvious. um, the only way out of our maybe if it will be of nato power's good was freshly ukrainians. but even if i happened, i'm not sure they would be willing to, but i, so i, i'm tending more and more to the view that essentially, mom we need to understand. but of over minutes does represent the obvious solution to the problem. it's not gonna happen. and that we're seeing a gradual creeping annexation of dumbass by russia recently seen in a new decree cut out by putin. about trade of dumbass and her. you know, we should be thinking in terms probably not of some settlement, but just of, i'm a total cease fire, some sort o

ah, welcome back to cross stock were all things are considered on peter la bell. this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing european security with those. go back to maxime here in moscow, and at the very end of the 1st part of the program, glenn pointed out nato and it's, it's mission is changed. it is now much more in tune with values. can you explain to our audience because i don't understand what do so called values in geopolitical interest and security have with each other because i don't think they have anything to do with each other. and i think that's the problem. go ahead, maxine wirelessly. i mean, there's always this quarter dilemma and we can debate how manufactured the dilemma really is geo politics and strategy of the political military organization. but they've been actually under the cold war, there were a few problems and few ways to we could have the boss, but you know, if you wanted to preserve and like i mentioned in the beginning of our problem, the american military presence in europe are the only way it could have the state was