is bbc world news. the headlines. president trump and president putin have discussed the alleged interference into the us elections during their face—to—face meeting in hamburg during the 620 summit. it was described as robust. 160 police officers have in injured outside of the summit due to protests with one officer firing a warning shot when he came under attack. angela merkel has condemned the protesting. a legal battle over the protesting. a legal battle over the terminally ill british baby charlie 6ard has taken a new turn. his hospital has asked for a new court hearing for fresh evidence to be assessed. and defending champion andy murray has won a thrilling third round contest against italy's fabio fanini at wimbledon. and that is bbc world news and its headlines.
and now, it is time for hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk with me, zeinab badawi. president trump is meeting his fellow leaders of the 620 summit in hamburg this week when big issues like international trade and climate change will be on the agenda. my guest is the progressive canadian—american writer and activist naomi klein. she says donald trump's rise to power is a product of our time and that his becoming president amounts to a corporate takeover of the united states by brand trump. she's calling for mass protests against him. but are her radical policies a panacea for the current ills in the united states? naomi klein, welcome to hardtalk.
happy to be here. you have just written a new book, no is not enough. is it anything more than just another liberal critique of donald trump? what i am trying to do with the book is really focus less on donald trump the personality, the extremist, the shock machine who has everybody gasping with his tweets and put him into the context really off the past a0 years of economic history and how we arrived here. and he makes sense in this culture where we have had the triumph of lifestyle brands where we have humans merging with corporations, we worship wealth, consumption is a way of life. we have a dominance—based logic in our economy at every level so i think trump makes sense and i want to put him in context. and in what way does he epitomise or that the personification of the merger of humans and corporations because you say, he has become a one—man mega brand
with his children and wife as spin—off brands. he does kind of breed brands within his family. this is the first time we have had a political figure of this stature who is a fully commercialised superbrand. the trump corporation is built around his personality so it isn't just that he has refused to divest from his business, which would be problematic enough, it's that the business is trump. so this relates to the first book i ever wrote called no logo which is about how many corporations restructured themselves in the 1990s so they were less about selling and making products and more about building ideas and then creating these branded cocooned lifestyles that they extended into all of these areas and donald trump did that. he started off building buildings but then he just started building brand trump especially once he had the apprentice. but his trump organisation employs 3a,000 people and if you take
in all of their families and so on, that's a lot of people who are reliant on his organisation. i don't see what that really has to do with the fact that we are in unprecedented... well, he's more than a brand, he's more than a brand and if his employees at trump 0rganisation amount to that number, 3a,000... look, the people who make most of the buildings that bear the trump logo are not employed directly by trump. his main business model is to build his name and certainly there are people employed in marketing brand trump, in designing brand trump. that's the figure from last year's cnn money and they looked into the whole trump organisation and that's the figure they came up with, so, one way or another... what are you saying? that he doesn't build...he leases brand trump... i'm just saying that there is 3a,000 employees under the trump organisation so he's more than a brand. a lot of people rely on him for his livelihoods. ok, i never denied that. all right, that's fine.
isn't he also more than a brand in that he stands for policies, very clear policies and he taps into the zeitgeist when he says, look, i'm not happy about globalisation. he said, in particular about globalisation in june last year, "it has made the financial elite who donate to politicians very wealthy but it's left millions of our workers with nothing but poverty and heartache". and you know, he's not the only political figure on the right that is tapping into huge levels of dissatisfaction around corporate globalisation. marine le pen is doing the same in france and the brexit campaign in the uk tapped into that same energy and he ran on this campaign to bring backjobs, to stand up for the working class. what he is doing in power is very, very different and that's why as you said in your introduction, i said this is a takeover. but notjust of brand trump, it's really exxonmobil, who has taken over the state department. their ceo is secretary of state. rex tillerson worked at exxon for his entire adult life, 41 years. after campaigning against goldman sachs and wall street,
accusing hillary clinton of being in the pocket of goldman sachs, accusing his republican rivals like ted cruz of the same, trump has turned around and appointed five former goldman sachs executives to his cabinet which is absolutely unprecedented. so you are saying big money is associated with donald trump. what i'm saying is that the way he is governing is quite different from the way he campaigned. there was this political brand called make america 6reat again. but what he has ended up doing is pushing policies that systematically redistribute wealth to the 1% of the 1%. he is doing it with tax policy infrastructure plans, healthcare, social security. that's not what he campaigned on. all right. interesting you bring up the campaign when you say it's not what he campaigned on because the democratic candidate, hillary clinton, spent $1.2 billion on her campaign. donald trump spent $600 million. if you look at your argument, actually, just looking at the campaign, it would seem that
big money flowed more to the democratic candidate than it did to donald trump. that's not my argument. no, just, it's a point to make though, isn't it? you can make that point. but the argument i make in the book is that hillary clinton paved the way for donald trump, in that he did not win the election but she lost at the election, because she was uniquely unsuited to be an opposition to this hollow promise that he represented. of course this billionaire in his golden throne was not going to be a saviour to the working class. the reason he won is not because he had a landslide, he won because the democrats were not able to energise their base and that is why i say that no is not enough. it is not enough just to critique trump. there has to be an economic project on the progressive side of the political spectrum that speak to that need forjobs and security that trump was speaking to.
he was selling lies. well, i'm sure he wouldn't say he was selling lies because one thing he has done is teared up the tra ns—pacific partnership agreement because he thinks that trade has not served the united states well and says he wants to renegotiate nafta... to make it more like the tra ns—pacific partnership. he says he wants to hire american, buy american and that's what i mean about the fact that he taps into the zeitgeist. he's criticised countries like japan and germany because they have huge trade surpluses. he wants to bring jobs to the united states. well, he says that. yes. he says that. i think if we look at what he is doing, he will actually end up driving down wages. his commerce secretary, wilbur ross, has been out there reassuring business audiences that when they renegotiate nafta, they're going to do to make it more like the trans—pacific partnership which is exactly what trump campaigned against.
so of course he raised these hopes but i don't believe he is going to bring thejobs back and support middle—class lifestyles. he did it to get elected and it was a resonant promise but that is why my argument is that progressives need to step up into this moment with a real 21st—century jobs programme and i'm passionate about climate change and the fact that we need jobs that are going to support middle—class families and working—class families but also bring emissions down very, very quickly. luckily we can do this, we can create huge numbers ofjobs in efficiency, public transit, renewable energy. this is the future, not bringing back coaljobs and creating weapons jobs. but i mean, he wants to bring back jobs, even if they might not be as well paid as you might like, at least he wants to bring jobs back. he's criticised outsourcing, i know you say in your book
that there is outsourcing in trump's organisations but he says he wants to bring back... they're built on outsourcing. he wants to bring back some labour to the united states and i think you would have to accept that time might tell if he does do that. he is saying that free trade isn't all it is cracked up to be. i mean, there are people who are worried about protectionism now in the us and so on. absolutely. so i'm saying there must be some things that you agree with him on. his anti—globalisation stance. what i believe is that the reason why trump and the brexit campaign and le pen have been able to be as successful as they have been is because this terrain which is rightfully progressive has been seeded because centrist political parties that originally opposed these trade deals ended up negotiating them and advancing them further. bill clinton and this is a huge reason why hillary clinton was not trusted among working—class voters in the us is that bill clinton originally campaigned against nafta, promised to renegotiate the whole agreement, and ended up pushing the free trade agenda much further. so when she campaigned against the tra ns—pacific partnership, as she did, itjust wasn't credible and this is why we are seeing a wave of support for figures
like jeremy cameron and bernie sanders who are just seen as more credible messengers for a message of progressive economic populism. but there is some overlap, you must accept, between progressive voices such as yours and what donald trump is advocating. but, i guess... isn't there? there is overlap, there is overlap... there is overlap, you accept that. what i don't accept is that he's actually going to do it. what i believe is that he saw that there was fertile political ground... he's changing the corporate culture a bit. i'll tell you whatjeff immelt, the outgoing ceo of general electrics said. he said, "6lobal thinkers have grown increasingly distant from the needs at ground level. we ignored the impact on communities and hid behind trade deals that were better for companies than workers." donald trump arguably has opened up the space where you have corporate leaders such asjeff immelt saying these things. saying things, saying things. you know, shifting the debate, it doesn't matter. no, it does matter. he's opened a debate amongst senior corporate figures. absolutely, there is a shifting political ground and that is happening for a variety of reasons.
the economic project that began under reagan and thatcher has been in crisis since the 2008 financial crash. there is a vacuum. where this ideological project of privatisation, deregulation, corporate free—trade deals used to be. 0n the right you have these populist figures who are coming in and mixing a feeling that economic decisions are all being made by these remote bureaucracies which is true, that economic conditions are becoming more and more precarious and mixing it up with xenophobia, with racism, with misogyny. you have populist sentiment from the left wing and populist sentiment on the right wing and arguably, donald trump is a populist from the centre—right. let me tell you what concerns me. there are populists from the centre—left such as, you mentioned jeremy corbyn, syriza in greece, and arguably you yourself. and the sanders campaign which got 13 million votes. sure, and there's common ground is what i'm saying. anti—establishment. there's common ground, certainly, in this tapping in of the anti—establishment feeling out there. but surely you would acknowledge that there's a contradiction to run an anti—establishment campaign, saying, "i'm going to stand up their money" and then bringing
in five goldman sachs executives into your cabinet, and then appointing the ceo of exxon to be your secretary of state. and what i'm saying is we can'tjust expose... i mean, it's so obvious to expose that donald trump is a fraud but the real issue is what are progressives going to do in the united states? and this is a real concern because this is a malleable moment. there is a moment now, especially what we are seeing with healthcare where their plan to replace 0bamacare is to kick millions of people off their health insurance coverage. and in this moment, we are seeing a rise of interest in universal public healthca re, single—payer healthcare, but who is blocking that at the state level? the democrats. this is why the road to donald trump is not one we can just pin on the republican side of the political spectrum. you've mentioned twice now that he is associated with big
money and so on, but some of the most greatly admired figures in the united states and in europe are extremely wealthy, usually men. you have bill gates who was applauded for his efforts in tackling tropical diseases. you have richard branson with whom barack 0bama holidayed recently, the british billionaire. yep. you've got mike bloomberg who is doing a great deal on climate change, an agenda you are very, very attached to, so, what is the matter if these people have a great deal of money if they use it for the public good? so the argument i make is that that whole idea that we can outsource the most pressing problems that we face as global citizens, whether it is climate change or infectious diseases, whether it is poverty itself, to the davos class. you know, rather than doing this with democracies, with accountability, with transparency, we are going
to hand it over to, as you say, bill gates, richard branson, maybe bono will show up... no, i wasn't saying that, but i mean, i know you've said that bill gates, you know, we've got to this assertion that... i said he paved the way. ..bill gates can fix africa. nobody‘s saying that bill gates can fix africa but his efforts in helping fix africa have to be a applauded. what i say in the book is that, i don't have a problem with charity but we're at a moment where the gates foundation has arguably more power than the world health organisation and many people who work within the un system... i'm not sure that's the case. ..talk about being absolutely stunned by the amount of power wielded by private, unaccountable wealth. and this is something i have written about in the past with richard branson and the wild claims he has made about how he is going to use his billions from fossil fuel burning to fix climate change and there is no accountability for that money. are you saying we should do away with philanthropy? tax them at a fair level and use that money democratically to solve problems collectively. that logic created a situation where we acquainted great wealth with great wisdom.
if you make money in software, it must mean you know everything about everything — health, agriculture, education. that created a context for donald trump to say, "vote for me, i don't know anything about governing and i have never held public office but i am so rich" — this was his pitch. he has surrounded himself with other rich people, he has hr mcmaster, national security advisor. he has outsourced half the government to his son—in—law. you say he has outsourced half of the government. i have to say he was criticised for not appointing enough people. 5% of 556 federal positions have been filled, which means... they don't believe in government. so many others haven't. he argues against the fact that you say there is a grand master plan. it could be more... steve bannon has been open about the master plan. he said the goal is to deconstruct
the administrative state, and that is why they have appointed people to head up government agencies who don't believe in the existence it of those government agencies. this is true for energy, the epa, education — betsy davos doesn't believe in public education! he won't get anything done if he hasn't filled 550 positions. they don't believe in government. there is a grand master plan and that is the same we have lived in for a0 years, which is what reagan said, "6overnment isn't the solution, it is the problem." it is margaret thatcher's vision, that there is no such thing as this society. donald trump went before the people and said he would protect healthcare and social security, and it is finishing the job that reagan and thatcher started. margaret thatcher believed in a community of communities, that society remark. misquoted her. laughter. donald trump has tapped into the zeitgeist. two thirds of american voters
who don't have a degree voted for him. i don't know if it was the zeitgeist. 145 academics and writers issued a statement in support of trump, and one was a philosophy professor at the university of texas, he said trump is pro—american, concerned about immigration because of economic effects and about factories closing down. these are not... trump is concerned about donald trump. this is his animating mission in life. it is to enrich himself and build himself up. anybody who tells themselves otherwise is... you are dismissing a lot of people who voted for him. i am not dismissing all of the people who voted for him. he ran a deeply dishonest campaign at a moment which, as you say, he tapped into the antiestablishment zeitgeist, running against an extremely establishment candidate
with a message that was, "all is hell," to which hillary clinton said, "all is well," and it isn't well. people are in pain. they need good jobs. they need security. there is a tremendous amount of fear. those who didn't vote for donald trump, the majority of american people, too many were not excited about hillary clinton. she had depressed voter turnout compared with 0bama in 2012. they felt the system had failed them. i believe the democratic party has abandoned workers, not just white workers, the working class generally. and those most vulnerable in the working class in the us are those of colour. so, what they peddled was identity politics mostly about name—checking different groups, recognising them, "i see you," and not offering improvements in daily life. hillary clinton opposed the strong campaign for a 15 dollar minimum wage — she couldn't get behind it.
she said, "maybe 12, you know?" this is what it means to fight for women's rights, who are overwhelmingly the women who are in those precarious jobs, working multiplejobs to pay the bills. she represents a particular kind of identity politics, a leaf in feminism that benefits elites. to go back to the white working class, it is the white male working class who feel neglected who voted for donald trump. professor angus steed and anne cates, nobel laureate, they are at princeton university, they have done a great deal of study on the white male working class. they showed that the mortality rate for the poorly educated for white males has soared since 2000. they are more likely to die than black or hispanic males. they are likely to be at the bottom of the rung.
that is what i said, they have been perhaps neglected by progressive voices. by everyone. that is where trump spoke to them and they heard him. the solution is not to say, "well, forget identity politics, we will just focus on the white working class." it is to connect the dots. they are not the only ones discarded by this system. it is true that they are the ones who had the highest level of expectation. they had the betterjobs, they tended to have those manufacturing jobs that paid enough to support a family, you know, in the auto sector and so on. so it is untrue that they have suffered the most under these economic policies. in fact the wealth gap between white and black in the united states has widened, because, since 2008, since the financial crisis, it was overwhelmingly black americans targeted for sub—prime loans. they have lost an enormous
amount of wealth. if you are in the higher part of the economic hierarchy you have further to fall. there is more a sense of betrayal perhaps among those white men that are taking their own lives, whether drugs, suicide and that death by despair study is in the book. so are you not with your arguments now playing into people's fear, uncertainty and doubt, by saying, "look what's happening," you know, "donald trump could spark a war," for instance, "to push up oil prices," and that kind of thing. are you not playing into people's fears? people are afraid already. what i am trying to offer is a plan that goes beyond just saying no to trump, resistance to trump, this hashtag in response to "trump is the resistance." i think we need to resist the most dangerous of his policies. we have seen some inspiring
resistance in response to the muslim ban. we saw the huge women's march on trump's first day on the job. the problem is, even if we resist every one of the attacks, we would still end up in the same place we were when donald trump was elected, and that was the ground that produced donald trump. we have to get to the issues he was able to play on in order to be elected. jeremy corbyn‘s campaign shows the power of a bold, forward—looking progressive agenda. the leader of the labour party in the uk. he didn't win the election, did he? he did a lot better. he was dozens of seats less than the conservatives. he did better but he didn't win. he started to do better when they issued their manifesto, which was so bold, which was about healthcare, which was aboutjobs, which was about free education. that is not about fear. it is the opposite of fear.
that is what you want to promote for the united states? yes. i think it is the only way of resisting and defeating trumpism. calling for mass protest, finally? i don't think they are enough. i think we need vision and protest. we have had a lot of protest. people get exhausted by only protesting. i think what will keep people in the long haul is a vision for the world they want instead. who has that vision among the leaders in the united states' politicians? i am not sure we have seen exactly who that leader is yet. bernie sanders has part of it, elizabeth warren has part of it, nina turner has part of it, the new head of our revolution, which is the congressional wing of bernie sanders's campaign. i also think a social movements have it at the grassroots, and that is where i'm putting a lot of my hope right now. naomi klein, thank you very much
indeed for coming on hardtalk. thank you. good morning. we may only be early on in summer but on friday we saw the seventh occasional ready where we saw temperatures beat 30 degrees. that was at london heathrow airport. at the same time it was only 16 celsius in glasgow. a big contrast temperature wise north to south and those contrasts continue this morning. a fresh but sunny start in parts of scotland, northern ireland, northern england.
still pretty muggy further south, with temperatures still about 18—19. but more cloud compared to friday in southern counties. sunshine here and there, but the cloud thick enough to produce a few spots of rain, a few passing showers. misty towards the coast of devon, cornwall and wales. further north the well broken cloud to start the day. yes, a bit on a fresh side. what with light winds and sunshine it will soon warm up for much of scotland, northern ireland and northern england. early sunshine, though, in the hebrides — doesn't last too long. the cloud thickens and we have outbreaks of rain developing widely through the rest of the day. holding onto plenty of cloud in southern counties compared to what we had on friday. still the chance of the few passing showers. most will be dry and temperatures down on the 30 we saw on friday but still the mid—20s possible and in the sunshine further north feeling warmer than on friday. it does look like largely dry but cloudy at wimbledon for saturday.
only the small chance of a shower. sunday, the chance of a shower later and monday staying largely dry. but the next few days it will be a close call and into saturday night the cloud could produce the odd spot of rain. wet conditions in scotland and northern ireland and windy. that works its way southwards into sunday. the weather fronts grinding to a halt in southern scotland and northern ireland and it's here on sunday where we start with temperatures a bit higher than they were on saturday morning, but plenty of cloud around. still a muggy start further south. misty around southern and western coasts. that cloud breaks up and we have sunny spells coming through. a couple of showers later on. the odd rumble of thunder with those. southern scotland, northern ireland, cloudy and damp and compared to england and wales it will be cooler. temperatures in the mid—teens at the very best. through sunday night and into monday that weather system gradually pushes eastwards and itjust holds onto a lot of cloud. developing low pressure around it. it does mean monday will be a story of some sunny spells,
but just about anywhere could see showers. some of those on the heavy and thundery side and temperatures, high teens, low 20s at best. this is bbc news. i'm lukwesa burak. our top stories: from the us election to syria, presidents trump and putin make progress in their first face to face meeting at the 620 summit in hamburg. anti—globalisation protestors trying to disrupt the 620 meeting clash with police as violence and looting continues for a second night. a glimmer of hope for the parents of terminally ill british baby charlie 6ard, as fresh evidence about a possible treatment emerges. we're quite happy with today's outcome. we are hopeful and confident charlie may get his chance now. camping without shelter in france: the migrant families desperate to make it to britain.