Episode 264 – Deconstructing the Colonial Archetype with Fadhel Kaboub

Macro N Cheese – Episode 264
Deconstructing the Colonial Archetype with Fadhel Kaboub
February 17, 2024

[00:00:00] Grumbine: It’s interesting that they didn’t even bother to change the name. The Mattei Plan is named after the founder of Eni, which is Italy’s oil and gas company. So this is not sending the right vibe about climate action and development in Africa.

The African Union actually has a comprehensive, very ambitious transformative agenda for the continent. It’s called Agenda 2063. You can find it on the African Union website. It’s very thorough, very ambitious, and it’s been approved by member states on the continent. The question is how do we activate that agenda?

[00:01:35] Geoff Ginter [Intro/Music]: Now, let’s see if we can avoid the apocalypse all together. 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. My guest today is none other than Fadhel Kaboub, who is rejoining me now for the umpteenth time. One of my favorite guests ever. Fadhel is an associate professor of economics at Denison University. While he’s on leave, he is also the president of the Global Institute for Sustainable Prosperity and a member of the Independent Expert Group on Just Transition and Development, and serves as a senior advisor with PowerShift Africa.

We’re going to be talking a lot about Africa, the environment, and a just transition. We’re really going to be focusing on the extractivist viewpoints of the global north. As they target the global South and Africa in particular, and some of the crazy things that are going on right now regarding the Mattei plan and other issues such as that.

So, without further ado, let me bring on my guest, welcome to the show, sir.

[00:02:44] Kaboub: Thank you. Hi, Steve. And thank you for having me back on the show. Real pleasure.

[00:02:48] Grumbine: Absolutely. I really appreciate your work, sir. I’ve always appreciated you, but your work today and the work that you’re doing with PowerShift Africa. It’s exciting to see someone boldly saying the truth out loud and some of the things that are going on in the US right now. We have a president who thinks that Mexico is Egypt, does not have his mental faculties about him, and we’re expecting him to be the leader of the free world and lead us to climate crisis solutions. All the while, Europe is seeking out ways to extract even more, and maintain- and deepen- the neocolonial ties. While Africa, once again, exports its riches to the global North.

You’ve been very vocal on this, really appreciate the work you’re doing. Tell us about this Mattei plan.

[00:03:38] Kaboub: Well, it’s actually news because most people didn’t know about the Mattei plan. It’s Italy/Europe’s vision for development in Africa. So, it’s painful to talk about this, because on the one hand, it tells us that when you don’t have a strategic plan for yourself, somebody else already has a plan for you- whether it’s Italy or the US or China or Russia- and the Mattei plan is one of those, Italy’s plan for development in Africa.

And it’s dressed up in nice PR language, described as not extractive, but also not charitable, it’s partnership. But when you undress all the diplomatic language and the PR language, and you look at what is being proposed, you realize it’s yet another extractive, paternalistic, colonial plan for Africa.

But it’s interesting that they didn’t even bother to change the name. The Mattei plan is named after the founder of Eni, which is Italy’s oil and gas company. So, this is not sending the right vibe about climate action and development in Africa, especially when the heads of states were meeting with the Italian government and European leaders.

As part of that conversation in the same room were several Italian CEOs of some of the main corporations, including the current CEO of Eni- the Italian oil and gas company. So, the motivation for Italy to do this, to have this summit- just to put it in context- Italy is presiding the G7. So it has that platform.

Italy is the gateway for migration, from the global South into Europe. So it’s been overwhelmed with the flow of migrants. Thousands of them die in the Mediterranean every year, and the numbers are about to accelerate exponentially in the next decade. So, the current Italian government was elected, partly a mandate to deal with this issue, with the immigration issue.

And of course, Italy is applying pressure on the rest of the EU to step up and help it in figuring out a solution because it’s not just Italy’s problem, it’s the rest of Europe. So, let me put this in the context of the climate crisis, which I argue is one of the main push factors- economic push factors- from the global South, from Africa in particular.

The World Bank, which is not your most radical climate organization, produced a report a couple of years ago- and they actually updated it recently- estimating that the number of people that will be displaced because of climate events globally, will be 216 million people by 2050. 2050 is the day after tomorrow on the climate clock.

Of that number, more than 100 million people will be displaced on the African continent. Even if a small portion of that number end up making the journey all the way across the Sahara to Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, and try to cross into Europe- most of the crossing happens through Italy- that’s going to be the biggest refugee crisis Europe has ever seen, the world has ever seen. So, to their credit, the Italians are trying to get to the bottom of this. They’re trying to get to the root causes of this migration issue. It’s not coming from Tunisia, it’s coming from the entire continent. So they’re saying, ‘okay, what we need to do is provide job opportunities, development opportunities, investment in agriculture and health and sanitation, things that will make people’s lives better.’

Sounds nice, except all of these proposed investments, they don’t actually address the root causes of economic deficiencies in Africa. The other component of Italy’s strategy here is for Italy to become the energy hub for Europe, to replace Russian gas with clean energy and not so clean energy from Africa. That is, a lot of the renewable energy investment that is taking place in Tunisia- and especially in North Africa- that will be connected through an undersea cable- that is being built as we speak, between Tunisia and Italy, will bring investments in renewables to a country like Tunisia, generate the clean electricity and ship it to Europe. Not for Africa’s self sufficiency or energy sovereignty or energy security, it’s for Europe’s energy security. So, that makes it purely extractive, greenwashed and extractive.

But if you go back to Africa in particular, the reason why we have governments who are unable to deliver to their people, to their needs for health, for education, for infrastructure- all of this, is because they have no fiscal policy space available to invest in these things. Why? Because we’re in a debt trap, a historic debt trap that keeps accelerating.

Ethiopia defaulted on its debt a few weeks ago, and now we have a long list of African countries who are about to default- or very close to default, starting with Egypt, Tunisia, Kenya, and the list goes on. More than 50 countries are heavily in a position of debt distress. So, the external debt problem is actually a symptom of these deeper structural issues that we must address, which I can summarize in three major points.

One is food deficits, two is energy deficits, and three is manufacturing deficits. So, food deficits, according to UNCTAD, Africa imports 85 of its food, when we used to be the breadbasket for Europe during colonial times, less than a hundred years ago. And that’s not by accident, it’s by design, because of the rules of international trade that have been imposed on the global South- on Africa in particular- and the heavy agricultural subsidies from the EU common agricultural policy.

But it’s not just Europe, it’s agricultural subsidies in the US and Canada, Australia, the former Soviet Union- which is Russia and the Ukraine. All of these agricultural subsidies started in the ’60s and are still in place to this day. They forced us into switching away from producing the core crops that we need for our actual food security; the wheat, the corn, the rice, and so on; to producing the cash crops for exports; the bananas and the watermelons and the tomatoes and the coffee and tea and tobacco, all of that. Which, as soon as you start producing for exports, you have to serve the taste of your consumers in the global North, which means you start using seeds that are not native to your soil, and fertilizers and pesticides, all of which you have to import.

And you do that for 30 years, you burn the fertility of your soil, and then you have to double down on the potency of those seeds and fertilizers and pesticides. And that’s exactly where we are. And by the way, the concept of ‘food security’ was invented and imposed on us in the 1960s, precisely to do this.

Food security sounds great, who doesn’t like food security? Except it’s a loaded term, that means you basically have to secure the nutrition of your people somehow. Either by producing it or by buying it from somewhere else- international markets, basically- or by borrowing money to buy it from international markets or even worse.

The worst part is receiving it as food aid to secure people’s nutrition, and food aid is the worst thing you can do to your farmers because they can’t compete with free wheat and rice and corn coming from US aid or European aid or any other country’s aid. And that’s- essentially- how food security was imposed on Africa and on the global south.

So, that’s the food deficit component, which is a core component of this external debt. Number two is the energy deficits. And here I include even our biggest oil exporters on the continent. Take Nigeria, today imports 100 of its gasoline. Angola imports 80 of its fuel from international markets.

Libya, the third biggest exporter- same thing- imports quite a bit of its fuel, and the list goes on. And these are the countries that have the massive oil resources. They are in a debt trap because of this classic playbook of oil and gas companies, that they use on countries in the global South. So again, this energy deficit is by design, not by accident.

And then finally, the manufacturing deficits. This is part and parcel of the historic role that was imposed on the global South, on Africa in particular, during colonial times, post-colonial times, and to this day. That is, we’re always forced to play the role of the place for cheap raw materials. The place where our large consumer market consumes the industrial output from the global North. And most importantly, we’re the place where obsolete technologies, assembly line manufacturing- that is no longer needed in the global North- is delivered to us under the umbrella of development and job creation and cooperation.

But what it does- effectively- is that it locks us at the bottom of the global value chain. Whereby, what we call “industry” in the global South, is where you have to import the machines, you import the intermediate components to assemble- from the global north, you import the fuel to power those factories- and we even import the packaging. And we use low cost labor, racing to the bottom to assemble and produce low value-added content.

So, what we import is high value-added content, what we export is low value-added content. So, you can double, triple, quadruple your exports, you’re always locked at the bottom of the value chain. So, take these three structural deficits and that’s the root cause of the external debt. Which is the root cause of why our governments don’t have the fiscal space to invest in health, education, infrastructure, climate adaptation, the things that their people want. Which creates the economic push factor to push millions of people to take that dangerous journey across the continent- across the Sahara desert, across the Mediterranean- to maybe make it into the Italian shores and enter European territory.

So, if the Mattei plan- or any other plan- doesn’t address these actual root causes, then it’s just further contributing to the entrapment of the continent into this debt trap, into these structural traps. And as a result, it will actually continue to accelerate the push factor that- presumably- the Italians and the Europeans are trying to stop.

So, that is the lens that I use to assess whether a development plan for Africa, is going to work or not. And if Italy really wanted to get to the bottom of this, Italy would be joining hands with the African Union- with African governments- to implement the type of structural transformation that prioritizes investments in food sovereignty and agroecology, investments in renewable energy, not for export, but renewable energy to deliver to the 600 million people who have no access to electricity on the continent.

Well, guess what? Without energy, you don’t have transportation. You don’t have education. You don’t have health. You don’t have logistics, nothing. Which means it’s a push factor for people to leave. Investments in renewable energy infrastructure for the continent, not for Europe’s energy security. And most importantly, investment in transformative industrial policies that allow us to escape the bottom of the value chain, so that we give people decent livelihoods, and give people the opportunity to build their own countries, their own communities. In which case, they will not be looking to leave these low paying jobs and unemployment and socioeconomic exclusion, and make the dangerous journey all the way to Italy.

And by the way, that’s a win also for Italian workers, for European workers, for American workers, because when Africa starts to industrialize on these terms and pay decent wages for their people and start rejecting assembly line, obsolete manufacturing that the North doesn’t want, then those jobs that are being outsourced- that have been outsourced from the US, from Europe for decades to the global South, throwing global North workers under the bus because there are workers in the South who are willing to do the low-cost labor- then those jobs will remain in the US, in Europe, in Italy, in the global North. And it gives workers in those countries a stronger bargaining position, because their jobs are not outsourceable anymore because the global South doesn’t want those low paying jobs.

So, it’s a win for workers- for middle class- in the south and in the north. So, if the Mattei plan doesn’t address any of these issues- or any other plan- then I guarantee you, it’s a PR approved, greenwashed, colonial plan, dressed up in nice diplomatic language.

[00:16:55] Grumbine: If

I look at this through an MMT lens, and just as a human being, anytime we see privatization, there is a profit motive there. And when you see countries supporting privatization as a means of economic growth and then they thrust that into these relationships- global North to global South- you automatically have a predatory environment.

There’s no reason that this needs to be privatized. Why can’t we make these public institutions? Why does it need to be with this profit motive driving the behavior? I don’t know how you get out of this with green capitalism, that is an oxymoron. So, the very notion of helping Africa, while building it based on a profit motive that extracts, why is Africa not able to leverage its own public space?

Is it the debt trap itself that has kept them from being able to self-actualize? Is it a lack of imagination? Is somebody being bought off?

What is preventing Africa from pushing this away?

[00:18:15] Kaboub: All the above. So, there is definitely a lack of imagination and it’s not by accident, it’s by design. Because we’re talking about technocrats, bureaucrats, politicians, academia, even civil society, that’s been brought up in a colonial educational system and a colonial public discourse space that’s dominated by the economic theory and the economic ideology, that you get in the US and other people get in the rest of Europe.

So, that is part of the struggle, is decolonizing the mind and decolonizing the thinking. There’s of course, the limited fiscal policy space because of the external debt trap. There is these false solutions and dangerous distractions and hijacking of narratives, like the narrative I described earlier about food security versus food sovereignty.

And we know that this is intentional, not by accident. I’ll give you an example. The French ministry of agriculture is called the ministry of agriculture and food sovereignty, not called the ministry of food security. But when the French talk about agriculture and food and economic development in Africa, they talk about food security for Africans, not food sovereignty. Because if they say food sovereignty, it will completely contradict the core of their agricultural policy. Not just theirs, but the entire EU agricultural policy, designed for Africa to supplement or compliment the EU’s common agricultural policy. If you actually promote food sovereignty in Africa, you’re shooting yourself in the foot. But of course, they don’t say it out loud, it’s there in the policy design and even the language- the statements that they make. Not just the French, but others about the global South, it’s always about food security.

So, these are important reasons, but to its credit, the African Union actually has a comprehensive- very ambitious- transformative agenda for the continent, it’s called Agenda 2063. You can Google it and find it on the African Union website. It’s very thorough, very ambitious and wonderful. And it’s been approved by member states on the continent.

The question is, how do we activate that agenda? Which has components about building the African Union monetary institutions, building the African high-speed rail transportation system, industrializing, using our strategic minerals that are available to us on the continent. All of these are laid out.

Education and telecommunication, everything is in there, very comprehensive. But it has not been activated because member countries- and the presidents and prime ministers of African countries- when they go home, the first thing they have to think about is, ‘am I going to be able to pay for the wheat and rice shipment- that’s waiting at the port- to feed the people?’ ‘Am I going to be able to meet the external debt payment, that is owed to the IMF and private creditors in three weeks?’

These are burning priorities. The other thing- that they also know about themselves- is that they don’t have the freedom to think in a radical transformative way, that will disrupt the global economic architecture, because they’re vulnerable. Because you can take any African country, and think of a dashboard of vulnerabilities that those countries have. Food security, energy security, debt problems, internal security, regional security, so many pressure points that anybody from the global North can easily push those buttons, and make a whole lot of trouble for those countries.

And we know when those buttons are pushed, is when somebody is challenging the geopolitical reality or the international security reality, that the US dominates and NATO dominates and the rest of the global north dominates. So, because they know they have these vulnerabilities, they don’t even bother to think about challenging this.

And let’s be very clear, we operate in a global economic architecture that was not designed for development. It was not designed by us, not designed for us. So by definition, it’s not supposed to deliver results that actually work for us. So in a way, we shouldn’t be surprised that we have all of these problems, because this was- by design- a colonial system- extractive- that is supposed to drive us to the bottom of the global value chain, drive us into debt, drive us into vulnerability.

So, the type of thinking that we need to have today, is one of two options. Do we work towards reforming this global economic architecture, that was designed for these purposes? Or do we build a parallel, alternative economic architecture from the ground up? And I’m of the opinion that the countries that dominate the current economic architecture, will fight to death to keep their supremacy.

So, they will give you a little bit of reform around the edges, but not really structural transformation. And when we talk about economic architecture, we’re talking about financial architecture, trade and investment architecture, and taxation architecture. And yes, these days, everybody’s talking about reforming the financial architecture that’s mostly dominated by the World Bank and the IMF.

Yeah, reforming is nice, but we’re talking about transforming. And yes, we had a major victory in the global South- in Africa in particular- on the international taxation front, with the UN tax convention vote that happened a few months ago in New York. That is finally going to take the design of the international taxation architecture away from the OECD, and into the UN system, where you have one country, one vote.

And you can finally transform that system. And that’s a major victory. And that’s a big battle to continue shaping how that international tax architecture is going to be done under the UN tax convention. And the process leading up to that vote was viciously attacked and interrupted by the US, the UK, all the OECD countries, except one country from the OECD group. Which is Colombia, that voted and lobbied against the OECD to take the tax system into a more international, democratic space. So yeah, we’re making progress on the tax front, maybe on the financial architecture- I have my doubts about that- but the big blind spot for this decolonization of the global economic architecture, is the trade and investment architecture, which is the WTO.

And this is critical. And unfortunately, very few people are talking about that type of transformation that is needed. So, lots of great ideas that are on the table, to build this alternative architecture. That’s where the struggle is going to be. You’ll remember after the first set of sanctions on Russia in 2014- I think- that isolated Russia from the international payment system. That immediately sent everybody into panic mode, but now we’re weaponizing the dominance in the financial international payment system to exclude countries, and isolate them from being able to export or import. That immediately triggered both Russia and China to start setting up their own alternative to SWIFT for international payment system.

And it’s a long way behind SWIFT, but China now has two payment systems that are much bigger than the Russian payment system. The African Union is supposed to have an African Union payment system that is right there on paper and needs to be activated, and this is a way to create this parallel architecture. But payment system is just one component.

You need an alternative shipping system, logistic system, supply lines for food, for energy, for insurance system, for all the shipments. All of this parallel economic architecture is yet to be born. So, we can hope for the best, for reforming the existing architecture. But I have severe doubts and reservations about how far these reforms will go, to truly decolonize the system and create a multi-polar economic system that is resilient, and sustainable, and just.

[00:26:54] 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 Periscope, Twitter, Twitch, Rockfin, and Instagram.

[00:27:45] Grumbine: Genocide Joe Biden, although he can’t put two words together coherently, he’s finding a way to fund the genocide of the people of Gaza. Palestinians are homeless. They’ve absolutely decimated the entire region. And even if they stop bombing and there is a ceasefire, where do they go now? They have nothing to go back to.

And a lot of the vote blue sycophants are right there with Joe, thinking that’s the right thing. And the propaganda that creates this manufactured consent is global. It’s not just in the U.S. Look at the insane rhetoric around Ukraine and Russia, not ever addressing NATO. Not addressing the destruction of the pipeline.

There’s so much lies out there and you start to wonder, well, what is the motivation? So, how do you propose that suddenly those same people- and I don’t believe we have agency in the system, I believe it’s a system of manufacturing consent to make it have the appearance of legitimacy, while doing the work of an oligarch without any concern for the people, as long as someone can gain wealth from it- I don’t know how you defeat that system… when people don’t even acknowledge that’s the system we’re in.

And to be able to create the kind of awareness- you gave three simple points that you should be able to keep in front of people’s eyes, you’re the only person I’ve heard, but those three points- I don’t think most people would be able to organize and talk about them, and build enough pressure in the US to force the government to do whatever.

There’s no agency in the system to create these kinds of coalitions. Help me understand how you make that happen, how you bring about these changes when you see everything is predatory, is intentionally extractive, and in no way meant to help or benefit the global South.

[00:29:49] Kaboub: Yeah, we can have a 5 hour discussion about this, about how the US has a very serious, systemic crisis from within. And the fact that you have two [almost] 80 year olds competing for the presidency- one being a genocide supporter, and the other being the person that he is, I’m not going to go into that space- tells you this great country doesn’t have more than these two elders- with their track records- to govern the biggest economy and the most powerful country in the world?

That is a very serious problem. And if the Democrats don’t figure out a way to put forward a decent candidate with an agenda that actually speaks to the needs of the people of the US forget about the rest of the world- then they’re going to have to deal with another 4 years of Trump, and man, he’s coming back with a revenge.

Just picture the 4 years of Trump- actually in power- with the anger that he’s carried over the last 4years It’s not going to be pretty. It’s going to be ugly. And that’s going to have consequences, not just for the average American, but for the whole planet, given the position that the US is in. When all the potential for transformation in the US -and beyond- is right there available in the US with its influence, with its technology, with its diplomatic might and non-diplomatic might. All of the opportunities for radical transformation that will benefit everyone is there.

But somehow, you have a very small portion of the system, mainly a political class, their lobbyists and the billionaires- and close to trillionaires now- who support them and the media machines that spin their narrative. And even then, they’re losing the narrative. Most people are waking up to this reality, especially with the ongoing genocide that’s been exposed by the International Court of Justice, by the media, by civil society. We have a live-streamed genocide. Everybody can watch it, if you can bear the pain of watching what’s happening. It’s right there for you to watch, no filter. And yet, we have this very tiny minority, that is governing the US and accelerating its movement towards a cliff, towards the destruction of the empire. And all you have to do is just look at the founding documents, no matter what you think of the founding fathers of the US, where they came from and what they did, but it’s supposed to be a democracy. It’s supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, for the people, not a government of the billionaires, for the trillionaires and for the powerful, to abuse the rest of the system.

And that’s just within the US. Go back to post World War II, a major crisis. And the US approach to Germany after the war- the initial approach, which most people don’t remember, don’t know of- was to de-industrialize Germany, turn it into an agrarian, backward society, that will never rise to power again and never cause any other war.

That was the actual approach- the Morganthau approach- to Germany. And it was put in place. And then Marshall came and said, ‘this is the worst thing that we can do, we need a very powerful industrialized Germany to stand and support Europe in the face of the Soviet threat.’ So the Marshall Plan was an industrialization plan, it was a charity to Germany. It was to industrialize Germany and turn it into an economic powerhouse, that it is today. And it included the cancellation of German debt, 50 of Germany’s debt, which was not very high. Germany didn’t really need a debt relief, when you compare the debt of the global South today.

But yet, that was the formula for industrialization. Which is, 1 cancel 50 of the debt, and 2 transfer technology and resources and partnership and joint ventures, to rapidly industrialize Germany. And look where Germany is today. So, we have a formula. The Marshall Plan- when you look at it in terms of US contribution- it was 5 of US GDP, that was essentially gifted, not loans and debt traps, but essentially gifted. In today’s dollars, if you take 5 of US GDP, we’re talking about more than $1.2-1.3 trillion dollars. And that was a gift from one country- from the US alone- and this massive gift for Europe, came after a very expensive war for the US, which came after very miserable economic time during the great depression.

And yet, the US was able to afford this massive gift, to transform Germany and rebuild Europe and all of that. And today, we’re told we’re facing this climate crisis, this poly-crisis, this debt crisis of the global South, and especially on the climate front. And the United States sends John Kerry- the climate envoy- to the COP meeting in December in Dubai, to contribute to the loss and damage fund for the entire global South. How much did the US contribute? $17.5 million. Let me do the math for you, that’s 0.00 nothing of US GDP.

[00:35:27] Grumbine: There’s football coaches that make more than that.

[00:35:30] Kaboub: Exactly.

[00:35:32] Grumbine: So, revolutionary activist Emma Goldman said, ‘if voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.’ And I say this, only because I believe that while we may want to vote because we want to make sure that we do our civic duty, I think the reality is, in order to address the very things you’re talking about, we have to organize outside of the system. Like you were saying, you have to build those parallel systems in Africa, we’ve got to build them around as activists. In your mind, looking at that Marshall Plan, looking at the beauty and the glory of the things we could do, and realizing we’re not doing them… what do you think is the best way to organize, to bring that to the forefront?

Because I don’t see the kind of change, that I think that we need to see.

[00:36:20] Kaboub: Yeah. Very quickly on the US side- but then I’ll answer this from also an African perspective and global perspective- from the US side, if you’re thinking elections, you’ve already lost the battle for transformation. Because you do have elections and you can say, more or less, they’re transparent and all of that… I mean, we can question that, but they’re there.

But why don’t half of Americans participate in elections? It’s because they know it doesn’t really deliver any change. And the campaigns of both parties in the US, are deeply insulting to the intelligence of the average American, which is why they don’t participate.

Because you have communities of millions of people that are neglected for decades, and neglected in the 4 years leading up to the election cycle. And then, all of a sudden, these politicians show up and say, ‘I’m here to improve your life.’

‘Where have you been?’ ‘You just show up when you need my vote.’ And ‘what have you done for me lately, other than throw me under the bus, outsource our jobs, give us empty promises, and then go back and serve the billionaires that put you in office?’

So, that’s why 50 of Americans don’t bother to vote, because they know it’s a useless process. So, that’s why I’m saying the US political system is in a deep crisis, just by design, the way elections are run, the political system, the fundraising. The whole thing needs to have a complete overhaul, that is genuine and that is democratic and that really builds trust with the average American citizen, so that they actually participate from the ground up and see results that actually change their lives. And the fact that you have a handful of billionaires who own the majority of wealth in the US- and on the planet- is a symptom of that political system, that is in serious need of a complete overhaul.

Now, on the global South front, if you take what I described earlier- as the historic role that was imposed on us, to be at the bottom of the global value chain- and you want to change that- and that’s the part of the transformation that is needed- you can say, ‘okay, in the global South- just take Latin America and Africa alone- we basically have almost the entire global supply of strategic minerals, all the critical minerals that you need for the high tech revolution, for renewables, for clean transportation, for the economy of the future, they’re right there.’ So, you have the raw materials, and you have the market- at scale- to industrialize and you have the market demand at scale.

So, you have all the factors needed for an industrial revolution in the global South, to escape the bottom of the value chain, except for one component, which is the manufacturing capability, the technology. And this is where you want to look for actual partners who will do joint ventures with you, who will transfer technology to accelerate this leapfrogging, this industrialization.

So, let’s take renewables- for example. Which countries have the technology for renewables and will be willing to transfer technology- to go into joint ventures- on terms that actually transform the global South? Well, of all those countries, there’s one country- in particular- that has the entire manufacturing base, from refining minerals, all the way to producing the solar panels and the wind turbines. That country is China.

So, the geopolitical opportunity for the global South today, is the following: It’s to build a core bloc of global South countries who have the minerals, who have the political commitment for this transformation, and say, ‘okay, we have the resources and capabilities, we want joint venture partnership, transfer of technology and financing from China to manufacture and deploy and create millions of jobs for the next 30 years to manufacture and deploy the renewable infrastructure, the clean cooking infrastructure, the clean transportation infrastructure across the global South.’

That gives China the opportunity to deepen its presence in the global South. That gives China the opportunity to- very quickly- double the industrial footprint that it has globally, and become massively dominant, geopolitically and economically. But that also gives the global South the bargaining chip. Because if that process begins, I guarantee you there’s a couple of major blocs that will panic immediately. That is the US. That is Europe.

And the opportunity for the global South is to say, ‘well, great, because we have a plan for you this time, not you have a plan for us.’ The plan for you is actually a joint venture partnership with Japan, to manufacture and deploy high-speed rail across the global South, with Japanese technology, with German technology, with American technology. To manufacture and deploy the US made pharmaceutical technology, for the global South, on these new non-abusive, non-extractive terms.

So, we design these plans and say, ‘we have plenty of business to do with you, come in on these terms.’ But until you have that bargaining chip to say, ‘look, we’re about to take off, and if you don’t participate, you’ll be left behind, and China will be twice your size in a matter of 10 years’, then we’re not going there.

So, that is the type of repositioning of the global South that is desperately needed, to escape the bottom of the global value chain. And that is the type of repositioning- the type of industrialization- that’s been systematically denied to the global South, by the dominant players, by the US and Europe.

And the opportunity now, is to say that industrialization denied, is no more, because we do have a partner that has the technology. Now, the question is, how did China get all this technology? Wasn’t China a poor developing country a little bit ago? Wasn’t industrialization also denied to China? Or guess what, because of the rules of international trade that were imposed by the WTO- those rules explicitly say you can’t steal technology, you can’t reverse engineer, you can’t leapfrog- you have to buy the license from us, on our terms, and stay at the bottom… what did China do? They said ‘no way!, we’re going to reverse engineer the hell out of everything, and we’re going to catch up, and we’re going to exceed and we’re going to take technology where we find it, to develop and industrialize, despite what the rules of international trade have imposed on us.’

So, the hypocrisy of the system that was designed to keep the global South down, has actually kept the global South down, except for the one country that says, ‘no, we’re going to violate these and reverse engineer technology and further develop it at scale, and we’re going to catch up.’ So, that particular country that rejected the pathway that was imposed on it, is now- possibly- the one country that is willing to further deepen its economic influence and geopolitical influence, and help uplift the global South. But here’s the caveat- China will not do this for the global South.

The global South has to organize, unite, and propose a geopolitical bargain with China, on terms that are careful and reasonable, in order to activate this process that I said. And it will be a win for everybody, including for the US, including for Europe. Because once we rebalance the global economic architecture and geopolitical architecture, and we have a multipolar world- in the most noble sense of the term- then it’s a win for everybody. For workers in the North, for workers in the South. It’s a stabilizing geopolitical result, because when countries are truly sovereign and independent and not vulnerable, nobody can come from the outside and pressure them to side with them, and compromise their principles, compromise their commitment to international law, to side with somebody who’s more influential and powerful. That’s the hope. That’s the dream. I think that’s the strategy, that I hope a lot of people in countries and civil society will commit to pushing towards that ultimate goal.

But as they say, it’s easier said than done. This is a process of a struggle, and it’s a process of educating, empowering, mobilizing, organizing towards these types of results.

[00:45:03] Grumbine: We talked years ago about xenophobia, and the climate crisis, and the migrations. And at the beginning of our interview, you talked about how many die on their trek to Italy. And a lot of the reason they’re leaving is because of this manufactured situation, but the United States is doing the same thing.

We’re building a wall right now across Mexico. It seems interesting to me that we create these horrible situations for countries that are not able to fight back. And we’re building political campaigns on keeping those immigrants out, because they’re going to ‘steal our jobs.’ We talked about the job guarantee previously, as well- as a solution- or at least a counter to that. But it doesn’t appear that there’s any appetite for a job guarantee in the US, or for Europe either.

What do you suppose will end up happening? Because people are going to keep dying, and keep being demonized and vilified for crossing borders, to escape horrible conditions. And then the US media- and the European media- of course, will blame the corruption of the global South and the wickedness of their leaders, and they’ll talk about dictators.

How do you deal with that? Regardless of sovereignty of food and energy production, this is going to keep happening. What would your message to people be, that see immigration in this way, and want to close borders, and are becoming somewhat nationalistic?

[00:46:40] Kaboub: Let me pick up on that last bit about political corruption, and these 80 year old dictators who govern the global South. You can look at the US Senate. Look at the two political candidates that are competing for the presidency of the US And you’re just describing the US, so that’s one thing.

On the job guarantee and everything else, as I’m a strong advocate of the job guarantee, both in the global north and in the global south, but with a distinction that the global South-type job guarantee needs to be channeled towards these structural transformations. Whereas in the global North- in a country like the US- it’s really not about the industrialization and economic growth.

It’s really about better quality of life, and providing universal public services, and focusing on the care economy. And this is an important linkage point between the climate conversation and the job guarantee conversation in the global North, for the following reasons. Because these critical minerals- or strategic minerals- that are needed for decarbonizing the energy system- globally- the numbers don’t add up, in the sense that, if most of the decarbonization happens in the global North first, without changing the consumption pattern- the obsession with growth, the obsession with consumerism in the global North- then again, there’s not going to be anything left- in terms of critical minerals- for development and deployment in the global South.

But if we prioritize the industrialization, repositioning of the global South, with the minerals being used primarily to build the renewable energy infrastructure, clean transportation, clean public transportation- not everybody driving around with their own Tesla battery- and clean cooking infrastructure in the global South, then the volume of minerals left in the system will not be sufficient for the global North to continue its obsession with growth and consumerism. And it forces the conversation about degrowth. It forces the conversation about redesigning the transportation system in the global North towards public transportation. It forces the conversation in the global North towards marshaling all the research and development capabilities towards material science research, to get rid of the planned obsolescence that is built into every piece of technology we produce in the global North. And forces the conversation about quality of life and the care economy, in a circular economy in the global North. Because right now, it’s not even on the table for the big players. It’s just, ‘let’s get all the minerals we want, to industrialize and decarbonize on these growth obsessed models.’

So, that is critical. And as I said earlier, it forces the conversation, also about the position of the middle class and labor, both in the North and the South. When you stop outsourcing assembly line jobs to the global South, and throw workers in the global North under the bus, then you empower labor to have a critical voice in redesigning economies in the global North. And that’s a win for everybody.

So to me, the job guarantee comes into that eco systems of conversations about how do we address the polycrises- starting with the climate crisis, the debt crisis, the repositioning of the global South- which is truly a decolonization of the global South. And then the job guarantee comes in as a platform for channeling these strategic investments, these priorities.

And it’s a win. As we’ve discussed many times on this program, it’s affordable, it’s the most logical thing to do in the global North and in the global South.

[00:50:25] Grumbine: You brought up the word ‘degrowth’, and I know it’s one of the most important topics I think we can cover. I feel like there’s a lot of misinformation. People say, ‘you’re talking about impoverishing the global South.’ When that’s not it at all. It’s about knocking down the non-essentials from the global North, while enabling the global South to take up some of that carbon that has been sucked up from the North, and allow them to catch up and make their country sustainable.

Would you leave us with a thought on that?

[00:51:00] Kaboub: Yeah. When you’re talking about degrowth- first of all- it doesn’t mean going back to the caves and not having technology, not having comfortable quality of life. If anything, degrowth is about actually improving quality of life substantially, but getting rid of the waste, getting rid of the obsession with consumerism and growth for its own sake. As the saying goes, as the ideology of a cancer cell, it destroys the system from within.

But also when we talk about degrowth, we’re not talking about degrowth in the global South. The global South doesn’t consume enough energy, doesn’t produce enough energy. Of course, there are things to do, in terms of efficiency and reducing waste. And also making sure that we don’t introduce a development model in the global South that is obsessed with growth and consumerism, and replicates the mistakes of the global North.

But primarily, the discussion about degrowth, is about energy efficiency, reducing- substantially- the energy use, focusing on the care economy- caring for people, caring for the planet- and focusing on the circular economy, that sustains a very high quality of life. But gets rid of all the waste and all the growth for its own sake, and ‘we need to create jobs just because we need to create jobs’, rather than ‘what types of jobs can improve quality of life.’

So, that conversation about degrowth is gaining traction, slowly but surely. And it’s a conversation that will be forced into the public discourse, if we manage to get the global South really organized towards industrializing, and setting the terms for the global conversation about what ‘development’ means. And that will substantially reduce the availability of exports from the global South, to the global North, including exports of energy and raw materials. And that will force the conversation about ‘how does Europe, how does the United States and Canada organize their energy system, their transportation system, their economic system… to live within the ecological limits’ that the global South- hopefully- will impose on everybody. And that will be good news for everybody, because quality of life will improve. And we’ll be simultaneously addressing all of these crises that we’re currently facing, that the current approach to decarbonizing in the global North, is not actually going to solve these problems.

[00:53:21] Grumbine: I’ve witnessed arguments, from folks in even the MMT space, who hate the idea of degrowth and fight against it. What would be your final word to- perhaps- the MMT community, about its relationship to degrowth, and not being scared of it, but embracing it.

[00:53:40] Kaboub: Yeah. I think sooner or later, those people will recognize that the MMT project- and the MMT analysis and vision for the common good- without degrowth- without the contribution of ecological economics and the degrowth literature and policy principles- can turn MMT into- yet another- colonial extractive project, which it does have that potential. And degrowth and ecological economics, without the MMT, are nothing but wonderful dreams and ideas, that stop at the doorway of ‘how are you going to pay for it?’ And then the TINA- there is no alternative- comes in, and ‘we need the jobs, we need the extractivism’, will dominate. So to me, degrowth and ecological economics on one hand, and MMT on the other hand, are two sides of the same coin, that we can count on to really galvanize the public policy approach, that many of us believe in and want to put forward, for the type of transformation that is needed in the public policy space.

[00:54:55] Grumbine: Fadhel, this was amazing. Thank you so much for your time, I appreciate it. Let everybody know where they can find more of your work. I know you’ve got a great Substack, great articles, wonderful stuff. Where else can we find your work?

[00:55:07] Kaboub: Well, you can find me on social media and Substack, it’s called Global South Perspectives. And I’m sure we’ll put some links in the show notes. And I’m happy to engage with people, to continue building this collective global effort, for this system transformation- for this radical transformation- in the Martin Luther King sense of the term, going to the roots of the problem and being alert to these tranquilizing drugs of gradualism, incrementalism, false solutions, and dangerous distractions.

[00:55:40] Grumbine: Fantastic. Fadhel, thank you so much sir. Folks, my name is Steve Grumbine. I am the host of Macro N Cheese. We are a part of Real Progressives, which is a tax deductible, nonprofit organization. Please consider becoming a monthly donor. No amount is too small. Fadhel Kaboub, please follow him, his work is phenomenal.

He is a friend of the program and has been a lifelong supporter. So, I appreciate you sir. This is Macro N Cheese. We are outta here.

[00:56:16] 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 Progressive Patreon account. If you would like to donate to Macro N Cheese, please visit patreon. com slash real progressives.