Episode 251 – Radical Political Economists on Palestine with David Fields

Macro N Cheese – Episode 251
Radical Political Economists on Palestine with David Fields
November 18, 2023

 

[00:00:00] David Fields [Intro/Music]: John Stuart Mill once said it’s better to be an unhappy Socrates than a contented fool. And that quote now is more significant than ever, I think.

Zionism is a hotly contested ideology that needs to be deeply questioned. And to me, constitutes a fascist ideology of ethnic cleansing, settler colonialism, removal of entire ethnicities. That’s completely antithetical to the Judaism I know.

[00:01:35] Geoff Ginter [Intro/Music]: Now, let’s see if we can avoid the apocalypse altogether. Here’s another episode of Macro N Cheese with your host, Steve Grumbine.

[00:01:43] Steven Grumbine: All right. This is Steve with Macro N Cheese. There’s a heavy weight on me. On this podcast I enjoy talking about macroeconomics and all the possibilities that understanding it can bring to people, especially in terms of radicalizing their minds and freeing them from the very narrow constructs that we’re allowed to discuss in public. And more importantly, for the future of mankind, I see macroeconomics as the key to doing that.

But we’re witnessing the mass genocide being perpetrated upon the Palestinian people. As oppressed people, they have every right to defend themselves and free themselves for self-determination. And the world is in absolute horror. And yet the United States and other nations are basically hand in glove with, what I see as, a fascist religio-nationalist state. Pushing the worst of what we’ve seen, when I think of World War II. The kind of ethnic cleansing that you can only see when you conjure up Hitler. It’s so hard to conceive that we’re watching this happen right before our eyes. And so it was very hard for me to find a way to talk about economics with this going on.

In fact, it’s been hard for me to do much of anything lately because this has weighed so heavily on me. I feel powerless. I feel hopeless. I reached out to my friend David Fields and he sent me a link, and it was Economists for Palestine under the Union for Radical Political Economics. And I read this. The two things that are on my mind the most right now, plight of the Palestinians as they’re being slaughtered and macroeconomics, it all came together.

And so I said, David, let’s do a podcast. And he gratefully agreed. For those of you don’t know who David is, David Fields is a political economist from Utah. His work centers on the intricacies concerning the interactions of foreign exchange and capital flows with economic growth, fiscal and monetary policy, and distribution whereby critical attention is paid to the notion of endogenous money. He also delves into the political economy of regional development to study patterns with respect to the nature of housing, social stratification, and community planning. And David is definitely a brother of the working class, as we’ve talked many times.

We share many of the same political sensibilities. And so it’s a great honor and pleasure to have my friend David Fields join me today. Welcome to the show, sir.

[00:04:50] David Fields: Thanks, Steve. It’s a pleasure to be here. Very somber times. Words ultimately can’t express the horror that we’re facing. Those times require to speak up if you can, even if it’s shaking. So, it’s an absolute pleasure to be here and converse with you and engage , now more than ever.

[00:05:13] Grumbine: Absolutely. A lot of people think I’m a loose cannon. I typically look at the individuals that take that perspective. And I think they’re awful, cautious, very conservative people, that are not really taking the gravity of a situation and calling it for what it is. And it often comes off as very calculated and measured and non-specific and really in the end, a waste of time, because they didn’t really say anything.

They were so cautious, so careful, so unprepared to speak to the calamity that’s before them…

[00:05:53] Fields: Yeah

[00:05:53] Grumbine: Why even say anything? It’s just noise. One of the things that we talked about offline, was that we need absolute clarity.

[00:06:02] Fields: Absolutely.

[00:06:03] Grumbine: We need to speak unabashedly. And there’s nothing wrong with feeling rage because when genocide’s occurring, rage is the appropriate response.

[00:06:16] Fields: Well, what did Malcolm X once say? Malcolm X said, ‘anger is a gift.’

[00:06:20] Grumbine: Amen. Agreed.

[00:06:22] Fields: And what he meant by that is that in the face of horror, tragedy, injustice, violence, discrimination, indentured servitude, whatever; you get angry and you speak up. And it’s hard to do, it’s very hard to do. There’s no question. But if you can, the power that it illuminates is insurmountable. And, in fact, it reminds me of a quote by John Stuart Mill. We won’t talk about his utilitarianism, but John Stuart Mill, who once said, ‘it’s better to be an unhappy Socrates than a contented fool.’ And that quote now, is more significant than ever, I think.

[00:07:09] Grumbine: Agreed.

A lot of economists are very cautious in their speech. They’re very calculated. And when I talk to regular people, there are people that are okay with that. But there’s a large swath of people out there who are radical activists trying to bring about change. And when you try and explain economics to them, they think of these cautious speakers, these timid voices that are not willing to really advocate for radical change. Where radical change is necessary for survival

[00:07:44] Fields: Absolutely.

[00:07:45] Grumbine: and…

[00:07:46] Fields: well, it

[00:07:47] Grumbine: You were the one that shared with me the Economists for Palestine that just came out November 8th.

Really powerful statement. And I was wondering if maybe you could talk to us a little bit about this, how it came about, the struggle you went through to even get it written and take us through this.

Well it was a cooperative effort amongst members of the Union for Radical Political Economics [URPE], which is an organization that’s been around since the sixties to bring radical political economy against the mainstream, talk about social justice, talk about the no-no’s of Marx and stuff, to bring about radical transformation of the system, which is capitalism, that breeds injustice on so many levels. So, given that tradition of URPE it would be wise, especially now, to make a statement as powerful as that statement.

[00:08:41] Fields: It wasn’t a smooth process. There was a lot of discussion. There was a lot of disagreement. Ultimately, we got it passed, which is fantastic. But this brings me to where I want to talk about what it means to do radical political economy. In my view, and I want to preface by saying that this is coming from somebody who grew up Jewish, was actually deeply wedded in a Jewish socialist tradition called Bundism, which is peace, justice, radical organizing.

I can talk about more of that later, but that’s where I’m coming from. So, if somebody were to tell me “you’re anti semitic for saying those things,” well, thanks. I’m a self hating Jew. Awesome. That said, let’s go back to what it means to do radical political economy. To do radical political economy, that means you stand up against injustice anywhere and everywhere.

There’s no picking and choosing. It means theory and praxis. So that means, if you’re standing up against plutocracy, which is the United States, you better be standing up against apartheid everywhere, and what is now genocide against the Palestinians. I’m sorry, you can’t just say, “well, I’m going to pick here and then go about my business and sit in my armchair and write about it.”

No. You do it. Because if there’s no doing, then what’s the damn point? You’re just sitting there like, well, I’m a socialist in name. Yeah, in name, but without praxis, you’re a fool. And I apologize if I seem very emotional about this, but it hit a nerve, because there are folks out there that think they can just pick and choose and think that they’re part of the movement.

And I, for one, and not just me, and others, think, ‘no, no, sorry.’ So luckily, we were able to capture that essence. And the majority of us at URPE reflected that, and we came out with this, what I think is an outstanding statement, saying that we’re not going to tolerate this. We are not going to tolerate this.

If we are radical political economists, we’re going to stand forthright, and we’re going to say: No! Because if we want to radically change circumstances to maximize our human potential, this is a glaring, glaring injustice that needs immediate, immediate rectification and ending for that matter. Because if not, apologetic reformism, which has gotten us nowhere. Now, I also want to talk about – and I think it’s necessary, especially now – well, what Israel means and what’s going on.

There’s this ideology, it’s called Zionism. And in fact, in 1975, I forget the resolution number, but in 1975, the United Nations even confirmed that Zionism, going back to the Nakba, which was the complete removal of Palestinians to set up the state of Israel, in 1975, they said ‘yes, Zionism is indeed a racist, genocidal ideology.’ [UN General Assembly Resolution 3379]

But unfortunately, it got overturned in the early ’90s with another UN resolution, in order for Israel to accept peace proceedings. Which obviously hasn’t done anything, has it? So in my view – and others would agree with me, I think – to do radical political economy, you’re going to have to challenge this essence called Zionism. Because when it’s played out, it means ethnic cleansing, settler colonialism, and ultimately a final solution.

I hate to use those words because it brings up the big H word in history, but I’m sorry, it’s happening again: the final solution of complete genocide, which is what we’re witnessing there. And to not bring those two characteristics together, and this is coming from a Jewish person, “never again,” which is supposed to bring about peace, is being bloody commodified.

And it makes me reflect upon the wonderful work of Norman Finkelstein, who is an outstanding person, especially now. Now he’s not an economist, but he’s putting theory to praxis. Saying that, look, as a Jewish person, with family on both sides that were completely wiped out in the Holocaust, and this is from Norman Finkelstein, what we’re witnessing is a complete repeat. And as a radical political economist, how can you not take heed of what Norman says and just say, well, I’m just going to focus on inequality and that’s it. To me, that’s bloody nightmarish. And I apologize for using ‘bloody’ given the circumstances, but it’s upsetting.

[00:13:47] Grumbine: You’re fine. Why don’t we take a second and read what this actual letter, the Economists for Palestine says.

[00:13:58] Fields: Okay. So economists for Palestine by the Union, the Union for Radical Political Economics. “We stand in unwavering solidarity with the Palestinian people. Since October 7th, 2023, over 2 million people have faced a brutal onslaught by the Israeli military and state. They have been forced to flee with nowhere to go as their homes, their shelters, evacuation routes, border crossings, hospitals, places of worship and entire neighborhoods are wiped out by constant bombardment of bombs and guns. We mourn the civilian deaths. Israel’s retaliation for the October 7th incursion…” Now, I want to say that probably a better word than incursion is the blowback for what happened on October 7th when Hamas committed those…

Now, there’s no excuse for what they did. It’s terrible. But one could argue what led to Hamas’s unsavory actions that day, was blow back from what Israel has done to the Palestinian people. “More than 8, 000 people…” in fact, today, based on UN numbers, if I remember, over 10,000 Palestinians have been killed, half of which were children. So “since the Nakba 75 years ago,” which was the removal of Palestinians, what the area now known as Israel to set up the state of Israel, “the Palestinian people have endured profound suffering, forced displacement, a brutal 16 years long, inhumane siege and blockade of Gaza.

Human rights organizations have characterized Gaza” and the West Bank for that matter, “the largest open air prison in the world. We also condemn the role of the US state in supporting the ongoing siege in Palestine, its support for the horrors inflicted on the Palestinian people, and its refusal to support a humanitarian ceasefire.

It is imperative that we do not turn our backs on the devastating impact of this violence. The fight for Palestinian liberation and a fair and enduring peace in the region is intricately linked with the liberation and resistance effort spearheaded by indigenous, colonized, and oppressed communities historically and worldwide,” which is the utmost importance of doing radical political economy is sharing consciousness with those marginalized groups.

“We stand in support of efforts by the Palestinian people to sustain themselves economically, through control over their land and their labor. We stand in solidarity with the anti-Zionist Jewish communities that have been raising their voices against the carpet bombing of Palestine, for the liberation of the Palestinian people, and who are working for a just, equitable, durable peace.”

And I want to note that a wonderful organization in particular is Jewish Voices for Peace. Highly recommend people checking that group out.

“We urgently call for 1) an immediate ceasefire. 2) immediate restoration of food, fuel, water, and electricity,” not just in the Gaza Strip, but for all of Palestine.

“3) Cessation of all settlement activity and disarmament of all settlers,” which has been the ethnic cleansing prior to this genocide, which has been ongoing, especially in the West Bank. “4) Immediate delivery of humanitarian aid on the scale that’s necessary and required, given the situation. 5) Respect to the Geneva Conventions by all parties concerned.

6) An end to the apartheid and strident moves toward democratic future for all people, not just in the region, but globally for that matter, regardless of race, religion, gender identity, and certainly nationality. In addition, we strongly uphold the principle of academic freedom,” which has been under attack nowadays, for any mention or any criticism of Zionism, the state of Israel.

Immediately brings up thoughts of anti-Semitic. And as a Jewish person myself, that complaint is utterly ridiculous, because Zionism is not Judaism. Israel does not ultimately represent Judaism. Now, that’s not from URPE, that’s from myself, but I think it’s worthwhile to mention that. “Especially in the light of the current global climate where individuals and educational institutions worldwide face termination, doxing, harassment for speaking up against these atrocities… and in support of the Palestinian population. Neglecting this commitment would be an utter betrayal of” not just doing radical political economy, but “our scholarly and moral obligations. In solidarity, the Steering Committee of the Union for Radical Political Economics, 8th of November, 2023.”

[00:19:26] Grumbine: That’s some powerful stuff.

[00:19:29] Fields: Thank you. And thank you on behalf of all our members who contributed to this. That’s a powerful statement, and I hope it spreads like a wildfire.

[00:19:39] Grumbine: When I think about political economy, it’s hard for me to see the two measured up together, when we talk about austerity and scarcity. Let’s look at the weapon of economic warfare being used against the Palestinians right now. The real resources that political economy allows us to gain access to, is completely stripped from them.

They’re trapped. So, help me understand the relationship… radical political economy and Palestine in this sense.

[00:20:20] Fields: For sure. It goes back to the point that we mentioned in the statement about the largest open air prison it is. When you’re in prison, you’re given nothing, maybe a pittance to survive. And that’s what Palestine is nowadays. And especially now, as it faces a complete and utter collapse by the genocide being committed by Israel. So, without food, without healthcare, without shelter, without moral support, without anything which constitutes the means of human survival. And maybe to go back, to do radical political economy is to maximize human potential. So how, and what’s happening right now with respect to Palestine, maximizing human potential, in fact, it’s a complete opposite. It’s decimating it to the highest degree.

Therefore fostering a complete contradiction,

of building the necessary capacities for, not just human survival, but for reaching their full potential. What’s happening is an indictment of that. A complete contradiction, opposite. And if we, as radical political economists, don’t reflect on that and just choose to ignore it, or not to say anything about it, and talk about the characteristics of what led to that, then what are we doing?

What are we doing? Like I said before: Oh, I’m a radical political economist, but I’m just going to focus on social stratification in some remote part of Canada. Sorry, Canada for making fun of you. It’s inhumane. It’s outrageous. It’s hypocritical. It’s blasphemous, I think is the appropriate word. And one of the reasons, and I think it’s appropriate, why folks or talking heads on mainstream economics and other topics, but it’s… I can keep on going because, well, economics is just focusing on the particulars and doing their models and yada, yada, yada.

So you want to understand why the culturalist and culturally imperilist dogma about rationalizing all sorts of injustices go on. Well, here’s your reason. It’s a fact that folks who claim to do the complete opposite are not doing what they’re supposed to do, breaking theory from praxis. You want to know why? The shit about stupid general equilibrium models and all this stuff that doesn’t really talk about humanity, you want to know why it keeps going on?

This is why. Because we choose to go off in our corners and our respective areas, do our micro projects, get tenure. I don’t know that’s under scrutiny now, right? And just forget about the movement. And I call bullshit. Because it really questions “What are you here for?” You say you’re against this you say you’re anti-mainstream. You say that you’re here for humanity and bringing social justice.

Well, where were you? Where were you when this genocide started to happen? Oh, no no, you have to respect Judaism and Zionism. Come on. Stop it. Stop it. Stop it. And I apologize if I sound very distressed, but it’s just stressful to me, as someone who likes to consider himself as a radical political economist, socialist, you name it. Because this is complete opposite of what that constitutes

[00:24:18] Grumbine: The orthodoxy that has control has made it so that people are terrified to speak the truth.

[00:24:27] Fields: exactly.

[00:24:28] Grumbine: They’re terrified because they’ll lose their job. They’ll lose their place. The media won’t use them as a talking head for economics anymore, or they won’t get invited to Harvard again.

[00:24:42] Fields: Yeah,

[00:24:43] Grumbine: They will no longer be advising politicians.

They will be on the sidelines writing blogs. Ultimately, the threat that they use of excommunication

[00:24:56] Fields: I know.

[00:24:57] Grumbine: Separating you from your career is very real. And I’ve seen that, especially working in this heterodox space as an activist. Talk to me a little bit about how they leverage these tools to keep you guys quiet.

[00:25:14] Fields: Well, first that’s a whole discussion in and of itself, as to why. The heterodoxy or alternative economics, radical political economy, can’t get to the main stage. I mean, that’s a whole discussion in and of itself, that’s been going on for years. Cause we talk about the things you’re not supposed to talk about, like class, race, gender, other sorts of social location, which give rise to vast amounts of inequity.

So, that’s the reason you won’t see any of us on CNBC… well, there’ve been a couple, but you know what I mean. But I think now more than ever, it’s going to do that even more, and it’s a tough situation to be in. Joan Robinson once said it’s better to be exploited than not, or don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

But if that hand is to do your work, as a proclaimed radical political economist, doing heterodoxy, what do you do? And that’s an indictment of, I guess, academia, or discourse, or knowledge creation altogether, in and of itself, which is a discussion to be had. If that can’t be fostered, then we really have to start to question institutions that propagate the system, that we’re unfortunately minions to, and that’s capitalism.

Which goes back to my point before that. You’ve got to try. I know it’s hard. You don’t want to be sent to the House of Un-American Activities, right? Didn’t go away. Still here. You don’t want to be sent there, but at the same time you want to do your work that you claim to be committed to. It’s very tough and maybe I should take a step back and say, well, the folks that aren’t doing theory and praxis, because that fear is real.

And for that, it’s deeply sorrowing. But in that case, it requires more reflection of how can you still do it given that constraint. Unfortunately, from what I’ve seen, those discussions are very minimal. And that’s not right, they need to be maximum. So, if we are stuck in that pigeonhole, if we can’t talk about linking stratification in Arkansas with genocide in Palestine, then what’s the point?

So, we have to talk about how we can link those, and how to expand our praxis. So, what we’re doing, what we’re saying we’re doing, is in essence, what it’s supposed to be. Because if you don’t have those conversations, just letting the system proliferate and you’re just another cog. And I hate to be indicting many of my comrades, hopefully I’m not, if I am, I deeply apologize, but I see why and I wish I could change it.

[00:28:38] Intermission: You are listening to Macro N Cheese, a podcast brought to you by Real Progressives, a non profit organization dedicated to teaching the masses about MMT, or Modern Monetary Theory. Please help our efforts and become a monthly donor at PayPal or Patreon, like and follow our pages on Facebook and YouTube, and follow us on TikTok, Twitter, Twitch, Rokfin, and Instagram.

[00:29:29] Grumbine: The concept of economics in and of itself is basically, I don’t know if the right word is efficient, but

[00:29:37] Fields: Be careful with that word. Be careful.

[00:29:39] Grumbine: I know, I trembled as I said it. For lack of a better term, and maybe you can give a better term, but is to mobilize resources. Basically, the object of economics is in fact, mobilizing resources and there has to be some sort of moral compass that drives the political economy. There’s always a class interest. If you know the information you have can fundamentally save lives and you stay quiet, what’s the point of it?

[00:30:14] Fields: We agree.

[00:30:14] Grumbine: And you have guilty knowledge. So one might say that by proxy, you have facilitated the very evil that you are morally against. And I think the more people that speak truth to power will find other kindreds willing to do the same.

[00:30:31] Fields: Yeah. Absolutely.

[00:30:33] Grumbine: And I believe that it takes people of courage to step out and do that.

[00:30:40] Fields: And there’s a way to do it.

[00:30:42] Grumbine: Talk about that.

[00:30:44] Fields: I’m just going back to the tradition of political economy, in and of itself. The Ricardos, yeah, we already mentioned Marx, but even Adam Smith and others, where it wasn’t economics about supply and demand bull crap and general equilibrium bull crap and my pseudo mathematical model of constrained optimization is better than yours.

No, it was none of that shit. It was the study of how humans extract from nature, the means to, in fact, survive. And that begs the questions of ‘how do we do that?’ Who gets to decide how the surplus is distributed? Who then gets to define the institutional configurations of what’s going to govern that distribution and those mechanisms?

What type of nature are we dealing with? etc, etc. So, it’s going back to classical political economy, which dealt with those questions and using that as the means to then do what we’re supposed to as radical political economists. Bringing theory to radical change, when ending all sorts of systems of oppression injustice, etc.

So, there is a way, and that means getting rid of this economic bullshit, mainstream dogma that prevents us from sticking our necks out and being the activists that we claim to be.

[00:32:30] Grumbine: When you think about the framing of the end of history,

[00:32:34] Fields: Oh, be careful. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I don’t want, uh, what was his name who wrote that book, The End of History?

[00:32:42] Grumbine: Fukuyama,

[00:32:43] Fields: Yeah, yeah, yeah, let’s not go down that route.

[00:32:45] Grumbine: Well, I’m only stating it from a standpoint.

[00:32:48] Fields: No, no, for sure. I was just poking fun.

[00:32:51] Grumbine: When you think about the fact that Marx spoke on international political economy regarding this, Fukuyama wrote about it as well. But this is the concept that this is it. There is no more,

[00:33:05] Fields: Yeah.

[00:33:06] Grumbine: and this is the way it will always be. And so changing that, there’s a huge contradiction, but this concept is a bit terrifying.

And I believe that people have said, ‘we can’t do anything about it. So let’s just go with it.’

[00:33:23] Fields: What did Margaret Thatcher say?

[00:33:25] Grumbine: So many things,

[00:33:27] Fields: No, I know. She said a lot of shit. But what was the one phrase that she said?

[00:33:32] Grumbine: No such thing as public money. There’s only taxpayer dollars.

[00:33:37] Fields: Yes, yes, yes. That wasn’t the one I was thinking of, but it’s sort of related. But yes, I’m glad you brought that one up. She also said there is no alternative,

[00:33:46] Grumbine: TINA.

[00:33:48] Fields: which is kind of related to what you said.

[00:33:51] Grumbine: Yes.

[00:33:52] Fields: We can talk about that, cause that’s important. But for the sake of what we’re talking about right now, people say ‘words are just words.’ Sorry, words matter. The discourse matters. Discourse is not an entity separate from the political economic conditions of where it came from, it’s deeply embedded.

So, when they came up with these concepts of TINA and end of history, and all the other dogma that came with it, it had a purpose. It had a purpose for the end of the cold war and ‘Sorry, socialism is poo poo, deal with it’… ‘We have a capitalist world system, deal with it.’ And it goes back to what you just said.

You’re pushed into a corner. Well, we’re not supposed to think of alternatives? Well, what does that say about human ingenuity? Even all the talk about prowess and technological advancement, etc, etc, that the mainstream likes to prioritize, really questions what that all means.

 

[00:34:55] Grumbine: In this space, you learn that corporations’ number one interest is maximizing profit and shareholder value. Everything else is incidental. If you can do some good as part of a public relations campaign, great. As long as it ends up increasing shareholder value and profit maximization.

And I can see why Africa is exploited, because they’ve got so many incredible natural resources. And the more you can keep them under your thumb, the more that you can discipline them and get what you need from them. And it’s good to see them breaking free of that mindset and seeing alternatives crop up around.

When I think of Palestine, I think about ‘what is the MO here?’ I think many people don’t even understand what Zionism is. So, the idea of political economy within the space of Zionism means nothing. It’s just a giant black box they have no concept of. Can you break that down, David?

[00:36:10] Fields: It’s very complex and it’s very hard to narrow it down. So, I’m going to try my best to give it context. And this is going to bring in international political/economic dimensions, and even foreign policy for that matter. And also, I’m going to talk about the hegemon of the world system, which is the US.

The US establishment needs Zionism because it rationalizes US commitment to a never ending presence in the Middle East. It rationalizes a never ending support for a mechanism of constant warfare, which the US hegemon is based on. And therefore, altogether, rationalizes… not everybody, because people are deeply contested, but it legitimates the US and its affiliates’ constant extraction/exploitation of vital resources in that region, which are ever more vital.

And in particular, and this is going a bit off, but I think it’s important to understand, given what’s happening, is that, and this is a very particular example… once the Israeli establishment- I forget what area it was, but it’s true- completely eviscerated a Palestinian encampment, if you will, a natural gas extractive facility was established in that location.

So here, we’re linking the material with the ideology and linking it to broader global implications. And I’m sure there are other very similar acts as well. Even the West Bank, you have settlers destroying Palestinian villages, and you can say, ‘well, it’s the expansion, it’s Zionism for Israel to be complete, etc. etc. etc.’ But West Bank has vital resources. West Bank has numerous amounts of material to ensure that the Israeli state can maintain its stranglehold, and maintain its relationship with the military establishment that’s the US hegemon.

So, it’s not just tearing down Palestinian communities, it’s accumulation by dispossession in that area too. But this is altogether an embodiment of what the capitalist world system is. Is requiring a dominant force and having currents under that dominant force and using whatever ideologies to allow for constant destruction of groups of people considered ‘less’, to destroy them and take their resources and keep the profits going.

Some may say, ‘oh, that’s ridiculous. That’s hearsay. That’s conspiracy.’ It’s not conspiracy. It’s the damn reality. It’s very similar to the white man’s burden of decades ago to rationalize colonialism. Zionism is the rationalization of modern day colonialism.

And that’s it. And that’s what links these ‘on the ground’ realities to the global capitalist system, maintained by the hegemon, which is the United States and its affiliates. That’s the reality, and that’s how we link it up.

So again, it goes back to my original point, that if being against capitalism is the ultimate goal to radically transform it, end it, etc, of what constitutes radical political economy, you’d best be doing an analysis of how to link Zionism, which is a genocide ideology.

And even the Jews of the 19th century of the Bundist movement and their critique of Theodor Herzl mentioned that this is complete and utter disgrace and essentially amounts to colonialism, which is what’s happening throughout the 19th century.

That’s it. And I apologize for being scatterbrained, but I’m trying to link it all together. Because it’s a very heavy topic and all sorts of explications can be proliferated. So, it’s very tough to narrow it down, so I’m trying to narrow it down the best way I can.

[00:41:09] Grumbine: One of the things that I focus on, and the way I think through these problems, is system thinking. If you understand the flow, you can understand why things happen the way they do, and then an engineer, the way things could be. You can come up with coherent systems responses.

[00:41:40] Fields: It’s critical realism.

[00:41:41] Grumbine: Absolutely.

[00:41:42] Fields: Realism, the essence of critical realism, is first knowing that reality is not some aura of perceived characteristics of which we cannot find a unifying essence. So, it’s just assuming that positivism, what’s there is there and that’s it. Well, to me, that sounds scientific. Science, which is to understanding of what the hell we’re doing here and what does this all mean and how can we change it or do things with it, is knowing first and foremost that there are hidden things that we can’t see.

So, we first understand that there are underlying relations, which give rise to manifest phenomena. So, if we can take to heart that there are underlying relations, which give rise to manifest phenomena, what we see on the surface. That gives us the capacity to facilitate those systems like you talked about and facilitate the necessary solutions, which go about doing what we can for the better.

If we just rid ourselves of saying that such critical realism is non existent, then the ability to have that system thinking, which you mentioned, would not be possible, in my view.

[00:43:02] Grumbine: It’s extremely powerful to me. It makes logical sense. It’s the observable praxis of your thoughts. This is the manifestation of all that deep thought coming into being. And I am not fluent in the history of Hamas, Israel, and Judaism,

[00:43:30] Fields: Okay, you’re a good mensch as we say in Yiddish

[00:43:33] Grumbine: I try to be

As a non-Jew, up until this time, I had walked on eggshells over these subjects and I became so consumed with this atrocity and feeling tremendously powerless. The only weapon at my disposal is a microphone, that I wanted so badly to talk about this with somebody and it just happens to be that you’re Jewish.

I didn’t know that. I only reached out to you because of you sending me that letter, that economists for Palestine, the union of radical political economy letter. You being Jewish was happenstance, I didn’t know that. Anybody that’s ever sat in a chair with me for these interviews knows I don’t script these and it’s intentional.

I want to see where it takes us.

[00:44:37] Fields: Yeah, that’s the beauty.

[00:44:40] Grumbine: It’s a journey for me, but as somebody who has been terrified to be labeled an anti-semite, which couldn’t be further from the truth. But when you see children

[00:44:53] Fields: I know

[00:44:54] Grumbine: buried under a building in their bed still, crushed by a building that was bombed in the middle of the night. If you can just keep on with your day, like nothing happened… we’ve lost it as a society as a whole.

That just really bludgeoned my heart and soul. Help me understand as a goy, as a non-Jew, how this anti-semitism weapon… there’s a real thing here and I can see it. It’s not hard to see anti-semitism…

[00:45:28] Fields: No, anti-semitism is real. There’s no question

[00:45:31] Grumbine: but being anti-Zionist is not anti-Jew.

[00:45:35] Fields: Exactly

[00:45:37] Grumbine: Help break that down. I want people to know the difference between anti-semitism and anti-Zionism, and why it is so important.

[00:45:49] Fields: You bet. And I’ll say, firstly, that anti-semitism which is being used now for any criticism of what the fascist state of Israel is doing, is a means of censorship. So, as soon as someone says, ‘well, I think what is happening right now is genocide’… this whole… and this contests the whole ideation of what Israel constitutes.

You have folks out there immediately saying, “Oh, you’re anti-semitic, you must hate Jews” or “you must criticize Jews for having their homeland.”

I call bullshit, because Zionism is a whole other beast. Mutually exclusive. But what I think, and I have many other Jews along with me, I think are the tenets of Judaism or in Hebrew, we call Mitzva. Which is the art of doing. Which is treating other people with dignity and respect, and following the ways of Bundism.

You should check it out. B U N D I S M. Which was very popular in the 19th century. Which to me, I think, are the true essences of Judaism, which is justice, dignity, respect, harmony, peace. Zionism is this whole other beast that’s mutually exclusive from that. Now, people will argue, ‘well, Zionism was the means to give Jews a place of refuge from what they suffered during the Holocaust.’

And I get that. I get it. However, there’s lots of literature, lots of documents, lots of details from that time that said… Well, how is this going to solve anything because you’re just taking the Jews and putting somewhere else and we don’t have to deal with anymore? In a way, you finally got rid of the Jews out of Europe and put them in the Middle East. You completed Hitler’s final solution.

But like, the American Council on Judaism, if I recall, and others, were calling out, that this is not the way to do it and to invoke something like Zionism, which goes back further than the Holocaust in the 19th century. Theodor Herzl said this is a good way to finally give Jews a way to escape the prevalence of Jewish hatred in Europe.

Yeah, there’s no question there was Jewish hatred. There’s no question. But there’s a good, significant… majority, I would say- even though people won’t see that as majority- throughout history from that time, among Jews that said, ‘no, this is not the way to deal with Jewish hatred.’ By turning to an ideology, which will eventually spear hatred. And that’s hatred of Palestinians.

So, this goes back to what I said before… Zionism is a hotly contested ideology that needs to be deeply questioned. And to me, and what the U.N. confirmed in 1975, even though it was revoked, constitutes a fascist ideology of ethnic cleansing, settler colonialism, removal of entire ethnicity, etc. That’s completely antithetical to the Judaism I know.

And if someone were to really follow the principles of Mitzvah and claim that they are, in fact, a practicing Jew- now I’m not saying that, ‘oh, other Jews are not Jewish enough for not following that’, I’m just pointing something out- they would realize and say, ‘wow, Zionism is antithetical.’

And that’s happening. And that’s what groups like Jewish Voice for Peace are doing. They’re revisiting tenets like Bundism and others, saying that, ‘no, this is not what Judaism is about.’ Judaism is not about rehashing the violence of what happened to us in the 30s and 40s. How is that Judaism? That’s flabbergasting.

And you can talk about why Israel was created, what does it mean, etc. But ultimately, the ideology that underpins that, Zionism, so Jews can have their holy land, etc, etc. History unfolds, and why should we be the ones to say, ‘sorry, Palestinians, I know you settled here, but you’ve got to get up and get out of here so we can come back because we’re the chosen people.’ and ‘we need a safe refuge’ and yada, yada, yada.

That’s completely ridiculous. Now, this is not to criticize those who live in Israel, Israeli citizens. I’m not doing that. I’m just criticizing the idea of Israel, not people who live there. Just the idea of Israel and what it facilitates.

And it facilitates discrimination, subjugation, oppression, and now what we’re witnessing, ultimately, genocide. Which someone, who claims to follow the faith of Jewish, should never, ever accept.

Because then, it goes back to my discussion about what it means to do radical political economy, and therefore questions what does it mean to be a Jew? That’s a discussion that should probably be had, given the times.

[00:51:31] Grumbine: David, this was very informative for me. I really appreciate your time. Let everybody know where we can find more of your stuff.

[00:51:38] Fields: Yeah, oh for sure, and thank you so much for having me. And I apologize if I was scatterbrained, but it’s a sensitive topic and it hits my heart. Especially as somebody who grew up Jewish, and seeing folks who make any sort of criticism of what’s happening, become anti-Semite. I call it ridiculous. And I’m glad you shared what you said.

I mean like, how can you go about saying that as a non-Jew? Well, from a Jew to a non-Jew, yes, you can criticize Israel because Israel is not the tenet of Judaism. So, you’re good. You get a pass from me. And now the Jews too. You get to pass from Jewish Voice for Peace and etc, etc.

But going back to the question of where you can find my work: just Google me. David Fields, ResearchGate, Political Economy. My ResearchGate profile will come up and you can see all my work.

But rIght now, given the times, I suggest folks turn to the statement from URPE, because that is of utmost importance right now. And I encourage any and all folks who want to do radical political economy, or do praxis and change things for the better, apply what’s happening right now to other injustices.

Link it and work towards a holistic solution for that final- I’m not going to go there because we know that how deeply unsettling that is- a solution for transforming the world for the better. If we can contest globally collectively against the genocide that’s happening, the injustice happening, we can do anything. Because then it shows that nothing is insurmountable, and we can change anything and everything, for the radical transformation that we want.

[00:53:25] Grumbine: Message of hope there. Thank you so much, David.

[00:53:28] Fields: You bet

[00:53:29] Grumbine: This is Steve Grumbine with Macro N Cheese. My guest, David Fields.

Please check us out. We release these podcasts every Saturday morning, 8am Eastern. This is our 251st episode. All of them have value. Please, take a listen, check it out. Also, we are a nonprofit organization and we survive by your donations.

So if you feel like there’s value in supporting this podcast, by all means, become a member and join us at patreon.com/realprogressives . And with that, I want to thank my guest once again, David Fields, and thank you all for listening. My name’s Steve Grumbine. We are out of here.

[00:54:22] End Credits: Macro N Cheese is produced by Andy Kennedy, descriptive writing by Virginia Cotts and promotional artwork by Andy Kennedy. Macro N Cheese is publicly funded by our Real Progressives Patreon account. If you would like to donate to Macro N Cheese, please visit patreon.com/realprogressives.