Podcasts about gaulle

Le silence est pesant. Seuls quelques zéphyrs traversent les coursives métalliques et viennent interrompre la tension latente. A bord du porte-avions, chacun est à son poste, prêt à agir. Dans la pénombre du central opérations, l'assistantautodéfense, un artilleur de spécialité, vérifie une dernière fois le paramétrage du système sur l'interface de sa console. En passerelle, l'immense mer s'étale à perte de vue, calme en apparence, mais la cible est identifiée. Pourtant, chaquemanœuvre, chaque seconde, compte. Il faut viser juste. Etre certain de son objectif, évaluer les probabilités d'interception de son système d'armes contre la menace qui approche. Et surtout... il ne faut jamais douter.Soudain, l'ordre du Commandant est donné puis relayépar l'officier de « quart opérations ». L'action codée depuis laconsole du système de combat se répercute le long de la ligne de feu jusqu'à ce qu'un grondement sourd traverse le porte-avions. La porte du silo s'ouvre, un missile part et fend l'air. Il file droit vers sa cible et son impact soulève une colonne d'eau sur plusieurs dizaines de mètres de hauteur.  Aujourd'hui, dans le Carré, on vous présente le métier d'artilleur, celui qui s'occupe de la mise en œuvre des systèmes d'armes au-dessus de la surface.Alors qui sont ces marins de l'ombre, formés à manier le feu pour protéger les autres ? Comment se préparent-ils à tirer, réagir et défendre leur navire ? Et que ressent-on quand on a la mer pour champ de bataille et un missile pour outil ?On en parle, aujourd'hui, avec le Lieutenant de vaisseau Pierre-Yves, artilleur et chef du secteur SAAM, « Surface Air Anti-missile », le système d'armes antiaérien principal, à bord du porte-avions Charles de Gaulle.Bonne écoute !Vous en voulez plus ? Retrouvez l'intégralité des publications du Centre d'études stratégique de la Marine sur notre site : ⁠⁠⁠Centre d'études stratégiques de la Marine (CESM) | Ministère des Armées⁠N'hésitez pas aussi à vous abonner au podcast et à nous faire part de vos retours à l'adresse mail : podcast.cesm@gmail.com

In a bumper episode, the legend that is Raymond Blanc joins Olivia Potts and Lara Prendergast. The self-taught chef heads up the double Michelin-starred Le Manoir aux Quat' Saisons, has trained chefs from Heston Blumenthal to Marco Pierre White, and received an honorary OBE in 2008. His new book Simply Raymond Kitchen Garden is out now.The chef tells Liv and Lara about his earliest memories of food – from eating worms to easter eggs, how his love of food is connected to the garden and why he owes his existence to General de Gaulle. He explains how he ended up becoming 'exiled' to Great Britain, how he fell in love with Le Manoir and why he would have to choose an English chef to cook his dream meal. Plus: Lara's daughter makes a guest appearance.Produced by Patrick Gibbons.Become a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts. Contact us: podcast@spectator.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Pour la première fois, depuis 1958, un gouvernement a été renversé par un vote de confiance. Hier (8 septembre 2025), François Bayrou a échoué à rallier une majorité…364 députés ont voté contre lui. Un échec historique qui l'a contraint à démissionner à la mi-journée. 1h20 d'entretien avec Emmanuel Macron et l'expédition des affaires courantes… le temps de lui trouver un successeur. Plusieurs noms circulent… Plusieurs scénarios cohabitent mais aucune vérité à l'heure où l'on se parle. Tout peut basculer dans les prochaines minutes ou pas. La France devenue enfant malade de l'Europe est-elle ingouvernable ? 24 gouvernements en 11 ans. Notre 5ème République pensée, conçue par le général de Gaulle est-elle à bout de souffle? C'est notre débat du soir ! Pour en débattre - Philippe Moreau-Chevrolet, professeur de Communication politique à Sciences-Po et président de MCBG Conseil  - Frédéric Sawicki, professeur de Science politique à l'Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne   - Valérie Gas, cheffe du service politique de RFI. 

Pour la première fois, depuis 1958, un gouvernement a été renversé par un vote de confiance. Hier (8 septembre 2025), François Bayrou a échoué à rallier une majorité…364 députés ont voté contre lui. Un échec historique qui l'a contraint à démissionner à la mi-journée. 1h20 d'entretien avec Emmanuel Macron et l'expédition des affaires courantes… le temps de lui trouver un successeur. Plusieurs noms circulent… Plusieurs scénarios cohabitent mais aucune vérité à l'heure où l'on se parle. Tout peut basculer dans les prochaines minutes ou pas. La France devenue enfant malade de l'Europe est-elle ingouvernable ? 24 gouvernements en 11 ans. Notre 5ème République pensée, conçue par le général de Gaulle est-elle à bout de souffle? C'est notre débat du soir ! Pour en débattre - Philippe Moreau-Chevrolet, professeur de Communication politique à Sciences-Po et président de MCBG Conseil  - Frédéric Sawicki, professeur de Science politique à l'Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne   - Valérie Gas, cheffe du service politique de RFI. 

Le Premier ministre a cité ces derniers mois l'héritage de Pierre Mendès France, ancien ministre de l'Economie du général de Gaulle. Considéré comme un sauveur dans les années 50, au moment où la France se reconstruit, il a chuté sur l'Algérie française au début des années 60. Tout au long de sa carrière, il a subi régulièrement les sifflets, la haine, trois attentats et des attaques antisémites.Mention légales : Vos données de connexion, dont votre adresse IP, sont traités par Radio Classique, responsable de traitement, sur la base de son intérêt légitime, par l'intermédiaire de son sous-traitant Ausha, à des fins de réalisation de statistiques agréées et de lutte contre la fraude. Ces données sont supprimées en temps réel pour la finalité statistique et sous cinq mois à compter de la collecte à des fins de lutte contre la fraude. Pour plus d'informations sur les traitements réalisés par Radio Classique et exercer vos droits, consultez notre Politique de confidentialité.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Here's a 300-word iTunes/Podcast Apps summary for Episode 562: What happens when your carefully planned vacation in France takes an unexpected turn? In Unexpected France: History, Nature, and a Bit of Chaos, host Annie Sargent talks with traveler Gregg Furey about a journey filled with breathtaking discoveries, surprising challenges, and a few classic French travel mishaps. Listen to this episode ad-free Gregg's trip took him to places most visitors overlook. He explored the prehistoric caves of Arcy-sur-Cure, where ancient paintings connect today's traveler with humanity's earliest stories. He visited the soaring cathedrals of Laon and Bourges, each one a masterpiece of Gothic architecture. At the battlefield of Alésia, Gregg learned how Julius Caesar defeated Vercingetorix and how that moment still shapes French identity. And in Colombey-les-Deux-Églises, he reflected on the life of General Charles de Gaulle at the Croix de Lorraine memorial and museum. But not everything went according to plan. Gregg ended up in a hospital in Sarlat after unexpected health issues. Instead of panic, he found efficient doctors, affordable treatment, and an eye-opening look at how the French healthcare system really works. This detour disrupted his schedule but turned into one of the most memorable parts of the trip. This conversation is about more than just sightseeing. It's about handling the unpredictable. It's about staying flexible, finding humor when things go wrong, and discovering that mishaps often make the best stories. Annie and Gregg remind us that France is more than Paris and the Riviera. Smaller towns, Roman ruins, and quiet villages hold just as much magic. Subscribe to the Join Us in France Travel Podcast to hear more stories like this one. Learn how to plan smarter, travel deeper, and embrace the unexpected side of France. Table of Contents for this Episode [00:00:31] Today's Episode [00:01:02] Support the Podcast [00:01:33] Strikes and Political Difficulties in France [00:01:55] Air Quality in Paris, ETIAS and EES requirements [00:02:40] Gregg and Annie [00:02:52] Greg's Unique Travel Experiences [00:03:39] Exploring Small Towns Near Paris [00:05:04] Visiting Melun [00:06:46] Hospitalization in France [00:13:07] Medical “Deserts” [00:15:28] Discovering Laon [00:17:09]  Disque de Stationnement [00:22:49] Exploring Vézelay and Nearby Caves [00:23:04] Exploring Neolithic Art in French Caves [00:26:50] The Historical Significance of Vézelay [00:30:25] The Battle of Alesia and Roman Conquest [00:35:31] Charles de Gaulle's Legacy in Colombey-les-Deux-Églises [00:40:13] Final Thoughts and Future Travels [00:41:50] Thank You Patrons! [00:42:49] Tour Review [00:43:25] Podcast Listeners Discounts [00:44:34] Strikes Coming Up [00:47:20] Political Uncertainty [00:48:44] Air Quality in Paris [00:50:33] EES and ETIAS [00:52:25] Next Week on the Podcast [00:52:47] Copyright More episodes about going off the beaten path in France

durée : 00:10:47 - Le Fil de l'histoire - par : Stéphanie Duncan - 1940. La IIIème République s'écroule. L'heure est alors à la Résistance et des femmes y participent activement. Le général de Gaulle ne l'oubliera pas : en juin 1942, il affirme qu'après la Libération les femmes et les hommes, sans distinction, éliront une Assemblée nationale souveraine. - invités : Anne-Sarah Bouglé-Moalic - Anne-Sarah Bouglé-Moalic : Historienne - réalisé par : Claire DESTACAMP Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

Hamas agrees to technocrat administration in Gaza Google in $45M PR deal with Netanyahu to promote Israeli hasbara Boat accident in Nigeria leaves at least 60 dead ICE gets Israeli spyware to hack phones Türkiye's new MUGEM carrier to surpass France's Charles de Gaulle

In Karachi, Pakistan's economic capital and largest city, fear has become a commodity. In 2024, Forbes Advisor ranked Karachi as the second-most dangerous city in the world for tourists. Due to the ineffectiveness of law enforcement agencies in curbing this violence, private security companies are thriving and expanding their clientele beyond affluent residential areas to include schools, shopping malls and corporate headquarters. This rapidly expanding and largely unregulated private security sector is turning Karachi's chronic insecurity into a lucrative business. FRANCE 24's Shahzaib Wahlah, Sonia Ghezali and Ondine de Gaulle report.

De la vie tellement connue du général de Gaulle, la période de la Grande Guerre est sans aucun doute la moins connue. Pourtant, tous les traits du personnage s'y trouvent déjà révélés.   Mention légales : Vos données de connexion, dont votre adresse IP, sont traités par Radio Classique, responsable de traitement, sur la base de son intérêt légitime, par l'intermédiaire de son sous-traitant Ausha, à des fins de réalisation de statistiques agréées et de lutte contre la fraude. Ces données sont supprimées en temps réel pour la finalité statistique et sous cinq mois à compter de la collecte à des fins de lutte contre la fraude. Pour plus d'informations sur les traitements réalisés par Radio Classique et exercer vos droits, consultez notre Politique de confidentialité.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Pays démocratique et républicain, la France nourrit un paradoxe : dans la mémoire collective des Français, la figure de l'homme providentiel a une place de choix. Parmi ces hommes et femmes surgissant dans des circonstances souvent exceptionnelles, se trouve Charles De Gaulle. Incarnation de la France libre pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, instigateur de la Ve République en 1958, le Général de Gaulle a, par deux fois, fait figure de sauveur dans notre pays. Comment s'est construit le mythe gaullien de l'homme providentiel ? Pour répondre à cette question, Virginie Girod reçoit l'historien Jean Garrigues. Fin connaisseur de l'histoire de nos institutions, il est président de la commission internationale d'histoire des assemblées, et auteur, notamment, des livres "A la plage avec Charles de Gaulle, l'homme providentiel dans un transat" (Dunod) et "Les Hommes providentiels: Histoire d'une fascination française" (Payot).Au Cœur de l'Histoire est un podcast Europe 1.Présentation : Virginie GirodProduction : Armelle ThibergeRéalisation : Clément IbrahimDiffusion : Estelle LafontComposition du générique : Julien TharaudVisuel : Sidonie ManginHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

8 Minute History ตอนจบของซีรีส์ ‘สงครามฝรั่งเศส-แอลจีเรีย' พาไปเจาะเบื้องหลังการทวงคืนเอกราชของแอลจีเรียจากฝรั่งเศส โดยมีตัวละครสำคัญคือนายพล Charles de Gaulle วีรบุรุษจากช่วงสงครามโลกครั้งที่ 2 ที่ร้างลาจากการเมืองไปถึง 12 ปีเต็มภารกิจหลักของ Charles de Gaulle ในครั้งนี้ คือการหาทางลงที่สวยที่สุดสำหรับทุกฝ่าย โดยวิธีการหลักของเขาคือการใช้ ‘การเมืองนำการทหาร' วิธีการนี้จะได้ผลหรือไม่ บทสรุปสุดท้ายจะลงเอยอย่างไร แล้วอะไรคือบทเรียนและบาดแผลที่ยังคงหลงเหลือมาจนถึงปัจจุบัน หาคำตอบได้ในอีพีนี้

Episode Overview In this episode of The Design Vault, hosts Albert Shum and Thamer Abanami explore the extraordinary story of the Citroën DS, arguably the most audacious automobile ever created. Born from the devastation of post-WWII France, this revolutionary car emerged from an 18-year development odyssey that challenged every automotive convention. With insights from retired Apple and Motorola design leader Tim Parsey, who owned multiple DS models, this episode reveals how a dream team of engineers and designers created a vehicle so advanced it seemed to come from the future. From its magical hydropneumatic suspension to its aerodynamic sculpture-on-wheels aesthetic, the DS completely reimagined what a car could be. Original Air Date: August 26, 2025 Episode Length: 38:31 Hosts: Albert Shum, Thamer Abanami Guest: Tim Parsey (Former Apple, Motorola, Mattel Design Leader)   Key Segments & Timestamps The Context: Post-War France's Design Challenge (00:20 - 03:58) Post-WWII devastation creating space for radical innovation Rough roads, high fuel taxes, and the culture of efficiency Charles de Gaulle's “grandeur” vision driving technological ambition How constraints became catalysts for breakthrough thinking The Automotive Landscape: A World Ripe for Disruption (03:58 - 06:10) American excess era: 42-inch tail fins and chrome measured by weight Germany's people's car philosophy with the Beetle Britain maintaining pre-war conservatism France's strategy to leapfrog rather than catch up Citroën's Culture of Radical Innovation (06:10 - 08:45) André Citroën's front-wheel-drive gamble with the Traction Avant The critical 1934 bankruptcy and Michelin's revolutionary takeover Pierre Boulanger's radical decision: “Keep engineers, fire accountants” The 2CV's parallel development funding DS ambitions The Dream Team (08:45 - 11:50) André Lefebvre: Aeronautical engineer with a backlog of innovations Paul Magès: Self-taught genius behind hydropneumatic suspension Flaminio Bertoni: Italian sculptor turned automotive stylist Why letting creative minds loose is “highly risky but necessary” The 18-Year Development Odyssey (11:50 - 16:21) Simple question: Why improve roads when you can improve cars? Secret development during WWII The hydropneumatic breakthrough: Gas compresses, liquid transmits Systems integration: One technology powering suspension, brakes, steering 40% of build cost invested in hydraulic complexity The Theatrical Launch: Paris 1955 (17:16 - 20:03) Grand Palais transformed into theater The silk sheet drops, crowds gasp 12,000 pre orders—a record until Tesla Model 3 The strategic 500-customer beta program with dedicated engineers Living with Revolutionary Complexity (20:03 - 23:05) The infamous “mushroom brake” and its quirks Tim's near-death experience  “Marking territory with hydraulic fluid” Why the experience had to be driven to be understood The Meditative Magic: What Made DS Special (23:05 - 27:03) “Like gliding around… a meditative experience” Magic carpet ride over speed bumps Why no other manufacturers copied the formula Engineering complexity as competitive moat Evolution and Variants (27:03 - 28:55) From “frog eyes” to swiveling directional headlights (1967) Power progression: DS 19, DS 21, DS 23 Safari wagons, Pallas luxury, SM with Maserati power “Frogs have personality. Fairings don't.” Design Philosophy: Engineering as Art (28:55 - 32:39) Perfect tension between engineering and sculptural beauty Authentic aerodynamics vs. American “rocket ship” styling Three-dimensional airflow management with under-car panels Flush door handles decades before Tesla Interior as Living Room (32:39 - 35:20) Four interior lights creating ambient atmosphere Bench seats and column-mounted gear shifter maximizing space Single-spoke steering wheel for unobstructed view Dashboard-mounted mirror at natural eye level Personal Connection: Tim's First DS Story (35:20 - 38:27) £30 for two broken cars to make one working DS Brilliant engineering: body panels removable with single bolts Digging holes in frozen ground to replace hydraulic lines The devotion that revolutionary design inspires Legacy and Lessons for Modern Innovators (38:27 - 38:31) Showing possibilities people never imagined The courage to exist “outside of time” Why serving people sometimes means ignoring market research Dream teams without financial constraints    Connect With The Design Vault The Design Vault explores iconic products from the innovation-rich 1970s-early 2000s, extracting strategic insights for today's designers, engineers, and business leaders. Each episode combines nostalgic storytelling with actionable lessons for modern product development. Subscribe: Available on all major podcast platforms including Spotify, Apple, and more Follow us: Instagram: @thedesignvaultpodcast, LinkedIn: Thamer Abanami, Albert Shum We'd love to hear your thoughts, episode ideas and feedback via the links above.   Credits Hosts: Albert Shum and Thamer Abanami Guest: Tim Parsey Editor: Rachel James Intro Music: Red Lips Media LLC Brand Design: Rafael Poloni​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Có nên chuyển toàn bộ các chuyến bay quốc tế từ Sân bay Tân Sơn Nhất đến Sân bay Long Thành ngay từ năm 2026? Đó là vấn đề đang gây nhiều tranh cãi tại Việt Nam và nhiều chuyên gia đã bày tỏ sự quan ngại về phương án này.  Công trình xây dựng sân bay quốc tế Long Thành, trên diện tích 5.000 ha, được chia làm ba giai đoạn. Giai đoạn một dự kiến hoàn thành cuối năm nay. Theo kế hoạch dự trù, vào ngày 19/12/2025, chuyến bay “kỹ thuật” đầu tiên cất cánh từ Sân bay Nội Bài, Hà Nội, sẽ hạ cánh xuống đường băng Sân bay Long Thành. Kể từ giữa năm tới, trên nguyên tắc sân bay quốc tế mới này sẽ được đưa vào hoạt động, trước mắt là với công suất 25 triệu lượt khách và 1,2 triệu tấn hàng hóa mỗi năm. Sân bay sau khi hoàn tất giai đoạn đầu được được mô tả là “với hạ tầng hiện đại, nhà ga rộng, công nghệ tự động hóa và luồng di chuyển thông thoáng”. Tổng công ty Cảng Hàng không Việt Nam (ACV) đã đề ra hai phương án: Hoặc là chuyển toàn bộ chuyến bay quốc tế về Long Thành ngay từ 2026, hoặc chỉ dời các đường bay quốc tế dài, giữ lại các chặng ngắn ở Tân Sơn Nhất. Theo báo chí Việt Nam, Cục Hàng không Việt Nam và nhiều hãng bay quốc tế cũng “cơ bản nhất trí” với phương án tập trung toàn bộ chuyến bay quốc tế về Long Thành, cho rằng như vậy sẽ “thuận tiện quản lý, tối ưu nguồn lực*. Vị trí của Sân bay Long Thành được cho là “thuận lợi hơn” vì nằm tách biệt với khu dân cư, không phải hạn chế giờ bay và sẽ được kết nối bằng các đường cao tốc, đường vành đai và trong tương lai sẽ có các tuyến metro. Nhưng vấn đề là hiện giờ mạng lưới giao thông đó hầu như chưa có và như vậy việc tập trung toàn bộ chuyến bay quốc tế về Long Thành ngay từ giữa năm 2026 sẽ đặt ra nhiều vấn đề về di chuyển đối với hành khách, nhất là vào những giờ cao điểm. Nhiều chuyên gia đã bày tỏ quan ngại về phương án này, trong đó có kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn, hiện là Chủ tịch NgoViet Architects & Planners và có trên 30 năm kinh nghiệm quốc tế về tư vấn thiết kế, quy hoạch kiến trúc tại châu Á và Bắc Mỹ. Theo quan điểm của kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn, Sân bay Long Thành chưa thể tiếp nhận ngay toàn bộ hay phần lớn các chuyến bay quốc tế, mà vai trò của sân bay này nên được nâng dần lên theo từng bước cho đến khi có đầy đủ cơ sở hạ tầng giao thông cần thiết. Sau đây mời quý vị nghe bài phỏng vấn qua điện thoại với kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Xin kính chào kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn, xin cám ơn ông đã nhận trả lời phỏng vấn. Trước hết ông có đánh giá như thế nào về vị trí và tiềm năng của Sân bay Long Thành? KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Long Thành có một vị trí chiến lược tốt, bởi vì Sân bay Long Thành phục vụ cho cả vùng đô thị thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, chứ không phải chỉ riêng thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Trong tương quan với những khu vực trọng điểm như là khu trung tâm của các tỉnh thành lân cận thành phố Hồ Chí Minh: Bình Dương, Đồng Nai, Bà Rịa - Vũng Tàu, cũng như các hạ tầng trọng điểm như Cụm cảng biển Thị Vải - Cái Mép - Cần Giờ, cùng trung tâm đường sắt ở phía Bình Dương, v.v…, tôi nghĩ rằng đây là một vị trí chiến lược tốt. Sân bay cũng nằm cách trung tâm nội thành Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh trong một khoảng cách có thể nói là lý tưởng, khoảng 40km, không quá xa và sân bay có quỹ đất rộng. Thưa ông, có hai phương án đang được đặt ra cho năm 2026: Hoặc là dồn toàn bộ các chuyến bay quốc tế đến Sân bay Long Thành, hoặc là chỉ chuyển những chuyến bay đường dài đến Long Thành và những chuyến bay đường ngắn thì tạm thời vẫn để ở Tân Sơn Nhất. Về các hệ thống giao thông để mà kết nối sân bay Long Thành với Sài Gòn chẳng hạn thì ông thấy hiện nay họ đang tiến hành như thế nào?  KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Các nhà quản lý mong là sẽ đưa sân bay Long Thành vào hoạt động cuối năm nay hoặc là đầu năm sau. Tuy nhiên, có vẻ như là những dự án kết nối hạ tầng, kết nối vùng không theo kịp với tiến độ này. Hai phương án mà ACV đưa ra: Một là chuyển toàn bộ tuyến quốc tế về Long Thành và hai là chỉ chuyển những tuyến đường dài về Long Thành và giữ lại những tuyến đường ngắn lại cho Tân Sơn Nhất và cả hai sân bay đều có tuyến bay quốc nội. Tôi nghĩ rằng hai phương án này cũng chỉ hướng đến mục tiêu ngắn hạn thôi, bởi vì chúng ta phải nhìn đến với mục tiêu dài hạn là hướng đến đích đến, khi mà hoàn thành đúng như kỳ vọng và đúng như quy hoạch, Long Thành sẽ là một sân bay tầm cỡ quốc tế hàng đầu của siêu đô thị Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Mình nói siêu đô thị là bởi vì Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh đã rất là lớn, quy mô đã trên 10 triệu dân và vừa rồi Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh nay sáp nhập với tỉnh Bình Dương và tỉnh Bà Rịa Vũng Tàu, tăng quy mô đô thị lên gấp ba và dân số lên gấp rưỡi. Như vậy, Sân bay Long Thành phục vụ cho cả một vùng đô thị Nam Bộ rộng lớn phía Nam, trong đó Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh là trung tâm. Như vậy, nhìn đến kỳ vọng tương lai, khi đó sân bay Long Thành có thể được ví như sân bay Charles de Gaulle của Paris với những tuyến quốc tế đường dài và hạ tầng của nó thì không chỉ có đường bộ, đường cao tốc, mà có cả kết nối metro, kết nối đường sắt cao tốc, giống như TGV của Pháp, đến sân bay Long Thành. Bên cạnh đó là khu vực xung quanh sân bay Long Thành sẽ hình thành như là một đô thị sân bay ( Airport City ). Giữa Sân bay Long Thành và Cụm Cảng Thị Vải - Cái Mép - Cần Giờ còn có khu thương mại tự do quốc tế đang được dự tính xây dựng, một phần là sẽ thuộc Đồng Nai, một phần sẽ thuộc Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.  Viễn cảnh xa là như vậy, nhưng trước mắt, nếu chúng ta đưa nó vào sử dụng, cho là đầu năm sau đi, thì rõ ràng là hạ tầng kết nối không kịp xây dựng. Đứng về góc độ khoa học, chúng ta có thể thấy rất rõ là việc nóng vội đưa tất cả những tuyến bay quốc tế về đây sẽ không hiệu quả, sẽ làm giảm giá trị của cả Long Thành lẫn Tân Sơn nhất. Tức là cả hai sân bay đều không hoạt động được tốt. Trước mắt, nếu muốn đưa sân bay Long Thành sớm sử dụng đó, tôi vẫn thấy phương án hai có lẽ là khả thi hơn, mặc dù là trong tương lai, Sân bay Long Thành sẽ đóng một vai trò quan trọng hàng đầu tại Việt Nam, lúc đó Tân Sơn Nhất sẽ đóng vai trò thứ yếu. Nhưng sang năm thì tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta hãy nhìn vào thực tế: vẫn nên để Tân Sơn Nhất quan trọng hơn Long Thành trong ngắn hạn. Bởi vì, với một siêu đô thị như Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh mà hoạt động hiện giờ là khách quốc tế ra vào và khách quốc nội đi và đến sân bay Tân Sơn Nhất, thì không nên vì mong muốn thúc đẩy phát triển Long Thành khi nó chưa có đủ điều kiện mà làm hại đến sự nghiệp chung. Vâng, tức là có nguy cơ nó sẽ gây khó khăn cho các hãng hàng không quốc tế  tức là hành khách của những chuyến bay quốc tế dài tới Long Thành muốn kết nối với Sân bay Tân Sơn nhất để đi các chuyến nội địa thì gặp tình trạng là đường xá của mình không phục vụ kịp. KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Chắc chắn rồi. Chúng tôi cũng đi nước ngoài thường xuyên. Sân bay quốc tế nào cũng vậy thôi, kết nối quốc nội với quốc tế phải thuận tiện. Hiện giờ người ta đang mong muốn Long Thành trở thành như là một "hub" về hàng không, sẽ là nơi tập trung những chuyến bay đường dài đi Châu Mỹ, đi Châu Âu, đi Châu Úc, vân vân… và sẽ có những chuyến quốc nội và quốc tế đến và gom khách ở đây. Dần dần sẽ có những chuyến bay thẳng của máy bay Boeing và Airbus rất lớn. Nhưng chúng ta phải nhìn nhận là hiện giờ Long Thành chưa phải là hub. Muốn trở thành hub thì cần điều kiện là hạ tầng kết nối phải rất là tốt. Bên cạnh đó, các hãng hàng không của Việt Nam, ít ra là hai hãng Vietnam Airlines và Vietjet, phải vươn lên tầm quốc tế, giống như Singapore Airlines hay là Japan Airlines, lúc đó nó mới trở thành là một thực tế. Như vậy là việc chuyến các chuyến bay quốc tế đến Long Thành là tùy thuộc vào khả năng tiếp nhận của sân bay. Khi nào thì Sân bay Long thành mới có thể đạt được mục tiêu đó? KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Tôi nhìn đến một kịch bản là mình tăng dần dần tầm quan trọng của Long Thành. Có thể là bước một sẽ có một số tuyến quốc tế và giai đoạn đầu có thể tập trung nhiều hơn cho hoạt động vận chuyển hàng hóa, tức là chuyển toàn bộ hoạt động vận chuyển hàng hóa, hay sửa chữa bảo dưỡng máy bay của Tân Sơn Nhất về Long Thành. Bước một thì có thể chấp nhận là Tân Sơn nhất vẫn quan trọng hơn Long Thành. Bước hai là khi bắt đầu có những kết nối hệ thống phục vụ cho Sân bay Long Thành, không chỉ là giao thông xung quanh sân bay, mà cả kết nối đến các tỉnh thành ở trong vùng Nam Bộ, bởi vì một  sân bay như Long Thành phục vụ cho cả một vùng đô thị rộng lớn, chứ không phải chỉ một hai tỉnh thành. Bước hai là khi chúng ta có kết nối ít nhất là đường bộ cao tốc nối đến các tỉnh thành, những hệ thống vành đai 1,2,3,4 của Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh hoàn thành những kết nối trực tiếp, như là đường Long Thành - Dầu Giây, được mở rộng ra để không ách tắc. Và có thể thêm được hai tuyến metro quan trọng. Thứ nhất là tuyến Metro trực tiếp từ Thủ Thiêm chạy thẳng lên Long Thành và thứ hai là kéo dài  tuyến Metro số 1 lên Biên Hòa từ Biên Hòa xuống Long Thành. Có nghĩa là sân bay này sẽ được phục vụ bởi hai tuyến metro từ nội thành Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Lúc đó mình mới nên bàn đến việc chuyển đa số những tuyến quốc tế, đường ngắn và đường dài, về Long Thành.  Bước ba thì xa hơn thế. Lúc đó Long Thành không chỉ là một sân bay, không chỉ là một điểm trung chuyển, mà có thể trở thành điểm đến theo mô hình thế kỷ 21 của thế giới, đó là đô thị sân bay. Về đô thị sân bay, tôi có đi thăm và làm việc với các đồng nghiệp ở sân bay Charles de Gaulle, họ có đưa lên khu đô thị sân bay của Paris. Sân bay Changi của Singapore, hay sân bay Schiphol ở Amsterdam thì đi khá xa với mô hình đô thị sân bay. Đến đó chúng ta thấy sân bay trở thành một điểm đến hấp dẫn. Khi hạ cánh xuống người ta có thể lựa chọn ở lại sân bay, có khách sạn, có căn hộ, rồi có dịch vụ thương mại, thậm chí là công viên giải trí. Bước ba thì Long Thành sẽ trở thành thứ nhất là một đô thị sân bay. Thứ hai là khu thương mại tự do kết nối với Long Thành, kết nối với Cụm cảng biển Thị Vải - Cái Mép - Cần Giờ, trở thành cũng là một điểm đến hấp dẫn. Lúc đó nó mới thật sự là kỳ vọng mà chúng ta đang mong muốn cho Long Thành. Tóm lại, trong ba bước này, tầm quan trọng của Long Thành sẽ tăng dần dần. Nhưng tôi muốn nhấn mạnh là ở bước một, hãy khoan thúc đẩy nó ở một vai trò quá quan trọng so với năng lực hạ tầng của nó. Trong bước một thì có thể khai trương, đưa Sân bay Long Thành vào sử dụng, nhưng ở bước một này, nó không thể quan trọng hơn Tân Sơn Nhất được.

Có nên chuyển toàn bộ các chuyến bay quốc tế từ Sân bay Tân Sơn Nhất đến Sân bay Long Thành ngay từ năm 2026? Đó là vấn đề đang gây nhiều tranh cãi tại Việt Nam và nhiều chuyên gia đã bày tỏ sự quan ngại về phương án này.  Công trình xây dựng sân bay quốc tế Long Thành, trên diện tích 5.000 ha, được chia làm ba giai đoạn. Giai đoạn một dự kiến hoàn thành cuối năm nay. Theo kế hoạch dự trù, vào ngày 19/12/2025, chuyến bay “kỹ thuật” đầu tiên cất cánh từ Sân bay Nội Bài, Hà Nội, sẽ hạ cánh xuống đường băng Sân bay Long Thành. Kể từ giữa năm tới, trên nguyên tắc sân bay quốc tế mới này sẽ được đưa vào hoạt động, trước mắt là với công suất 25 triệu lượt khách và 1,2 triệu tấn hàng hóa mỗi năm. Sân bay sau khi hoàn tất giai đoạn đầu được được mô tả là “với hạ tầng hiện đại, nhà ga rộng, công nghệ tự động hóa và luồng di chuyển thông thoáng”. Tổng công ty Cảng Hàng không Việt Nam (ACV) đã đề ra hai phương án: Hoặc là chuyển toàn bộ chuyến bay quốc tế về Long Thành ngay từ 2026, hoặc chỉ dời các đường bay quốc tế dài, giữ lại các chặng ngắn ở Tân Sơn Nhất. Theo báo chí Việt Nam, Cục Hàng không Việt Nam và nhiều hãng bay quốc tế cũng “cơ bản nhất trí” với phương án tập trung toàn bộ chuyến bay quốc tế về Long Thành, cho rằng như vậy sẽ “thuận tiện quản lý, tối ưu nguồn lực*. Vị trí của Sân bay Long Thành được cho là “thuận lợi hơn” vì nằm tách biệt với khu dân cư, không phải hạn chế giờ bay và sẽ được kết nối bằng các đường cao tốc, đường vành đai và trong tương lai sẽ có các tuyến metro. Nhưng vấn đề là hiện giờ mạng lưới giao thông đó hầu như chưa có và như vậy việc tập trung toàn bộ chuyến bay quốc tế về Long Thành ngay từ giữa năm 2026 sẽ đặt ra nhiều vấn đề về di chuyển đối với hành khách, nhất là vào những giờ cao điểm. Nhiều chuyên gia đã bày tỏ quan ngại về phương án này, trong đó có kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn, hiện là Chủ tịch NgoViet Architects & Planners và có trên 30 năm kinh nghiệm quốc tế về tư vấn thiết kế, quy hoạch kiến trúc tại châu Á và Bắc Mỹ. Theo quan điểm của kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn, Sân bay Long Thành chưa thể tiếp nhận ngay toàn bộ hay phần lớn các chuyến bay quốc tế, mà vai trò của sân bay này nên được nâng dần lên theo từng bước cho đến khi có đầy đủ cơ sở hạ tầng giao thông cần thiết. Sau đây mời quý vị nghe bài phỏng vấn qua điện thoại với kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Xin kính chào kiến trúc sư Ngô Viết Nam Sơn, xin cám ơn ông đã nhận trả lời phỏng vấn. Trước hết ông có đánh giá như thế nào về vị trí và tiềm năng của Sân bay Long Thành? KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Long Thành có một vị trí chiến lược tốt, bởi vì Sân bay Long Thành phục vụ cho cả vùng đô thị thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, chứ không phải chỉ riêng thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Trong tương quan với những khu vực trọng điểm như là khu trung tâm của các tỉnh thành lân cận thành phố Hồ Chí Minh: Bình Dương, Đồng Nai, Bà Rịa - Vũng Tàu, cũng như các hạ tầng trọng điểm như Cụm cảng biển Thị Vải - Cái Mép - Cần Giờ, cùng trung tâm đường sắt ở phía Bình Dương, v.v…, tôi nghĩ rằng đây là một vị trí chiến lược tốt. Sân bay cũng nằm cách trung tâm nội thành Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh trong một khoảng cách có thể nói là lý tưởng, khoảng 40km, không quá xa và sân bay có quỹ đất rộng. Thưa ông, có hai phương án đang được đặt ra cho năm 2026: Hoặc là dồn toàn bộ các chuyến bay quốc tế đến Sân bay Long Thành, hoặc là chỉ chuyển những chuyến bay đường dài đến Long Thành và những chuyến bay đường ngắn thì tạm thời vẫn để ở Tân Sơn Nhất. Về các hệ thống giao thông để mà kết nối sân bay Long Thành với Sài Gòn chẳng hạn thì ông thấy hiện nay họ đang tiến hành như thế nào?  KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Các nhà quản lý mong là sẽ đưa sân bay Long Thành vào hoạt động cuối năm nay hoặc là đầu năm sau. Tuy nhiên, có vẻ như là những dự án kết nối hạ tầng, kết nối vùng không theo kịp với tiến độ này. Hai phương án mà ACV đưa ra: Một là chuyển toàn bộ tuyến quốc tế về Long Thành và hai là chỉ chuyển những tuyến đường dài về Long Thành và giữ lại những tuyến đường ngắn lại cho Tân Sơn Nhất và cả hai sân bay đều có tuyến bay quốc nội. Tôi nghĩ rằng hai phương án này cũng chỉ hướng đến mục tiêu ngắn hạn thôi, bởi vì chúng ta phải nhìn đến với mục tiêu dài hạn là hướng đến đích đến, khi mà hoàn thành đúng như kỳ vọng và đúng như quy hoạch, Long Thành sẽ là một sân bay tầm cỡ quốc tế hàng đầu của siêu đô thị Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Mình nói siêu đô thị là bởi vì Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh đã rất là lớn, quy mô đã trên 10 triệu dân và vừa rồi Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh nay sáp nhập với tỉnh Bình Dương và tỉnh Bà Rịa Vũng Tàu, tăng quy mô đô thị lên gấp ba và dân số lên gấp rưỡi. Như vậy, Sân bay Long Thành phục vụ cho cả một vùng đô thị Nam Bộ rộng lớn phía Nam, trong đó Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh là trung tâm. Như vậy, nhìn đến kỳ vọng tương lai, khi đó sân bay Long Thành có thể được ví như sân bay Charles de Gaulle của Paris với những tuyến quốc tế đường dài và hạ tầng của nó thì không chỉ có đường bộ, đường cao tốc, mà có cả kết nối metro, kết nối đường sắt cao tốc, giống như TGV của Pháp, đến sân bay Long Thành. Bên cạnh đó là khu vực xung quanh sân bay Long Thành sẽ hình thành như là một đô thị sân bay ( Airport City ). Giữa Sân bay Long Thành và Cụm Cảng Thị Vải - Cái Mép - Cần Giờ còn có khu thương mại tự do quốc tế đang được dự tính xây dựng, một phần là sẽ thuộc Đồng Nai, một phần sẽ thuộc Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.  Viễn cảnh xa là như vậy, nhưng trước mắt, nếu chúng ta đưa nó vào sử dụng, cho là đầu năm sau đi, thì rõ ràng là hạ tầng kết nối không kịp xây dựng. Đứng về góc độ khoa học, chúng ta có thể thấy rất rõ là việc nóng vội đưa tất cả những tuyến bay quốc tế về đây sẽ không hiệu quả, sẽ làm giảm giá trị của cả Long Thành lẫn Tân Sơn nhất. Tức là cả hai sân bay đều không hoạt động được tốt. Trước mắt, nếu muốn đưa sân bay Long Thành sớm sử dụng đó, tôi vẫn thấy phương án hai có lẽ là khả thi hơn, mặc dù là trong tương lai, Sân bay Long Thành sẽ đóng một vai trò quan trọng hàng đầu tại Việt Nam, lúc đó Tân Sơn Nhất sẽ đóng vai trò thứ yếu. Nhưng sang năm thì tôi nghĩ rằng chúng ta hãy nhìn vào thực tế: vẫn nên để Tân Sơn Nhất quan trọng hơn Long Thành trong ngắn hạn. Bởi vì, với một siêu đô thị như Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh mà hoạt động hiện giờ là khách quốc tế ra vào và khách quốc nội đi và đến sân bay Tân Sơn Nhất, thì không nên vì mong muốn thúc đẩy phát triển Long Thành khi nó chưa có đủ điều kiện mà làm hại đến sự nghiệp chung. Vâng, tức là có nguy cơ nó sẽ gây khó khăn cho các hãng hàng không quốc tế  tức là hành khách của những chuyến bay quốc tế dài tới Long Thành muốn kết nối với Sân bay Tân Sơn nhất để đi các chuyến nội địa thì gặp tình trạng là đường xá của mình không phục vụ kịp. KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Chắc chắn rồi. Chúng tôi cũng đi nước ngoài thường xuyên. Sân bay quốc tế nào cũng vậy thôi, kết nối quốc nội với quốc tế phải thuận tiện. Hiện giờ người ta đang mong muốn Long Thành trở thành như là một "hub" về hàng không, sẽ là nơi tập trung những chuyến bay đường dài đi Châu Mỹ, đi Châu Âu, đi Châu Úc, vân vân… và sẽ có những chuyến quốc nội và quốc tế đến và gom khách ở đây. Dần dần sẽ có những chuyến bay thẳng của máy bay Boeing và Airbus rất lớn. Nhưng chúng ta phải nhìn nhận là hiện giờ Long Thành chưa phải là hub. Muốn trở thành hub thì cần điều kiện là hạ tầng kết nối phải rất là tốt. Bên cạnh đó, các hãng hàng không của Việt Nam, ít ra là hai hãng Vietnam Airlines và Vietjet, phải vươn lên tầm quốc tế, giống như Singapore Airlines hay là Japan Airlines, lúc đó nó mới trở thành là một thực tế. Như vậy là việc chuyến các chuyến bay quốc tế đến Long Thành là tùy thuộc vào khả năng tiếp nhận của sân bay. Khi nào thì Sân bay Long thành mới có thể đạt được mục tiêu đó? KTS Ngô Viết Nam Sơn: Tôi nhìn đến một kịch bản là mình tăng dần dần tầm quan trọng của Long Thành. Có thể là bước một sẽ có một số tuyến quốc tế và giai đoạn đầu có thể tập trung nhiều hơn cho hoạt động vận chuyển hàng hóa, tức là chuyển toàn bộ hoạt động vận chuyển hàng hóa, hay sửa chữa bảo dưỡng máy bay của Tân Sơn Nhất về Long Thành. Bước một thì có thể chấp nhận là Tân Sơn nhất vẫn quan trọng hơn Long Thành. Bước hai là khi bắt đầu có những kết nối hệ thống phục vụ cho Sân bay Long Thành, không chỉ là giao thông xung quanh sân bay, mà cả kết nối đến các tỉnh thành ở trong vùng Nam Bộ, bởi vì một  sân bay như Long Thành phục vụ cho cả một vùng đô thị rộng lớn, chứ không phải chỉ một hai tỉnh thành. Bước hai là khi chúng ta có kết nối ít nhất là đường bộ cao tốc nối đến các tỉnh thành, những hệ thống vành đai 1,2,3,4 của Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh hoàn thành những kết nối trực tiếp, như là đường Long Thành - Dầu Giây, được mở rộng ra để không ách tắc. Và có thể thêm được hai tuyến metro quan trọng. Thứ nhất là tuyến Metro trực tiếp từ Thủ Thiêm chạy thẳng lên Long Thành và thứ hai là kéo dài  tuyến Metro số 1 lên Biên Hòa từ Biên Hòa xuống Long Thành. Có nghĩa là sân bay này sẽ được phục vụ bởi hai tuyến metro từ nội thành Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh. Lúc đó mình mới nên bàn đến việc chuyển đa số những tuyến quốc tế, đường ngắn và đường dài, về Long Thành.  Bước ba thì xa hơn thế. Lúc đó Long Thành không chỉ là một sân bay, không chỉ là một điểm trung chuyển, mà có thể trở thành điểm đến theo mô hình thế kỷ 21 của thế giới, đó là đô thị sân bay. Về đô thị sân bay, tôi có đi thăm và làm việc với các đồng nghiệp ở sân bay Charles de Gaulle, họ có đưa lên khu đô thị sân bay của Paris. Sân bay Changi của Singapore, hay sân bay Schiphol ở Amsterdam thì đi khá xa với mô hình đô thị sân bay. Đến đó chúng ta thấy sân bay trở thành một điểm đến hấp dẫn. Khi hạ cánh xuống người ta có thể lựa chọn ở lại sân bay, có khách sạn, có căn hộ, rồi có dịch vụ thương mại, thậm chí là công viên giải trí. Bước ba thì Long Thành sẽ trở thành thứ nhất là một đô thị sân bay. Thứ hai là khu thương mại tự do kết nối với Long Thành, kết nối với Cụm cảng biển Thị Vải - Cái Mép - Cần Giờ, trở thành cũng là một điểm đến hấp dẫn. Lúc đó nó mới thật sự là kỳ vọng mà chúng ta đang mong muốn cho Long Thành. Tóm lại, trong ba bước này, tầm quan trọng của Long Thành sẽ tăng dần dần. Nhưng tôi muốn nhấn mạnh là ở bước một, hãy khoan thúc đẩy nó ở một vai trò quá quan trọng so với năng lực hạ tầng của nó. Trong bước một thì có thể khai trương, đưa Sân bay Long Thành vào sử dụng, nhưng ở bước một này, nó không thể quan trọng hơn Tân Sơn Nhất được.

Henry Kissinger "Riigijuhid. Kuus vaadet strateegilisele riigijuhtimisele" kirjastuselt Varrak. Tutvustab Timo Tarve. Selle nädala raamat on tõeline kingitus kõigile, kes tunnevad huvi maailmapoliitika vastu. Henry Kissinger kirjutab oma raamatus lahti Margaret Thatcheri, Charles de Gaulle'i ja veel mitme riigijuhi tegevuse ning erinevad strateegiad.

Vous aimez notre peau de caste ? Soutenez-nous ! https://www.lenouvelespritpublic.fr/abonnementUne émission de Philippe Meyer, enregistrée au studio l'Arrière-boutique le 23 janvier 2025.Avec cette semaine :Jean-Louis Bourlanges, essayiste.Raphaël Doan, essayiste, haut fonctionnaire.Antoine Foucher, spécialiste des questions sociales, auteur de Sortir du travail qui ne paie plus.Richard Werly, correspondant à Paris du quotidien helvétique en ligne Blick.frÉmission originellement diffusée le 23 février 2025.LE RÉFÉRENDUM, À QUOI ÇA SERT ?Lors de son allocution à l'occasion des vœux de fin d'année, le président de la République a émis l'idée de recourir à un ou des référendums à propos de certains « sujets déterminants ». Il s'inscrit ainsi dans la lignée de ses déclarations précédentes, puisqu'il avait déjà proposé de recourir à cet outil au moment de la crise des Gilets Jaunes. L'annonce d'un potentiel recours au peuple par ce biais a suscité de nombreux commentaires, à gauche comme à droite. Le Rassemblement National défend de longue date la tenue d'un référendum sur les questions migratoires, tandis qu'une partie de la gauche souhaite que ce soit la réforme des retraites qui fasse l'objet d'une consultation. Le président (Insoumis) de la Commission des Finances de l'Assemblée nationale, Éric Coquerel, a quant à lui suggéré que soit organisé un « référendum révocatoire » qui remettrait en jeu le mandat du président de la République.Historiquement, la question du référendum est indissociable de la figure du général de Gaulle, dont la pratique régulière des consultations populaires s'est terminée par sa démission après l'échec de son projet de réforme régionale et du Sénat. Cette défaite, combinée au rejet en 2005 du projet de constitution européenne, ont contribué à raréfier la pratique du référendum dont la perception a également été modifiée : instrument permettant de dénouer les conflits pour les uns, il est présenté par les autres comme l'outil populiste par excellence, puisqu'il a pour fonction de faire appel directement au peuple dont la volonté serait supposément mal comprise par les élites. Ses détracteurs attaquent en outre son manichéisme et la personnalisation du pouvoir qu'il entraîne, un référendum sur une question se trouvant bien souvent assimilé à un plébiscite pour ou contre celui l'ayant proposé.Dans le climat politique français actuel, la question du gouvernement par référendum se pose avec d'autant plus d'acuité qu'Emmanuel Macron ne dispose pas de la majorité absolue à l'Assemblée. Proposer des référendums lui permettrait alors de faire passer des textes sans passer par la représentation nationale. De l'autre côté, une défaite l'exposerait à l'intensification des appels à sa démission, approfondissant un peu plus la crise politique ouverte par la dissolution de juin dernier. Cette proposition est donc loin de faire l'unanimité au sein même de la majorité présidentielle. Dans un entretien publié en 2017 dans la revue Esprit, le philosophe Bernard Manin diagnostiquait le passage d'une démocratie de partis à une démocratie du public, dans laquelle « les différents segments de la population ne se reconnaissent plus durablement dans les partis, mais peuvent se regrouper momentanément pour produire le succès ou l'échec de l'un d'entre eux ». En creux, le référendum apparaît comme un moyen d'outrepasser ces divisions en forçant une adhésion claire. Subsiste cependant le risque d'une alliance des contraires qui ferait échouer les projets présidentiels.Chaque semaine, Philippe Meyer anime une conversation d'analyse politique, argumentée et courtoise, sur des thèmes nationaux et internationaux liés à l'actualité. Pour en savoir plus : www.lenouvelespritpublic.frHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Aunque parezca mentira con todo lo que está cayendo, Emmanuel Macron mira el futuro con algo de optimismo. La coyuntura internacional se ha puesto muy interesante para sus intereses y, en general para los de las élites políticas francesas. Estas élites llevan años tratando de transformar la Unión Europea en una potencia autónoma inspirada en el modelo francés. Francia ve en acontecimientos tales como la guerra de Ucrania, los aranceles de Trump o la emergencia de China como potencia mundial una oportunidad para consolidar su idea de una Europa soberana, un sueño que Charles de Gaulle promovió en los años 60 para liberar al continente del dominio de las superpotencias de la Guerra Fría. Desde entonces, todos los presidentes franceses han defendido esta autonomía estratégica, que ahora ha ganado apoyo en otros países europeos. Macron impulsa una UE que refleje los valores franceses: proteccionismo económico, independencia de EEUU y gasto público sin restricciones. Esto se refleja en sus propuestas para el rearme europeo, especialmente tras la presión de Trump para que los países de la OTAN destinen un 5% de su PIB a defensa. Mientras muchos países europeos tratan de adquirir armas rápidamente, también de proveedores externos a la UE como EEUU, el Reino Unido o Corea del Sur, Francia insiste en priorizar su industria de defensa mediante fondos europeos como el de Acción de Seguridad para Europa que asciende a 150.000 millones de euros. Francia ha logrado limitar el uso de estos fondos a empresas de la UE, excluyendo de paso a fabricantes británicos y restringiendo compras a empresas no europeas, lo que ha generado tensiones con otros Estados miembros que buscan una mayor flexibilidad. Francia justifica esta postura arguyendo que Europa debe ser independiente de EEUU, al que ya no se le puede considerar como un aliado fiable. Pero otros países europeos, especialmente los del este, tienen la necesidad de adquirir armas de inmediato, también de proveedores lejanos como Corea del Sur, y consideran al Reino Unido un aliado cercano, sobre todo desde que Keir Starmer se convirtió en primer ministro. El hecho es que Francia tiene problemas económicos graves: una deuda pública que alcanzará pronto el 120% del PIB, la mayor presión fiscal de la UE y una reciente degradación de su calificación crediticia. Macron propone financiar el gasto militar y social mediante deuda conjunta europea, evitando así subir los impuestos en Francia. Esta estrategia, que busca exportar el modelo económico francés a la UE, es una forma de mutualizar riesgos y subvencionar la industria nacional, lo que genera resistencia en la Europa central y oriental, donde ven el proteccionismo francés como un obstáculo. Macron quiere recrear el eje franco-alemán. Tienta al canciller Friedrich Merz con el paraguas nuclear francés a cambio de aceptar más deuda conjunta y relajar las reglas fiscales de la eurozona. Alemania, con una economía estancada y muchas presiones internas, podría mostrarse abierta a esa alianza, pero esto preocupa a otros países, que ven un precedente en el acuerdo de 1990 entre Mitterrand y Kohl que condujo al euro. El euro fue beneficioso en tanto extendió la disciplina monetaria alemana a toda Europa. Esta vez es al contrario, se trata de imponer la indisciplina presupuestaria francesa a todo el continente, lo que podría dividir aún más a la UE y debilitarla frente a potencias como Rusia, China o EEUU. En La ContraRéplica: 0:00 Introducción 4:01 A la medida de Francia 30:24 Barreras no arancelarias 35:02 El avispero de Gaza 41:42 El armisticio en Ucrania · Canal de Telegram: https://t.me/lacontracronica · “Contra la Revolución Francesa”… https://amzn.to/4aF0LpZ · “Hispanos. Breve historia de los pueblos de habla hispana”… https://amzn.to/428js1G · “La ContraHistoria de España. Auge, caída y vuelta a empezar de un país en 28 episodios”… https://amzn.to/3kXcZ6i · “Lutero, Calvino y Trento, la Reforma que no fue”… https://amzn.to/3shKOlK · “La ContraHistoria del comunismo”… https://amzn.to/39QP2KE Apoya La Contra en: · Patreon... https://www.patreon.com/diazvillanueva · iVoox... https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-contracronica_sq_f1267769_1.html · Paypal... https://www.paypal.me/diazvillanueva Sígueme en: · Web... https://diazvillanueva.com · Twitter... https://twitter.com/diazvillanueva · Facebook... https://www.facebook.com/fernandodiazvillanueva1/ · Instagram... https://www.instagram.com/diazvillanueva · Linkedin… https://www.linkedin.com/in/fernando-d%C3%ADaz-villanueva-7303865/ · Flickr... https://www.flickr.com/photos/147276463@N05/?/ · Pinterest... https://www.pinterest.com/fernandodiazvillanueva Encuentra mis libros en: · Amazon... https://www.amazon.es/Fernando-Diaz-Villanueva/e/B00J2ASBXM #FernandoDiazVillanueva #unioneuropea #francia Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Na decennialang gesteggel over en weer heeft de Britse regering heeft eindelijk een klap gegeven op de bouw van een derde aanvliegroute voor Heathrow. Schiphol heeft zes landingsbanen, Charles de Gaulle in Parijs heeft er vier, maar Heathrow, Europa’s drukste luchthaven moet het met twee landingsbanen doen. Hoog tijd dus voor uitbreiding, maar wie zegt dat het er deze keer dan echt van gaat komen? En we kunnen er niet omheen, ook prins Andrew komt ter sprake. Want als de Britten prins Andrew bijna vergeten zijn, duikt het pikzwarte schaap van de koninklijke familie weer op. Dit keer in de vorm van een nieuwe biografie over hem die donderdag naar buitenkomt. In Entitled: The rise and fall of the house of York'', wordt in detail geschreven over onder andere zijn relatie met zijn ex-vrouw, zijn extravagante levensstijl, en niet geheel onverwacht, zijn dubieuze vriendschap kindermisbruiker Jeffrey Epstein. De pers smult ervan, lezers kunnen niet wachten tot het eindelijk donderdag is maar of ze op Buckingham Palace ook een exemplaar zullen aanschaffen, is nog maar de vraag. Ook in deze aflevering We hadden het vorige week over Palestine Action, een organisatie die door de Britse regering is aangemerkt als een terreurgroep. Volgens veel Britten 'Volledig onterecht'. Honderden mensen demonstreerden afgelopen zaterdag in Londen tegen het verbod op die groep. Ruim 500 actievoerders werden gearresteerd waarvan de helft 60 jaar en ouder. Het weerhoudt actievoerders niet om de Londense straten op te zoeken - meer demonstraties dreigen. En dus ook meer druk op Starmer van politie, politiek en publiek om het verbod op Palestine Action in te trekken. Over Van Bekhovens Britten In van Bekhovens Britten praten Lia van Bekhoven en Connor Clerx elke week over de grootste nieuwsonderwerpen en de belangrijkste ontwikkelingen in het Verenigd Koninkrijk. Van Brexit naar binnenlandse politiek, van de Royals tot de tabloids. Waarom fascineert het VK Nederlanders meer dan zo veel andere Europese landen? Welke rol speelt het vooralsnog Verenigd Koninkrijk in Europa, nu het woord Brexit uit het Britse leven lijkt verbannen, maar de gevolgen van de beslissing om uit de EU te stappen iedere dag duidelijker worden? De Britse monarchie, en daarmee de staat, staat voor grote veranderingen na de dood van Queen Elisabeth en de kroning van haar zoon Charles. De populariteit van het Koningshuis staat op een dieptepunt. Hoe verandert de Britse monarchie onder koning Charles, en welke gevolgen heeft dat voor de Gemenebest? In Van Bekhovens Britten analyseren Lia en Connor een Koninkrijk met tanende welvaart, invloed en macht. De Conservatieve Partij leverde veertien jaar op rij de premier, maar nu heeft Labour onder Keir Starmer de teugels in handen. Hoe ziet het VK er onder Keir Starmer uit? En hoe gaan de ‘gewone’ Britten, voor zover die bestaan, daar mee om? Al deze vragen en meer komen aan bod in Van Bekhovens Britten. Een kritische blik op het Verenigd Koninkrijk, waar het een race tussen Noord-Ierland en Schotland lijkt te worden wie zich het eerst af kan scheiden van het VK. Hoe lang blijft het Koninkrijk verenigd? Na ruim 45 jaar onder de Britten heeft Lia van Bekhoven een unieke kijk op het Verenigd Koninkrijk. Als inwoner, maar zeker geen anglofiel, heeft ze een scherpe blik op het nieuws, de politiek, de monarchie en het dagelijkse leven aan de overkant van de Noordzee. Elke woensdag krijg je een nieuwe podcast over het leven van Van Bekhovens Britten in je podcastapp. Scherpe analyses, diepgang waar op de radio geen tijd voor is en een flinke portie humor. Abonneer en mis geen aflevering. Over Lia Lia van Bekhoven is correspondent Verenigd Koninkrijk voor onder andere BNR Nieuwsradio, VRT, Knack en Elsevier en is regelmatig in talkshows te zien als duider van het nieuws uit het VK. Ze woont sinds 1976 in Londen, en is naast correspondent voor radio, televisie en geschreven media ook auteur van de boeken Mama gaat uit dansen, het erfgoed van Diana, prinses van Wales (1997), Land van de gespleten God, Noord-Ierland en de troubles (2000), In Londen, 9 wandelingen door de Britse hoofdstad (2009) en Klein-Brittannië (2022).See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Fluent Fiction - French: Reunion at Charles de Gaulle: A Surprise That Heals Old Wounds Find the full episode transcript, vocabulary words, and more:fluentfiction.com/fr/episode/2025-08-12-22-34-02-fr Story Transcript:Fr: Julien se tenait dans le hall animé de l'aéroport Charles de Gaulle.En: Julien stood in the bustling hall of aéroport Charles de Gaulle.Fr: Il observait les voyageurs pressés, leurs valises roulant bruyamment sur le sol brillant.En: He watched the hurried travelers, their suitcases noisily rolling across the shiny floor.Fr: Le vaste espace était baigné de lumière naturelle grâce aux grandes fenêtres de verre.En: The vast space was bathed in natural light thanks to the large glass windows.Fr: Il était nerveux.En: He was nervous.Fr: Son père, Luc, avait insisté pour qu'il vienne aujourd'hui, sans lui donner de détails.En: His father, Luc, had insisted he come today without giving him any details.Fr: "C'est une surprise," avait dit Luc avec un sourire mystérieux.En: "It's a surprise," Luc had said with a mysterious smile.Fr: Julien était curieux mais aussi inquiet.En: Julien was curious but also worried.Fr: Alors qu'il scrutait la foule, il entendit son nom.En: As he scanned the crowd, he heard his name.Fr: "Julien!"En: "Julien!"Fr: Une voix familière et émue l'appelait.En: A familiar and emotional voice was calling him.Fr: Il se retourna et vit Sophie, sa sœur cadette.En: He turned around and saw Sophie, his younger sister.Fr: Elle était plus grande que dans son souvenir, ses cheveux bruns flottant autour de son visage rayonnant de bonheur.En: She was taller than he remembered, her brown hair floating around her face that radiated happiness.Fr: Ils ne s'étaient pas vus depuis cinq ans.En: They hadn't seen each other for five years.Fr: Leur dernière rencontre avait été marquée par une dispute qu'il n'avait jamais oublié.En: Their last meeting was marked by an argument he had never forgotten.Fr: "Sophie!"En: "Sophie!"Fr: s'exclama-t-il, surpris.En: he exclaimed, surprised.Fr: Ils s'étreignirent maladroitement, chacun trop conscient du passé.En: They awkwardly hugged, each too aware of the past.Fr: "Papa a tout organisé," expliqua Sophie en souriant timidement.En: "Papa arranged everything," Sophie explained, smiling shyly.Fr: "Il arrive bientôt.En: "He's coming soon.Fr: J'ai pris un vol d'avance."En: I took an earlier flight."Fr: Leur père avait bien joué son coup.En: Their father had played his hand well.Fr: Julien et Sophie se dirigèrent vers un café de l'aéroport.En: Julien and Sophie headed to a café in the airport.Fr: L'endroit était plein de voyageurs, le bruit familier des machines à café remplissant l'air.En: The place was full of travelers, the familiar noise of coffee machines filling the air.Fr: Ils s'assirent à une table près de la fenêtre.En: They sat at a table near the window.Fr: Pendant qu'ils attendaient, Julien sentit l'urgence d'aborder le sujet qui les avait séparés.En: While they waited, Julien felt the urgency to address the topic that had separated them.Fr: "Sophie, je suis désolé pour tout ce qui s'est passé avant ton départ."En: "Sophie, I'm sorry for everything that happened before you left."Fr: Sa voix était hésitante mais sincère.En: His voice was hesitant but sincere.Fr: Sophie le regarda, ses yeux brillants de tristesse ancienne et d'espoir nouveau.En: Sophie looked at him, her eyes shining with old sadness and new hope.Fr: "Moi aussi, Julien.En: "Me too, Julien.Fr: Je ne voulais pas que ça dure si longtemps."En: I didn't want it to last this long."Fr: Ils parlèrent de leurs vies séparées, des chemins qu'ils avaient pris.En: They talked about their separate lives, the paths they had taken.Fr: Les mots leur venaient lentement d'abord, comme des pièces de puzzle retrouvées puis s'ajustant enfin.En: The words came slowly at first, like puzzle pieces being found and finally fitting together.Fr: Les douleurs du passé s'évanouissaient à mesure qu'ils se confiaient.En: The pains of the past faded as they confided in each other.Fr: Finalement, Sophie tendit la main et Julien la prit.En: Finally, Sophie reached out and Julien took her hand.Fr: "Nous avons perdu assez de temps," dit-il doucement.En: "We've lost enough time," he said softly.Fr: Puis, ils aperçurent Luc, avec son chapeau de paille bien-aimé, s'approchant avec un sourire fier.En: Then, they saw Luc, with his beloved straw hat, approaching with a proud smile.Fr: Le cœur de Julien se remplit de gratitude.En: Julien's heart filled with gratitude.Fr: Il réalisa que la famille était précieuse, et que la rancune ne méritait pas le temps perdu.En: He realized that family was precious and grudges weren't worth the time lost.Fr: Luc arriva, et les trois s'étreignirent, formant un cercle de chaleur et d'amour retrouvé.En: Luc arrived, and the three embraced, forming a circle of warmth and reunited love.Fr: Les passants autour d'eux continuaient leur chemin, indifférents à cette scène chargée d'émotion.En: The passersby around them continued on their way, indifferent to this emotion-laden scene.Fr: Le soleil semblait briller un peu plus fort à travers les fenêtres.En: The sun seemed to shine a little brighter through the windows.Fr: Julien embrassa sa sœur puis son père.En: Julien hugged his sister and then his father.Fr: Il se promit de ne jamais laisser une telle distance se creuser entre eux à nouveau.En: He promised himself never to let such a distance come between them again.Fr: Dans le tumulte impersonnel de l'aéroport, une paix personnelle et précieuse s'était installée entre eux.En: In the impersonal bustle of the airport, a personal and precious peace had settled between them.Fr: La famille était réunie, prête à avancer ensemble, le cœur léger.En: The family was reunited, ready to move forward together, with light hearts. Vocabulary Words:the hall: le hallbustling: animéthe traveler: le voyageurnervous: nerveuxsurprise: la surprisemysterious: mystérieuxto scan: scruterthe crowd: la fouleto call: appelerfamiliar: familierthe argument: la disputeto embrace: étreindreawkwardly: maladroitementshyly: timidementto arrange: organiserto address: aborderhesitant: hésitantto confide: se confierthe pain: la douleurto fade: s'évanouirthe circle: le cerclethe passerby: le passantindifferent: indifférentprecious: précieuxthe peace: la paixthe path: le cheminto float: flotterto shine: brillerthe airport: l'aéroportthe window: la fenêtre

Vous aimez notre peau de caste ? Soutenez-nous ! https://www.lenouvelespritpublic.fr/abonnementUne émission de Philippe Meyer, enregistrée au studio l'Arrière-boutique le 18 octobre 2024.Avec cette semaine :Nicolas Baverez, essayiste et avocat.Jean-Louis Bourlanges, essayiste.Maximilien Radvansky, élève de l'École normale supérieure.RAYMOND ARON« Les hommes font l'histoire mais ils ne savent pas l'histoire qu'ils font » : cette phrase de Marx, dont on peut dire qu'elle résume la philosophie de l'histoire de Raymond Aron, constitue moins, pour le philosophe, la traduction d'un désespoir face à la difficulté qu'ont les hommes à se représenter le sens de leur histoire, qu'un appel à un engagement mesuré et lucide, engagement dont Raymond Aron témoigne tout au long de sa vie.Engagé d'abord en 1940 avec le général de Gaulle à Londres, celui qui n'a alors publié comme texte majeur que son Introduction à la philosophie de l'histoire, dont le contenu porte néanmoins en germe « toute une vie de travail » (selon les termes de son directeur de thèse), y côtoie le général pendant quatre années, devient secrétaire de la rédaction de la revue La France libre, où il publie des éditoriaux de stratégie qui seront particulièrement remarqués. Engagé ensuite dans l'immédiat après-guerre : alors qu'au normalien, tout juste nommé professeur à la faculté de Toulouse avant la déclaration de guerre, les portes de l'enseignement étaient grandes ouvertes, il choisit le « virus de la politique », devenant éditorialiste à Combat, puis directeur de cabinet du ministre de l'information, André Malraux. L'Opium des intellectuels (1954) ou La Tragédie algérienne (1957) entraînent Aron dans un tourbillon politique, médiatique et polémique. Si son élection au Collège de France en 1970, consécration de sa carrière universitaire avec laquelle il a renoué en 1957, marquent l'apaisement de ses relations avec l'intelligentsia de gauche, Aron continue d'affirmer son engagement militant, que ce soit par ses nombreux éditoriaux au Figaro ou par sa participation au comité de soutien à Valéry Giscard d'Estaing en 1978.Plus qu'un spectateur engagé passivement, Aron est un théoricien du rôle de l'intellectuel en politique, qui tente de cerner les conditions qui justifient l'analyse rationnelle de l'action politique et de définir le champ de la politique en dehors de celui de la morale. Commentant dans ses Mémoires l'évolution qui s'est faite en lui durant son séjour en Allemagne entre 1930 et 1933, pendant lequel il assiste impuissant à la montée du national-socialisme, il écrit ainsi : « J'avais compris et accepté la politique en tant que telle, irréductible à la morale ; je ne chercherais plus, dans des propos ou par des signatures, à donner la preuve de mes bons sentiments. Penser la politique, c'est penser les acteurs, donc analyser leurs décisions, leurs fins, leurs moyens, leur univers mental. Le national-socialisme m'avait enseigné la puissance des forces irrationnelles, Max Weber la responsabilité de chacun, non pas tant la responsabilité de ses intentions que celle des conséquences de ses choix ». Cette importance accordée à l'analyse lucide et objective de la réalité fera d'Aron à la fois un étranger parmi ses collègues journalistes et l'un des meilleurs analystes de la vie politique française pendant près de 40 ans. Le véritable héritage d'Aron réside-t-il dans cette pensée de la politique ?Chaque semaine, Philippe Meyer anime une conversation d'analyse politique, argumentée et courtoise, sur des thèmes nationaux et internationaux liés à l'actualité. Pour en savoir plus : www.lenouvelespritpublic.frDistribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Episode 62: Show Notes Friend of the show, Han Chicago, is fast becoming one of our most frequent and favorite guests, and today he joins Trevor and Tom to reminisce about his recent transatlantic trip. First, Han walks us through Ben Schlappig's Lufthansa debacle before explaining how another travel aficionado, Matthew Klint, influenced his itinerary for his transatlantic Memorial Day weekend trip. Then, we learn why Han travelled not once but twice across the Atlantic on the same trip, how airlines change aircrafts without alerting passengers causing booking and seating complications, why flying economy across the Atlantic is a better option now than ever before, the ins and out of the Delta One Lounge at JFK, and Han's short stay in London. Trevor, Tom, and Han all share similar negative experiences of the Frankfurt airport, and after trying to ascertain why Frankfurt is one of Europe's least pleasant airports, they all agree that Lufthansa First Class is better in the air than on the ground. We also discuss the new T5 train at O'Hare International Airport, what American Airlines is getting wrong with their new 787 flagship seats, the standout moments from Han's transatlantic journey, and everything that our guest has planned for the near future. To end, we unpack Boeing's never-ending woes, Han's final thoughts on JetBlue's transatlantic product, and what the future of aviation may hold in terms of Business and First Class layouts. Key Points From This Episode: [0:00:00] Han Chicago shares important travel news about Ben Schlappig and Lufthansa.    [0:10:00] The way Matthew Klint influenced Han's transatlantic Memorial Day weekend trip.   [0:15:21] How one transatlantic trip became two, and being “Qatared” onto a lesser aircraft.     [0:18:17] Why transatlantic trips in economy are more appealing today than ever before.    [0:20:40] The Delta One Lounge at JFK, a short London stay, and travelling from Heathrow.  [0:32:50] Frankfurt versus Munich, and comparing aircraft to address airline inconsistencies.  [0:43:16] Han's highs and lows from his time at Frankfurt airport.    [0:55:15] Why Lufthansa First Class is a better in-air experience compared to on the ground.  [1:02:28] Landing at O'Hare, the new T5 train, and American Airlines' 787 flagship seats.    [1:10:35] The flight from Frankfurt to Munich and other standout moments from Han's trip. [1:14:20] Acquisitions and everything else our guest has planned for his future.   [1:16:42] Unpacking Boeing's persistent woes. [1:22:48] Han's review of JetBlue's transatlantic product.   [1:29:24] The future of aviation: A new era of Business and First Class products. Quotes: “The devil's in the details on some of these partner programs.” — @tmount [0:16:14] “Guys, to me, [the Delta One Lounge at JFK] is one of the best lounges in the US, and it can rival a lot of lounges overseas, too.” — @hanchicago [0:20:54] “I'm trying to fly all the A380s on all the airlines that still fly them. After Lufthansa, the only one I think I have left now is Korean [Air].” — @hanchicago [0:31:43] “Frankfurt is one of the least pleasant airports in Europe. Considering you've got Charles de Gaulle and Heathrow included there, that's saying something.” — @TktweetsKim [0:44:57] “Luckily, I made all my connections. So many times, I could've missed something; something could've gone wrong. That's definitely happened to me on these kinds of [trips before], but Memorial Day weekend, it all worked out.” — @hanchicago [1:02:12] “I'm always looking for that special feeling. And I have to say, as much as we started this episode off about bagging on Lufthansa for this and that, I would say that they deliver that [feeling] for me.” — @hanchicago [1:10:48] “It's turbulent times for us in the world, on various fronts.” — @hanchicago [1:12:38] “Everyone's planning a new first-class seat, but because of Boeing's woes, everyone's putting that off as to when they're going to introduce it.” — @hanchicago [1:16:34] “It's a blessing to get on any of these aircrafts. Let's never forget. It's a blessing to be able to fly the way that we fly [and] in the luxury that we get to experience.” — @tmount [1:31:52] Links Mentioned in Today's Episode: Han Chicago on X Han Chicago on Instagram Episode 30: First Time Istanbul Visit with Han Episode 53: Aspirational Flying with Han Chicago Lufthansa Allegris First Class ‘Frustrating Lufthansa Allegris First Class Upgrade Glitch' ‘Lol, Oops: Downgraded From Lufthansa Allegris First Class' ‘American's Brand New Boeing 787 Has Serious Maintenance Issues' Ben Schlappig on Instagram Matthew Klint | Live and Let's Fly Alaska Airlines JetBlue Etihad Airways Qatar Airways Virgin Atlantic Delta One Virgin Atlantic Clubhouse Chase Sapphire Lounge SkyClub Priority Pass Korean Air Thai Airways American Airlines United Airlines U.S. Bank JonNYC on X Thomas Kim on X Trevor Mountcastle on X The Milenomics Podcast Network

durée : 01:02:37 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - Avec l'explosion de la première bombe atomique française en 1960, nom de code "Gerboise bleue", débute le programme d'armement nucléaire voulu par le général de Gaulle. En 1988, "L'histoire en direct" raconte le processus qui a permis à la France de se doter d'une force de dissuasion nucléaire. - réalisation : Emily Vallat

durée : 00:24:55 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - Lors de sa conférence de presse du 14 janvier 1963, le président de la République Charles de Gaulle expose sa doctrine sur la dissuasion nucléaire qui repose sur un principe intangible : l'indépendance nationale en matière de défense. - réalisation : Emily Vallat - invités : Charles de Gaulle Homme politique français et général militaire

In Episode 110 of Breaking History, Matt Ehret and Ghost uncover the real motives behind Nixon's infamous 1971 decision to close the gold window. Far from a spontaneous response to economic instability, the hosts argue it was part of a calculated geopolitical shift orchestrated by Henry Kissinger and aligned elites. They trace how Nixon's trip to China and the cozying up to Mao were tied to broader plans to unmoor the U.S. dollar from gold and empower a fiat system that would eventually serve globalist interests. From the betrayal of de Gaulle and Canada's role in testing debt-based finance, to the manipulation of U.S.-China relations and the sidelining of national sovereignty, Matt and Ghost connect the dots to expose the deep, coordinated architecture behind our current monetary crisis. Packed with historical insight and sharp geopolitical context, this episode challenges the official narrative and reframes 1971 as a turning point in the war on economic independence.

Charles de Gaulle is one of the greatest figures of twentieth century history. If Sir Winston Churchill was (in the words of Harold Macmillan) the "greatest Englishman In history", then Charles de Gaulle was without a doubt, the greatest Frenchman since Napoleon Bonaparte. Why so? In the early summer of 1940, when France was overrun by German troops, one junior general who had fought in the trenches in Verdun refused to accept defeat. He fled to London, where he took to the radio to address his compatriots back home. “Whatever happens,” he said, “the flame of French resistance must not be extinguished and will not be extinguished.” At that moment, Charles de Gaulle entered history. For the rest of the war, de Gaulle insisted he and his Free French movement were the true embodiment of France. Through sheer force of his personality and the grandeur of his vision of France, he inspired French men and women to risk their lives to resist the Nazi occupation. Usually proud and aloof, but almost always confident in his own leadership, he quarreled violently with Churchill, Roosevelt and many of his own countrymen. Yet they knew they would need his help to rebuild a shattered France. Thanks to de Gaulle, France was recognized as one of the victorious Allies when Germany was finally defeated. Then, as President of the Fifth Republic, he brought France back from the brink of a civil war over the war in Algeria. And, made the difficult decision to end the self-same war. Thereafter he challenged American hegemony, took France out of NATO, and twice vetoed British entry into the European Community in his pursuit of what he called “a certain idea of France.” Julian Jackson, Professor of History at Queen Mary College, University of London, past winner of the Wolfson History Prize and the winner in 2018 of the Paris Book Award for his book on De Gaulle--De Gaulle (Harvard University Press, 2018)--has written a magnificent biography, the first major reconsideration in over twenty years. Drawing on the extensive resources of the recently opened de Gaulle archives, Jackson reveals the conservative roots of de Gaulle's intellectual formation and upbringing, sheds new light on his relationship with Churchill, and shows how de Gaulle confronted riots at home and violent independence movements abroad from the Middle East to Vietnam. No previous biography has so vividly depicted this towering figure whose legacy remains evident in present-day France. In short Professor Jackson has written a superb book, which in every way possible is a glittering ornament in the biographical art. Charles Coutinho holds a doctorate in history from New York University. Where he studied with Tony Judt, Stewart Stehlin and McGeorge Bundy. His Ph. D. dissertation was on Anglo-American relations in the run-up to the Suez Crisis of 1956. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. It you have a recent title to suggest for a podcast, please send an e-mail to Charlescoutinho@aol.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

durée : 00:03:00 - Marion, épicière ambulante à Audenge - Le marché municipal hebdomadaire d'Audenge a lieu tous les mardis matin de 8h00 à 13h00, sous la halle et sur l'avenue du Général de Gaulle. Il rassemble une cinquantaine de marchands. Rencontre avec Marion, épicière ambulante, qui distribue les produits d'une vingtaine d'agriculteurs girondins. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

Charles de Gaulle is one of the greatest figures of twentieth century history. If Sir Winston Churchill was (in the words of Harold Macmillan) the "greatest Englishman In history", then Charles de Gaulle was without a doubt, the greatest Frenchman since Napoleon Bonaparte. Why so? In the early summer of 1940, when France was overrun by German troops, one junior general who had fought in the trenches in Verdun refused to accept defeat. He fled to London, where he took to the radio to address his compatriots back home. “Whatever happens,” he said, “the flame of French resistance must not be extinguished and will not be extinguished.” At that moment, Charles de Gaulle entered history. For the rest of the war, de Gaulle insisted he and his Free French movement were the true embodiment of France. Through sheer force of his personality and the grandeur of his vision of France, he inspired French men and women to risk their lives to resist the Nazi occupation. Usually proud and aloof, but almost always confident in his own leadership, he quarreled violently with Churchill, Roosevelt and many of his own countrymen. Yet they knew they would need his help to rebuild a shattered France. Thanks to de Gaulle, France was recognized as one of the victorious Allies when Germany was finally defeated. Then, as President of the Fifth Republic, he brought France back from the brink of a civil war over the war in Algeria. And, made the difficult decision to end the self-same war. Thereafter he challenged American hegemony, took France out of NATO, and twice vetoed British entry into the European Community in his pursuit of what he called “a certain idea of France.” Julian Jackson, Professor of History at Queen Mary College, University of London, past winner of the Wolfson History Prize and the winner in 2018 of the Paris Book Award for his book on De Gaulle--De Gaulle (Harvard University Press, 2018)--has written a magnificent biography, the first major reconsideration in over twenty years. Drawing on the extensive resources of the recently opened de Gaulle archives, Jackson reveals the conservative roots of de Gaulle's intellectual formation and upbringing, sheds new light on his relationship with Churchill, and shows how de Gaulle confronted riots at home and violent independence movements abroad from the Middle East to Vietnam. No previous biography has so vividly depicted this towering figure whose legacy remains evident in present-day France. In short Professor Jackson has written a superb book, which in every way possible is a glittering ornament in the biographical art. Charles Coutinho holds a doctorate in history from New York University. Where he studied with Tony Judt, Stewart Stehlin and McGeorge Bundy. His Ph. D. dissertation was on Anglo-American relations in the run-up to the Suez Crisis of 1956. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. It you have a recent title to suggest for a podcast, please send an e-mail to Charlescoutinho@aol.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Charles de Gaulle is one of the greatest figures of twentieth century history. If Sir Winston Churchill was (in the words of Harold Macmillan) the "greatest Englishman In history", then Charles de Gaulle was without a doubt, the greatest Frenchman since Napoleon Bonaparte. Why so? In the early summer of 1940, when France was overrun by German troops, one junior general who had fought in the trenches in Verdun refused to accept defeat. He fled to London, where he took to the radio to address his compatriots back home. “Whatever happens,” he said, “the flame of French resistance must not be extinguished and will not be extinguished.” At that moment, Charles de Gaulle entered history. For the rest of the war, de Gaulle insisted he and his Free French movement were the true embodiment of France. Through sheer force of his personality and the grandeur of his vision of France, he inspired French men and women to risk their lives to resist the Nazi occupation. Usually proud and aloof, but almost always confident in his own leadership, he quarreled violently with Churchill, Roosevelt and many of his own countrymen. Yet they knew they would need his help to rebuild a shattered France. Thanks to de Gaulle, France was recognized as one of the victorious Allies when Germany was finally defeated. Then, as President of the Fifth Republic, he brought France back from the brink of a civil war over the war in Algeria. And, made the difficult decision to end the self-same war. Thereafter he challenged American hegemony, took France out of NATO, and twice vetoed British entry into the European Community in his pursuit of what he called “a certain idea of France.” Julian Jackson, Professor of History at Queen Mary College, University of London, past winner of the Wolfson History Prize and the winner in 2018 of the Paris Book Award for his book on De Gaulle--De Gaulle (Harvard University Press, 2018)--has written a magnificent biography, the first major reconsideration in over twenty years. Drawing on the extensive resources of the recently opened de Gaulle archives, Jackson reveals the conservative roots of de Gaulle's intellectual formation and upbringing, sheds new light on his relationship with Churchill, and shows how de Gaulle confronted riots at home and violent independence movements abroad from the Middle East to Vietnam. No previous biography has so vividly depicted this towering figure whose legacy remains evident in present-day France. In short Professor Jackson has written a superb book, which in every way possible is a glittering ornament in the biographical art. Charles Coutinho holds a doctorate in history from New York University. Where he studied with Tony Judt, Stewart Stehlin and McGeorge Bundy. His Ph. D. dissertation was on Anglo-American relations in the run-up to the Suez Crisis of 1956. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. It you have a recent title to suggest for a podcast, please send an e-mail to Charlescoutinho@aol.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Charles de Gaulle is one of the greatest figures of twentieth century history. If Sir Winston Churchill was (in the words of Harold Macmillan) the "greatest Englishman In history", then Charles de Gaulle was without a doubt, the greatest Frenchman since Napoleon Bonaparte. Why so? In the early summer of 1940, when France was overrun by German troops, one junior general who had fought in the trenches in Verdun refused to accept defeat. He fled to London, where he took to the radio to address his compatriots back home. “Whatever happens,” he said, “the flame of French resistance must not be extinguished and will not be extinguished.” At that moment, Charles de Gaulle entered history. For the rest of the war, de Gaulle insisted he and his Free French movement were the true embodiment of France. Through sheer force of his personality and the grandeur of his vision of France, he inspired French men and women to risk their lives to resist the Nazi occupation. Usually proud and aloof, but almost always confident in his own leadership, he quarreled violently with Churchill, Roosevelt and many of his own countrymen. Yet they knew they would need his help to rebuild a shattered France. Thanks to de Gaulle, France was recognized as one of the victorious Allies when Germany was finally defeated. Then, as President of the Fifth Republic, he brought France back from the brink of a civil war over the war in Algeria. And, made the difficult decision to end the self-same war. Thereafter he challenged American hegemony, took France out of NATO, and twice vetoed British entry into the European Community in his pursuit of what he called “a certain idea of France.” Julian Jackson, Professor of History at Queen Mary College, University of London, past winner of the Wolfson History Prize and the winner in 2018 of the Paris Book Award for his book on De Gaulle--De Gaulle (Harvard University Press, 2018)--has written a magnificent biography, the first major reconsideration in over twenty years. Drawing on the extensive resources of the recently opened de Gaulle archives, Jackson reveals the conservative roots of de Gaulle's intellectual formation and upbringing, sheds new light on his relationship with Churchill, and shows how de Gaulle confronted riots at home and violent independence movements abroad from the Middle East to Vietnam. No previous biography has so vividly depicted this towering figure whose legacy remains evident in present-day France. In short Professor Jackson has written a superb book, which in every way possible is a glittering ornament in the biographical art. Charles Coutinho holds a doctorate in history from New York University. Where he studied with Tony Judt, Stewart Stehlin and McGeorge Bundy. His Ph. D. dissertation was on Anglo-American relations in the run-up to the Suez Crisis of 1956. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. It you have a recent title to suggest for a podcast, please send an e-mail to Charlescoutinho@aol.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Charles de Gaulle is one of the greatest figures of twentieth century history. If Sir Winston Churchill was (in the words of Harold Macmillan) the "greatest Englishman In history", then Charles de Gaulle was without a doubt, the greatest Frenchman since Napoleon Bonaparte. Why so? In the early summer of 1940, when France was overrun by German troops, one junior general who had fought in the trenches in Verdun refused to accept defeat. He fled to London, where he took to the radio to address his compatriots back home. “Whatever happens,” he said, “the flame of French resistance must not be extinguished and will not be extinguished.” At that moment, Charles de Gaulle entered history. For the rest of the war, de Gaulle insisted he and his Free French movement were the true embodiment of France. Through sheer force of his personality and the grandeur of his vision of France, he inspired French men and women to risk their lives to resist the Nazi occupation. Usually proud and aloof, but almost always confident in his own leadership, he quarreled violently with Churchill, Roosevelt and many of his own countrymen. Yet they knew they would need his help to rebuild a shattered France. Thanks to de Gaulle, France was recognized as one of the victorious Allies when Germany was finally defeated. Then, as President of the Fifth Republic, he brought France back from the brink of a civil war over the war in Algeria. And, made the difficult decision to end the self-same war. Thereafter he challenged American hegemony, took France out of NATO, and twice vetoed British entry into the European Community in his pursuit of what he called “a certain idea of France.” Julian Jackson, Professor of History at Queen Mary College, University of London, past winner of the Wolfson History Prize and the winner in 2018 of the Paris Book Award for his book on De Gaulle--De Gaulle (Harvard University Press, 2018)--has written a magnificent biography, the first major reconsideration in over twenty years. Drawing on the extensive resources of the recently opened de Gaulle archives, Jackson reveals the conservative roots of de Gaulle's intellectual formation and upbringing, sheds new light on his relationship with Churchill, and shows how de Gaulle confronted riots at home and violent independence movements abroad from the Middle East to Vietnam. No previous biography has so vividly depicted this towering figure whose legacy remains evident in present-day France. In short Professor Jackson has written a superb book, which in every way possible is a glittering ornament in the biographical art. Charles Coutinho holds a doctorate in history from New York University. Where he studied with Tony Judt, Stewart Stehlin and McGeorge Bundy. His Ph. D. dissertation was on Anglo-American relations in the run-up to the Suez Crisis of 1956. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. It you have a recent title to suggest for a podcast, please send an e-mail to Charlescoutinho@aol.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/french-studies

Charles de Gaulle is one of the greatest figures of twentieth century history. If Sir Winston Churchill was (in the words of Harold Macmillan) the "greatest Englishman In history", then Charles de Gaulle was without a doubt, the greatest Frenchman since Napoleon Bonaparte. Why so? In the early summer of 1940, when France was overrun by German troops, one junior general who had fought in the trenches in Verdun refused to accept defeat. He fled to London, where he took to the radio to address his compatriots back home. “Whatever happens,” he said, “the flame of French resistance must not be extinguished and will not be extinguished.” At that moment, Charles de Gaulle entered history. For the rest of the war, de Gaulle insisted he and his Free French movement were the true embodiment of France. Through sheer force of his personality and the grandeur of his vision of France, he inspired French men and women to risk their lives to resist the Nazi occupation. Usually proud and aloof, but almost always confident in his own leadership, he quarreled violently with Churchill, Roosevelt and many of his own countrymen. Yet they knew they would need his help to rebuild a shattered France. Thanks to de Gaulle, France was recognized as one of the victorious Allies when Germany was finally defeated. Then, as President of the Fifth Republic, he brought France back from the brink of a civil war over the war in Algeria. And, made the difficult decision to end the self-same war. Thereafter he challenged American hegemony, took France out of NATO, and twice vetoed British entry into the European Community in his pursuit of what he called “a certain idea of France.” Julian Jackson, Professor of History at Queen Mary College, University of London, past winner of the Wolfson History Prize and the winner in 2018 of the Paris Book Award for his book on De Gaulle--De Gaulle (Harvard University Press, 2018)--has written a magnificent biography, the first major reconsideration in over twenty years. Drawing on the extensive resources of the recently opened de Gaulle archives, Jackson reveals the conservative roots of de Gaulle's intellectual formation and upbringing, sheds new light on his relationship with Churchill, and shows how de Gaulle confronted riots at home and violent independence movements abroad from the Middle East to Vietnam. No previous biography has so vividly depicted this towering figure whose legacy remains evident in present-day France. In short Professor Jackson has written a superb book, which in every way possible is a glittering ornament in the biographical art. Charles Coutinho holds a doctorate in history from New York University. Where he studied with Tony Judt, Stewart Stehlin and McGeorge Bundy. His Ph. D. dissertation was on Anglo-American relations in the run-up to the Suez Crisis of 1956. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. It you have a recent title to suggest for a podcast, please send an e-mail to Charlescoutinho@aol.com.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

durée : 00:08:53 - France Culture va plus loin (l'Invité(e) des Matins d'été) - par : Astrid de Villaines, Stéphanie Villeneuve, Sarah Masson - En 1959, le Général de Gaulle revient au pouvoir pour résoudre ce qu'on appelle encore les “événements d'Algérie”. Au cœur d'une des dernières colonies françaises, dans un contexte éruptif, un quatuor de grands gaillards est chargé de la sécurité du chef d'État “le plus menacé de la planète”. - réalisation : Félicie Faugère - invités : Xavier Dorison Scénariste de bande-dessinée

durée : 00:58:45 - Les Grandes Traversées - Il reçoit le prix Nobel de littérature en 1953, notamment "pour ses brillantes qualités oratoires dans la défense des grandes valeurs de l'humanité". Son épouse, Clémentine, reçoit le prix pour lui. Qui est l'écrivain Churchill ? L'histoire retient de Winston Churchill son rôle de leader politique et militaire, véritable figure de proue de la victoire des Alliés à l'issue de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Pourtant, moins connue du grand public, sa carrière d'écrivain lui a aussi valu le prix Nobel de littérature en 1953. Une récompense qui distingue un grand œuvre porteur "de valeurs humaines". Un style littéraire unique au service de l'histoire et de la politique Churchill était un écrivain talentueux et un orateur engagé, mais aussi un stratège politique. Jean-Claude Zilberstein, éditeur passionné, souligne l'admiration que suscite l'œuvre de Churchill, notamment ses mémoires et ses discours, véritables joyaux d'un style unique, rythmé et puissant. Sa maîtrise de la langue, en anglais comme en français, et son sens aigu de la formule ont marqué durablement la littérature et la politique. Au-delà de l'écriture, il est présenté comme un homme de théâtre capable de captiver ses auditeurs par des discours vibrants, notamment ceux prononcés en 1940 à la Chambre des communes.  Les spécialistes rapprochent l'homme d'État d'écrivains britanniques classiques comme Evelyn Waugh ou P.G. Wodehouse, le plaçant dans une tradition littéraire mêlant humour, conservatisme et finesse stylistique. Son œuvre, marquée par une conscience historique profonde héritée de ses lectures, représente un témoignage précieux sur son époque. Un héritage littéraire et historique durable L'Académie suédoise, en lui décernant le Nobel de littérature, a récompensé non seulement sa maîtrise de l'histoire et de la biographie, mais aussi les "valeurs humaines" de son œuvre et de ses discours. Malgré son absence à la cérémonie, Churchill envoya Lady Clementine, son épouse, prononcer son discours de réception. Encore un signe, s'il en fallait un, que l'homme était partagé entre ses trois grandes passions, " le métier des armes, la politique et l'écriture", résume l'historien François Kersaudy. Ses mémoires furent toutefois le fruit d'un travail collaboratif : des assistants préparaient les premiers brouillons, tandis que l'homme d'État passait de longues heures à peaufiner son style, reconnaissable à ses formules percutantes et son rythme narratif. Avant publication, les écrits de Churchill sont soumis à relecture. Et ils passent ainsi "par tout le monde, par ses anciens collègues, par le Foreign Office, par le ministère de la Guerre, par les services secrets, par le roi, par le gouvernement, par le général Eisenhower" et n'échappent pas à une certaine censure, explique François Kersaudy. Un procédé de bonne guerre et assez commun,"pour éviter les gènes diplomatiques", poursuit l'historien Robert Tombs. Si certains critiques questionnent l'authenticité des ouvrages du "vieux lion" en rappelant le recours aux prête-plume pour leur rédaction, d'autres reconnaissent en Churchill un écrivain puissant, vivant et accessible, aux antipodes d'un Charles de Gaulle à la prose plus austère. Roger Katz, libraire à Londres, témoigne d'ailleurs de l'engouement toujours plus vif pour les livres de Churchill. Ce succès durable témoigne de la place centrale qu'occupe l'homme politique dans la mémoire collective britannique et mondiale.

80 ans après la libération de la France, nous revisitons le procès historique du Maréchal Pétain lors de l'été 1945. « C'est un vrai procès, avec un vrai débat », déclare l'historien Julian Jackson dans les lieux même où il s'est déroulé, au sein du Palais de justice de Paris, sur l'île de la Cité. Julian Jackson est spécialiste de l'histoire de France au XXème siècle et il nous propose de revivre le procès de l'ancien chef du gouvernement de Vichy, une expérience inédite enregistrée par RFI et partagée avec notre invité Denis Salas, président de l'Association française de l'Histoire de la justice et ancien juge. Revenons justement à l'Occupation de la France par les nazis et à cette photographie qui a tellement choqué les Français : le Maréchal Pétain, héros de la Première guerre mondiale, serrant la main de Hitler, le 24 Octobre 1940. Une photo symbole de la collaboration. C'est à la radio que le Maréchal Pétain explique alors son choix. « Français j'ai rencontré le Chancelier du Reich. Cette première rencontre entre le vainqueur et le vaincu marque le premier redressement de notre pays. C'est dans l'honneur et pour maintenir l'unité française que j'entre aujourd'hui dans la voie de la collaboration. (…) L'armistice au demeurant n'est pas la paix (…) la France est tenue par des obligations nombreuses vis-à-vis du vainqueur, du moins reste-t-elle souveraine. Cette politique est la mienne, mes ministres ne sont responsables que devant moi. C'est moi seul que l'Histoire jugera. » C'est également à la radio que Charles de Gaulle, Chef de la France libre a fait connaitre son choix. « Un jour, la France libérée punira les responsables de ces désastres et les artisans de sa servitude. » Comme l'avait déclaré le Général De Gaulle en 1940, il s'agit en 1945 de punir Pétain mais aussi de le juger. Le Maréchal Pétain s'est rendu à la France depuis la Suisse, fin Avril 1945 et que c'est en prison à Montrouge dans le sud de Paris, qu'il attend son procès. Un procès qui a lieu au sein de la première Chambre d'appel de la Cour de Paris du 23 juillet au 15 Août 1945. Et c'est dans cette même salle que Julian Jackson nous raconte les trois semaines du procès. Si la première semaine est marquée par le silence de Pétain, le grand évènement de la deuxième semaine, c'est l'arrivée de Pierre Laval. Joseph Kessel écrit sur « sa laideur fascinante, avec ses énormes oreilles et ses yeux reptiliens », il serait le mauvais génie de Pétain. Si l'accusation réclame la peine de mort, l'avocat principal Fernand Payen joue la carte de la sénilité tandis que le jeune et brillant Jacques Isorni, partage les valeurs de son client et met en scène une défense de rupture en assumant la collaboration de Vichy. Tous les protagonistes sont conscients que le verdict de la peine de mort sera commué en prison à vie. Mais ce procès pour l'Histoire écrit-il toute l'histoire de la collaboration de Vichy avec les nazis ? « Certainement pas, nous dit Denis Salas, il y a un moment de justice avec ce procès de 45, qui a été prolongé et complété par la suite par d'autres moments de justice (Entre 1987 et 1998, la justice française a jugé Klaus Barbie, Paul Touvier et Maurice Papon) qui ont prouvé la participation active et déterminante du régime de Vichy à la déportation des juifs de France. À lire aussiProcès de Klaus Barbie: 30 ans après, les archives ouvertes aux chercheurs   À lire aussiL'Argentine retire à Maurice Papon une distinction reçue pendant la dictature À lire : Le procès Pétain. Vichy face à ses juges par Julian Jackson. À découvrir : Le site de l'association française pour l'Histoire de la justice présidée par Denis Salas.

The history of the world's most successful military alliance, from the wrecked Europe of 1945 to Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. As they signed NATO into being after World War II, its founders fervently believed that only if the West's democracies banded permanently together could they avoid a catastrophic global atomic conflict. Over the 75 years since, the alliance has indeed avoided war with Russia, also becoming a major political, strategic and diplomatic player well beyond its borders. It has survived disagreements between leaders from Eisenhower, Churchill and de Gaulle to Trump, Stoltenberg and Merkel, faced down Kremlin foes from Stalin to Putin and endured unending questions and debate over what new nations might be allowed to join. Deterring Armageddon: A Biography of NATO (Hachette UK, 2024) takes the reader from backroom deals that led to NATO's creation, through the Cold War, the Balkans and Afghanistan to the current confrontation with the Kremlin following the invasion of Ukraine. It examines the tightrope walked by alliance leaders between a powerful United States sometimes flirting with isolationism and European nations with their ever-evolving wishes for autonomy and influence. Having spent much of its life preparing for conflicts that might never come, NATO has sometimes found itself in wars that few had predicted – and with its members now again planning for a potential major European conflict. It is a tale of tension, danger, rivalry, conflict, big personalities and high-stakes military and diplomatic posturing – as well as espionage, politics and protest. From the Korean War to the pandemic, the Berlin and Cuba crises to the chaotic evacuation from Kabul, Deterring Armageddon tells how the alliance has shaped and been shaped by history – and looks ahead to what might be the most dangerous era it has ever faced. Peter Apps is global defence correspondent for Reuters news agency and is currently on sabbatical as executive director of the Project for Study of the 21st Century (PS21). He is the author of two Kindle Singles. BEFORE EBOLA (2014) describes his experiences covering haemorrhagic fever in Angola in 2005 while CHURCHILL IN THE TRENCHES (2015) reconstructs the experiences of Britain's future prime minister at the front line during the First World War. Peter's podcast, focusing on modern military topics, as part of PS21 can be found here. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow Tom Clancy novels Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The history of the world's most successful military alliance, from the wrecked Europe of 1945 to Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. As they signed NATO into being after World War II, its founders fervently believed that only if the West's democracies banded permanently together could they avoid a catastrophic global atomic conflict. Over the 75 years since, the alliance has indeed avoided war with Russia, also becoming a major political, strategic and diplomatic player well beyond its borders. It has survived disagreements between leaders from Eisenhower, Churchill and de Gaulle to Trump, Stoltenberg and Merkel, faced down Kremlin foes from Stalin to Putin and endured unending questions and debate over what new nations might be allowed to join. Deterring Armageddon: A Biography of NATO (Hachette UK, 2024) takes the reader from backroom deals that led to NATO's creation, through the Cold War, the Balkans and Afghanistan to the current confrontation with the Kremlin following the invasion of Ukraine. It examines the tightrope walked by alliance leaders between a powerful United States sometimes flirting with isolationism and European nations with their ever-evolving wishes for autonomy and influence. Having spent much of its life preparing for conflicts that might never come, NATO has sometimes found itself in wars that few had predicted – and with its members now again planning for a potential major European conflict. It is a tale of tension, danger, rivalry, conflict, big personalities and high-stakes military and diplomatic posturing – as well as espionage, politics and protest. From the Korean War to the pandemic, the Berlin and Cuba crises to the chaotic evacuation from Kabul, Deterring Armageddon tells how the alliance has shaped and been shaped by history – and looks ahead to what might be the most dangerous era it has ever faced. Peter Apps is global defence correspondent for Reuters news agency and is currently on sabbatical as executive director of the Project for Study of the 21st Century (PS21). He is the author of two Kindle Singles. BEFORE EBOLA (2014) describes his experiences covering haemorrhagic fever in Angola in 2005 while CHURCHILL IN THE TRENCHES (2015) reconstructs the experiences of Britain's future prime minister at the front line during the First World War. Peter's podcast, focusing on modern military topics, as part of PS21 can be found here. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow Tom Clancy novels Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

The history of the world's most successful military alliance, from the wrecked Europe of 1945 to Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. As they signed NATO into being after World War II, its founders fervently believed that only if the West's democracies banded permanently together could they avoid a catastrophic global atomic conflict. Over the 75 years since, the alliance has indeed avoided war with Russia, also becoming a major political, strategic and diplomatic player well beyond its borders. It has survived disagreements between leaders from Eisenhower, Churchill and de Gaulle to Trump, Stoltenberg and Merkel, faced down Kremlin foes from Stalin to Putin and endured unending questions and debate over what new nations might be allowed to join. Deterring Armageddon: A Biography of NATO (Hachette UK, 2024) takes the reader from backroom deals that led to NATO's creation, through the Cold War, the Balkans and Afghanistan to the current confrontation with the Kremlin following the invasion of Ukraine. It examines the tightrope walked by alliance leaders between a powerful United States sometimes flirting with isolationism and European nations with their ever-evolving wishes for autonomy and influence. Having spent much of its life preparing for conflicts that might never come, NATO has sometimes found itself in wars that few had predicted – and with its members now again planning for a potential major European conflict. It is a tale of tension, danger, rivalry, conflict, big personalities and high-stakes military and diplomatic posturing – as well as espionage, politics and protest. From the Korean War to the pandemic, the Berlin and Cuba crises to the chaotic evacuation from Kabul, Deterring Armageddon tells how the alliance has shaped and been shaped by history – and looks ahead to what might be the most dangerous era it has ever faced. Peter Apps is global defence correspondent for Reuters news agency and is currently on sabbatical as executive director of the Project for Study of the 21st Century (PS21). He is the author of two Kindle Singles. BEFORE EBOLA (2014) describes his experiences covering haemorrhagic fever in Angola in 2005 while CHURCHILL IN THE TRENCHES (2015) reconstructs the experiences of Britain's future prime minister at the front line during the First World War. Peter's podcast, focusing on modern military topics, as part of PS21 can be found here. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow Tom Clancy novels Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

The history of the world's most successful military alliance, from the wrecked Europe of 1945 to Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. As they signed NATO into being after World War II, its founders fervently believed that only if the West's democracies banded permanently together could they avoid a catastrophic global atomic conflict. Over the 75 years since, the alliance has indeed avoided war with Russia, also becoming a major political, strategic and diplomatic player well beyond its borders. It has survived disagreements between leaders from Eisenhower, Churchill and de Gaulle to Trump, Stoltenberg and Merkel, faced down Kremlin foes from Stalin to Putin and endured unending questions and debate over what new nations might be allowed to join. Deterring Armageddon: A Biography of NATO (Hachette UK, 2024) takes the reader from backroom deals that led to NATO's creation, through the Cold War, the Balkans and Afghanistan to the current confrontation with the Kremlin following the invasion of Ukraine. It examines the tightrope walked by alliance leaders between a powerful United States sometimes flirting with isolationism and European nations with their ever-evolving wishes for autonomy and influence. Having spent much of its life preparing for conflicts that might never come, NATO has sometimes found itself in wars that few had predicted – and with its members now again planning for a potential major European conflict. It is a tale of tension, danger, rivalry, conflict, big personalities and high-stakes military and diplomatic posturing – as well as espionage, politics and protest. From the Korean War to the pandemic, the Berlin and Cuba crises to the chaotic evacuation from Kabul, Deterring Armageddon tells how the alliance has shaped and been shaped by history – and looks ahead to what might be the most dangerous era it has ever faced. Peter Apps is global defence correspondent for Reuters news agency and is currently on sabbatical as executive director of the Project for Study of the 21st Century (PS21). He is the author of two Kindle Singles. BEFORE EBOLA (2014) describes his experiences covering haemorrhagic fever in Angola in 2005 while CHURCHILL IN THE TRENCHES (2015) reconstructs the experiences of Britain's future prime minister at the front line during the First World War. Peter's podcast, focusing on modern military topics, as part of PS21 can be found here. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow Tom Clancy novels Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Le saviez-vous ? En 1968, Miriam Makeba, la chanteuse africaine la plus célèbre au monde fait le choix de quitter les États-Unis pour s'installer à Conakry avec son révolutionnaire de mari Stokely Carmichael, le leader du mouvement Black Power. Le couple panafricain va servir la révolution socialiste de Sékou Touré ! Cette histoire aussi fascinante que méconnue est documentée par Elara Bertho, chargée de recherche au CNRS au sein du Laboratoire Les Afriques dans le monde (LAM). Historienne de la littérature, elle revisite les années 70 marquées par une extrême violence envers les noirs, que ce soit aux États-Unis ou en Afrique du Sud, mais depuis Conakry, capitale de la Guinée indépendante dirigée par Ahmed Sékou Touré depuis 1958 et son célèbre « Non » à la communauté française proposée par le Général de Gaulle. Une indépendance immédiate, en rupture avec la France, et un choix politique clair : celui du socialisme. Anticolonialiste, panafricaniste, Sékou Touré soutient les luttes de libération et accueille combattants clandestins et réfugiés politiques. Pour Stokely Carmichael, théoricien du Black Power et de la colonialité, des millions de Noirs sont justement devenus des réfugiés politiques à l'époque. « Dans le monde entier, il y a des centaines de milliers, je dirais même des millions de réfugiés politiques noirs, et nous devenons des réfugiés politiques dans le monde. Et nous n'avons absolument rien à voir avec les luttes politiques qui se déroulent, les luttes politiques des Blancs. Mais ce sont des luttes politiques blanches pour le contrôle des Noirs, et nous sommes pris au milieu. Chaque fois qu'il y a un coup d'État dans un pays africain, qui est provoqué par les forces impérialistes occidentales blanches, des milliers de Noirs doivent alors fuir. Prenons l'exemple du Congo. Au Congo, il y avait (Moïse) Tshombe, Mobutu et Lumumba. Lorsque les forces impérialistes blanches ont tué Lumumba, des dizaines de milliers de Noirs vivant au Congo ont dû fuir le pays à la recherche d'un refuge politique dans les pays environnants, affirme-t-il au micro de Hayward Henry aux USA en 1968 (Archive Afro-Marxist). Et des milliers de personnes ont dû fuir lorsque Nkrumah a été renversé, ce sont les forces blanches qui contrôlent les richesses. Ma femme (Miriam Makeba) est une réfugiée politique de son propre pays, née et élevée en Afrique du Sud. Certains envahisseurs blancs viennent expulser les Noirs de leur propre terre et leur disent qu'ils ne peuvent pas y retourner. Nous avons des milliers de réfugiés politiques d'Afrique du Sud, du Mozambique, d'Angola, de Guinée-Bissau, toute l'Afrique est inondée de réfugiés politiques noirs, et maintenant les États-Unis complotent pour déplacer ce phénomène dans les Caraïbes. Et enfin, bien sûr, vers les États-Unis.» Lors de ses différentes visites à Conakry, Miriam Makeba, infatigable militante contre l'apartheid en Afrique du Sud, s'est vue plusieurs fois proposer l'accueil de la Guinée. C'est ainsi qu'en 1968, après leur mariage le 29 Avril à New-York, Miriam Makeba et Stokely Carmichael s'envolent pour Conakry et s'engagent au service de la révolution culturelle lancée par Sékou Touré… un récit aux sons de nos archives sonores et musicales ! À lire : Un couple panafricain par Elara Bertho, aux éditions ROT-BO-KRIK.   À voir : Le diaporama des photos du livre. Programmation musicale : - Miriam Makeba / Kilimanjaro Live 1971 Guinée - Harry Belafonte / Give Us Our Land (Mabayeke) - Miriam Makeba / Pata Pata (Strut Records) - Miriam Makeba / Sékou Famaké (SYLLART RECORDS) - Miriam Makeba / Kadeya Deya (SYLLART RECORDS).

We feel pretty confident that most sane Andor viewers skipped right from “Who Else Knows?” (S2, E11) into the finale. Turns out, there's still a LOT to discuss in the penultimate episode of Andor ever.We spent significant time this week digging into ISB hierarchies, and how the rise and fall of ambitious Imperials has hollowed out the Empire's institutions. We dissect ISB politics and competency through lenses of race and gender. We also paint parallels between Luthen Rael and French revolutionary Charles de Gaulle, and delight in Rebel downtime.New to Growing Up Skywalker? Come join us for non-toxic Star Wars recaps from a veteran and a new fan. New episodes every Tuesday.Want more Growing Up Skywalker? This is a great time to sign up for our Patreon for bonus audio content!Timestamps:00:00:00 Who Are We?00:03:23 Plot Summary00:11:27 Ambition, Competency, And Is The ISB Crumbling From Within?00:43:44 Luthen as Charles de Gaulle?00:59:51 Bae Watch01:08:28 Closing Thoughts

durée : 00:29:10 - Avoir raison avec... - par : Géraldine Mosna-Savoye - À la mort de Paul Valéry en 1945, de Gaulle exige des funérailles publiques, et Jean Moulin avait dit de lui qu'il aurait pu être Président. Prince des poètes, immense penseur, il s'est pourtant déposée au fil du temps une couche de poussière sur sa mémoire. Comment expliquer cet oubli injuste ? - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Benoît Peeters Écrivain, scénariste de bandes dessinées et éditeur, biographe d'Hergé

L'OTAN, l'Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord, a été créée en 1949 pour assurer une défense collective face à la menace soviétique. Au départ, son quartier général n'était pas du tout à Bruxelles, mais à Paris. Jusqu'en 1966, c'est dans la capitale française que se trouvait le siège de l'OTAN, plus précisément au Palais de Chaillot, puis à Porte Dauphine.Mais tout bascule avec le général de Gaulle.En 1966, le président français décide de retirer la France de la structure militaire intégrée de l'OTAN (même si elle reste membre de l'organisation politique). Il refuse que des troupes étrangères soient stationnées en France en temps de paix. Résultat : l'OTAN doit déménager… et vite.Alors pourquoi Bruxelles ? Pour trois raisons principales :Sa position géographique et diplomatiqueLa Belgique est située au cœur de l'Europe de l'Ouest, entre la France, l'Allemagne et les Pays-Bas. C'est un pays stable, neutre dans les grands conflits idéologiques du XXe siècle, et ouvertement pro-européen et pro-américain. Elle est donc un choix diplomatiquement consensuel.Sa tradition multilatéraleLa Belgique est un pays qui aime les institutions internationales : elle héberge déjà des organismes comme l'Union européenne (la Commission, le Conseil, le Parlement en partie). Installer l'OTAN à Bruxelles s'inscrit dans cette logique d'accueil.Sa réactivité et sa disponibilitéLorsqu'il a fallu trouver une nouvelle maison pour l'OTAN, la Belgique s'est montrée extrêmement coopérative. Elle a rapidement proposé un site à Evere, dans la banlieue nord-est de Bruxelles. Un bâtiment provisoire y a été construit, puis remplacé en 2017 par un tout nouveau siège ultramoderne.En résumé : si le siège de l'OTAN est à Bruxelles, c'est à la fois parce que la France l'a expulsé, et parce que la Belgique cochait toutes les bonnes cases : centrale, neutre, multilatéraliste… et efficace.Depuis, Bruxelles est devenue la capitale militaire de l'Occident, en complément de son rôle de capitale politique de l'Europe. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

“Je vous ai compris” : ces mots célèbres, prononcés par Charles de Gaulle le 4 juin 1958 à Alger, en pleine guerre dont on ne dit alors pas le nom, résument peut-être l'attitude de l'homme du 18 juin face aux événements qui conduiront à l'indépendance de l'Algérie, proclamée en 1962. De Gaulle a-t-il compris ce qui se jouait, dès les années 1940, de l'autre côté de la Méditerranée ? On verra aujourd'hui qu'il s'est souvent montré ambigu, voire contradictoire sur ces questions que Virginie Girod évoque avec Pierre Manenti, historien du gaullisme et de la Cinquième République.Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Tout au long de sa vie, de Gaulle entretient une relation conflictuelle avec les États-Unis d'Amérique. Kennedy est peut-être le seul président américain qu'il aura su apprécier. Mention légales : Vos données de connexion, dont votre adresse IP, sont traités par Radio Classique, responsable de traitement, sur la base de son intérêt légitime, par l'intermédiaire de son sous-traitant Ausha, à des fins de réalisation de statistiques agréées et de lutte contre la fraude. Ces données sont supprimées en temps réel pour la finalité statistique et sous cinq mois à compter de la collecte à des fins de lutte contre la fraude. Pour plus d'informations sur les traitements réalisés par Radio Classique et exercer vos droits, consultez notre Politique de confidentialité.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Résistance, collaboration, attentisme… que faisaient vraiment les Français entre 1940 et 1944 ? Il y a 85 ans, l'Allemagne nazie envahissait la France. C'était le début de quatre années d'Occupation. Chaque année, le 18 juin, on commémore le message lancé depuis Londres par le général de Gaulle en 1940. Cet appel à la Résistance est devenu un symbole car beaucoup de Français aiment se souvenir que certains de leurs ancêtres ont eu le courage de dire non à l'ennemi. Mais entre 1940 et 1944, la France était en réalité dirigée par un régime autoritaire, mené par le maréchal Pétain, un ancien héros de la Première Guerre mondiale. Alors, comment vivait-on en France pendant cette période ? Est-ce que la majorité des citoyens soutenait de Gaulle et la Résistance ? Ou bien suivaient-ils Pétain et le régime de Vichy ? La réalité est bien plus complexe. Dans cet épisode, Hugo et Ingrid reviennent sur ces années sombres. Ils racontent l'invasion allemande et les réactions politiques de 1940. Ils expliquent le fonctionnement du régime de Vichy, autoritaire et antisémite. Et enfin, ils explorent les différentes attitudes des Français. Retrouvez la transcription de cet épisode sur innerfrench.com Vous avez envie de progresser avec nous ? Découvrez nos cours en ligne sur courses.innerfrench.com  

Stéphane Bern raconte, en ce 18 juin, le destin méconnu d'Elisabeth de Miribel, une combattante de la France Libre qui, en tout premier, a répondu à l'appel du Général de Gaulle… pour dactylographier son célèbre discours du 18 juin 1940, qui, sans le savoir, allait entrer dans l'Histoire. Sans Élisabeth de Miribel, la France et le conflit de la Seconde Guerre mondiale auraient-ils connu la même issue ? Quels liens a-t-elle tissés avec le général de Gaulle ? Quel héritage a-t-elle laissé derrière elle ? Pour en parler, Stéphane Bern reçoit David Brunat, écrivain et auteur de "A la machine, Vies d'Élisabeth de Miribel" (Editions La Thébaïde) Au Coeur de l'Histoire est réalisée par Guilaume Vasseau. Rédaction en chef : Benjamin Delsol. Auteur du récit : Tony Liégois. Journaliste : Clara Leger. Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Founder of the Raising Capitalists Foundation and previous co-host of The Real Estate Guys Radio show, Russell Gray, joins Keith to discuss the historical and current devaluation of the U.S. dollar, its impact on investors, and the broader economic implications. Gray highlights how the significant increase in interest rates has trapped equity in properties and affected development. He explains the shift from gold-backed currency to paper money, the role of the Federal Reserve, and the impact of the Bretton Woods Agreement.  Gray emphasizes the importance of understanding macroeconomic trends and advocates for Main Street capitalism to decentralize power and promote productivity. He also criticizes the idea of housing as a human right, arguing it leads to inflation and shortages. Resources: Connect with Russell Gray to learn more about his "Raising Capitalists" project and his plans for a new show. Follow up with Russell Gray to get a copy of the Beardsley Rummel speech transcript from 1946. follow@russellgray.com Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/558 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREinvestmentcoach.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”.  For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Automatically Transcribed With Otter.ai  Keith Weinhold  0:01   Welcome to GRE. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, what's the real backstory on why we have this thing called the dollar? Why it keeps getting debased? What you can do about it and when the dollar will die? It's a lesson in monetary history. And our distinguished guest is a familiar voice that you haven't heard in a while. Today on get rich education.   Mid south home buyers, I mean, they're total pros, with over two decades as the nation's highest rated turnkey provider, their empathetic property managers use your ROI as their North Star. So it's no wonder that smart investors just keep lining up to get their completely renovated income properties like it's the newest iPhone. They're headquartered in Memphis and have globally attractive cash flows and A plus rating with a better business bureau and now over 5000 houses renovated. There's zero markup on maintenance. Let that sink in, and they average a 98.9% occupancy rate, while their average renter stays more than three and a half years. Every home they offer has brand new components, a bumper to bumper, one year warranty, new 30 year roofs. And wait for it, a high quality renter. Remember that part and in an astounding price range, 100 to 180k I've personally toured their office and their properties in person in Memphis, get to know Mid South. Enjoy cash flow from day one. Start yourself right now at mid southhomebuyers.com that's mid south homebuyers.com   Russell Gray  1:54   You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  2:10   Welcome to GRE from St John's Newfoundland to St Augustine, Florida and across 188 nations worldwide. I'm Keith weinholden. You are inside get rich education. It's 2025. The real estate market is changing. We'll get into that in future. Weeks today. Over the past 100 years plus, we've gone from sound money to Monopoly money, and we're talking about America's currency collapse. What comes next and how it affects you as both an investor and a citizen.   I'd like to welcome in longtime friend of the show and someone that I've personally learned from over the years, because he's a brilliant teacher, real estate investors probably haven't heard his voice as much lately, because until last year, he had been the co host of the terrific real estate guys radio show for nearly 20 years. Before we're done today, you'll learn more about what he's doing now, as he runs the Main Street capitalist platform and is also founder of the raising capitalists foundation. Hey, it's been a few years. Welcome back to GRE Russell Gray.   Russell Gray  3:19   yeah, it's fun. I actually think it's been maybe 10 years when I think about it, I remember I was at a little resort in Mexico recording with you, I think in the gym. It was just audio back then, no video.    Keith Weinhold  3:24   Yeah, I remember we're trying to get the audio right. Then I think you've been here more recently than 10 years ago. But yeah, now there's this video component. I actually have to sit up straight and comb my hair. It's ridiculous. Well, Russ, you're also a buff of monetary history. And before we discuss that, talk about the state of the real estate market today, just briefly, from your vantage point.   Russell Gray 1  3:55    I think the big story, and I'm probably not telling anybody anything they don't know, but the interest rate hike cycle that we went through this last round was quite a bit more substantial, I think, than a lot of people really appreciated, you know. And I started talking about that many years ago, because when you hit the zero bound and you have 6,7,8, years of interest rates below half a point, the change when they started that interest rate cycle from point two, 525 basis points all the way up to five and a quarter? That's a 20x move. And people might say, well, oh, you know, I go back to what Paul Volcker did way back in the day, when he took interest rates from eight or nine to 18. That was only a little bit more than double. Double is a far cry from 20x so we've never seen anything like that. Part of the fallout of that, as you know, is a lot of people wisely, and I was on the front end of cheerleading This is go get those loans refinanced and lock in that cheap money for as long as possible, because a loan will actually become an asset. The problem is, when you do that, you're kind of married to that property. Now it's not quite as bad. As being upside down in a property and you can't get out of it, but it's really hard to walk away from a two or 3% loan in a Six 7% market, because you really can't take your same payment and end up getting more house. And so that equity is kind of a little bit trapped, and that creates some opportunities, but I think that's been the big story, and then kind of the byproduct of the story. Second tier of the story was the impact it had on development, because it made it a lot harder for developers to develop, because their cost of funds and everything in that supply chain, food chain, you marry that to the 2020, COVID Supply Chain lockdown and that disruption, which, you know, you don't shut an economy down and just flick a switch and have it come back on. And so there's all of that. And then the third thing is just this tremendous uncertainty everybody has, because we just went from one extreme to another. And I think people, you know, they don't want to, like, rock the boat, they're going to kind of stay status quo for a little bit, whether they're businesses, whether they're homeowners, whether they're anybody out there that's thinking about moving them, unless life forces you to do it, you're going to try to stay status quo until things calm down. And I don't know how close we are to things calming down.   Keith Weinhold  6:13   One word I use is normalized. Both the 30 year fixed rate mortgage and the Fed funds rate are pretty close to their long term historic average. It just doesn't feel that way, because it was that rate of increase in 2022 that caught a lot of people off guard, like you touched on Well, Russ, now that we've talked about the present day, let's go back in time, and then we'll slowly bring things up to the present day. The dollar is troubled. It's worth perhaps 3% of what it was 100 years ago, but it's still around since it was established in the Coinage Act of 1792 and it's still the world reserve currency. In fact, only three currencies have survived longer than the dollar, the British pound, the Japanese yen and the Swiss franc. So talk to us about this really relentless debasement of the dollar over time, including the creation of the Fed and the Bretton Woods Agreement and all that.   Russell Gray 7:09   That's a big story, as you know, and I always like to try to break it down a little bit. One of my specialties I'd like to believe, is I speak macro and I speak Main Street. And so when I try to break macroeconomics down, I start out with, why do I even care? I mean, if I'm a main street investor, why do I even care? In 2008 as you know, is a wipeout for me. Why? Because I didn't think anything had happened in the macro I didn't think Wall Street bond market. I didn't think that affected me. One thing I really cared about was interest rates. And I had a cursory interest in the bond market. We just try to figure out where interest rates were going. But for the most part, I thought, as a main street real estate investor, I was 100% insulated. I couldn't have been more wrong, because it really does matter, because the value of the dollar, in other words, the purchasing power of the dollar, and usually you refer to that as inflation, right? If inflation is there, the dollar is losing its purchasing power, and so the higher the inflation rate, the faster you're losing that purchasing power. And you might say, well, maybe that matters to me. Maybe it does. But the people who make the money available to the mortgage community, right to the real estate community to borrow that comes out of the bond market. And so when people go to buy a bond, which is an IOU, they're going to get paid back in the currency that they lent in, in this case, dollars. And if they know, if they're making a long term investment in a long term bond, and they're going to get paid back in dollars, they're going to be worth a whole lot less when they get them back. One of the things they're going to want is compensation for that time risk, and that's called higher interest rates. Okay, so now, if you're a main street investor, and higher interest rates impact you, now you understand why you want to pay attention. Okay, so let's just start with that. And so once you understand that the currency is a derivative of money, and money used to be you mentioned the Coinage Act Keith money, which is gold, used to be synonymous with the dollar. The dollar was only a unit of measure of gold, 1/20 of an ounce. It was a unit of measure. So it's like, the way I teach people is, like, if you had a gallon of milk and you traded, I'm a farmer, and I had a lot of milk, and so everybody decided they were going to use gallons of milk as their currency. Hey, where there's a lot of gallons of milk. He's got a big refrigerator. We'll just trade gallons of milk. Hey, Keith, I really like your beef. I you know, will you sell me some, a side of beef, and I'll give you, you know, 100 gallons of milk, you know, like, Oh, that's great. Well, I can't drink all this milk, so I'm going to leave the milk on deposit at the dairy, and then later on, when I decide I want a suit of clothes, I'll say, well, that's 10 gallons of milk. So I'll give the guy 10 gallons of milk. So I just give him a coupon, a claim, a piece of paper for that gallon of milk, or 20 gallons of milk, and he can go to the dairy and pick it up, right? And so that's kind of the way the monetary system evolved, except it wasn't milk, it was gold. So now you got the dollar. Well, after a while, nobody's going to get the milk. They don't care about the milk. And so now. Now, instead of just saying, I'll give you a gallon of milk, you just say, well, I'll give you a gallon. And somebody says, Okay, that's great. I'll take a gallon. They never opened the jug up. They never realized the jug is empty. They're just trading these empty jugs that used to have milk in them. Well, that's what the paper dollar is today. It went from being a gold certificate payable to bearer on demand, a certain amount of gold, a $20 gold certificate, what looks exactly like a $20 FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE. Today they look exactly the same, except one says FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE, which is an IOU backed by nothing, and the other one said gold certificate, which was payable to bearer on demand, real money. So my point is, is he got money which is a derivative of the productivity, the beef, the soot, the milk, whatever, right? That's the real capital. The real capital is the goods and services we all want. Money is where we store the value of whatever it is we created until we want to trade it for something somebody else created later. And it used to be money and currency were one in the same, but now we've separated that. So now all we do is trade empty gallons, which are empty pieces of paper, and that's currency. So those are derivatives, and the last derivative of that chain is credit. And you had Richard Duncan on your show more than once, and he is famous for kind of having this term. We don't normally have capitalism. We have creditism, right? Everything is credit. Everything is claims on wealth, but it's not real wealth, and it's just when we look at what's going on with our current administration and the drive to become a productive rather than a financialized society, again, as part of this uncertainty that everybody has. Because this is not just a subtle little adjustment on the same course. This is like, No, we're we're going down a completely different path. But fundamentally, your system operates on this currency that is flowing through it, like the blood flowing through your body. And if the blood is bad, your body's sick. And right now, our currency is bad, and so it creates problems, not just for us, but all around the world. And now we're exacerbating that. And I'm not saying it's bad. In fact, I think it's actually it's actually good, but change is what it is, right? I mean, it can be really good to go to the gym and work out before we started recording, you talked about your commitment to fitness, and that if you stop working out, you get unfit, and it's hard to start up again. Well, we've allowed our economy to get very unfit. Now we're trying to get fit again, and it's going to be painful. We're going to be sore, but if we stick with it, I think we can actually kind of save this thing. So I don't know what that's going to mean for the dollar ultimately, or if we end up going to something else, but right now, to your point, the dollar is definitely the big dog still, but I think it's probably even more under attack today than it's ever been, and so it's just something I think every Main Street investor needs to pay attention to.    Keith Weinhold  12:46   And it was really that 1913 creation of the Fed, where the Fed's mandates really didn't begin to take effect until 1914 that accelerated this slide in the dollar. Prior to that, it was really just periods of war, like, for example, the Civil War, where we had inflation rise, but then after wars abated, the dollar's strength returned, but that ceased to happen last century.   Russell Gray  13:11   I think there's a much bigger story there. So when we founded the country, we established legal money in the Coinage Act of 1792 we got gold and silver and a specific unit of measure of gold, a specific unit, measure of silver was $1 and that's what money was constitutionally. Alexander Hamilton advocated for the first central bank and got it, but it was issued by Charter, which meant that it was operated by the permission of the Congress. It wasn't institutionalized. It wasn't embedded in the Constitution. It was just something that was granted, like a license. You have a charter to be able to run a bank. When that initial charter came up for renewal, Congress goes, now we're not going to renew it. Well, of course, that made the bankers really upset, because bankers have a pretty good gig, right? They get to just loan people money. They don't have to do any real work, and then they make money on just kind of arbitraging, you know, other people's money. Savers put their money in, and they borrowed the money out, and then they with fractional reserve, they're able to magnify that. So it's, it's kind of a cool gig. And so what happened? Then he had the first central bank, so then they got the second central bank, and the second central bank was also issued by charter this time when it came up for renewal, Congress goes, Yeah, let's renew it, right? Because the bankers knew we got to go buy a few congressmen if we want to keep this thing going. But President Andrew Jackson said, No, not going to happen. And it was a big battle. Is a famous quote of him just calling these bankers a brood of vipers. And I'm going to put you down. And God help me, I will, right? I mean, it was like intense fact, I do believe he got shot at one point. I think he died from lead poisoning, because he never got the bullet out. So, you know, when you go to up against the bankers, it's not pretty, but he succeeded. He was the last president that paid off all the debt, balanced budget, paid off all the debt, and we got kind of back on sound money. Well, then a little while later, said, Okay, we're going to need, like, something major, and this would. I should put on. I got my, this is my hat, right now, I'll kind of put it on. This is my, my tin foil hat. Okay? And so I put this on when I kind of go down the rabbit trail a little bit. No, I'm not saying this is what happened, but it wouldn't surprise me, right? Because I know that war is profitable, and so sometimes, you know, your comment was, hey, there's the bank, and then there was, you know, the war, or there's the war, then there's a bank, which comes first the chicken or the egg. I think there's an article where Henry Ford and Thomas Edison went to Congress. I think it was December. The article was published New York Tribune, December 4. I think 1921 you can look it up, New York Tribune, front page article   Keith Weinhold  15:38   fo those of you in the audio only. Russ started donning a tin foil looking hat here about one minute ago.    Russell Gray  15:45   I did, yeah, so I put it on. Just so fair warning. You know, I may go a little conspiratorial, but the reason I do that is I just, I think we've seen enough, just in current, modern history and politics, in the age of AI and software and freedom of speech and new media, there's a lot of weird stuff going on out there, but a lot of stuff that we thought was really weird a little while ago has turned out to be more true than we thought. When you look back in history, and you kind of read the official narrative and you wonder, you kind of read between the lines. You go, oh, maybe some stuff went on here. So anyway, the allegation that Ford made, smart guy, Thomas Edison, smart guy. And they go to Congress, and they go, Hey, we need to get the gold out of the banker's hands, because gold is money, and we need money not to revolve around gold, because the bankers control gold. They control the money, and they make profits, his words, not mine, by starting wars, because he was very upset about World War One, which happened. We got involved right after Fed gets formed in 1913 World War One starts in 1914 the United States sits off in the background and sells everybody, everything. It collects a bunch of gold, and then enters at the end and ends it all. And that big influx created the roaring 20s, as we all know, which ended big boom to big bust. And that cycle, which then a crisis that created, potentially a argument for why the government should have more control, right? So you kind of go down this path. So we ended up in 1865 with President Lincoln suppressing states rights and eventually creating an unconstitutional income tax and then creating an unconstitutional currency. That's what Abraham Lincoln did. And then on the back end of that, you know, it didn't end well for him, and I don't know why, but all I know is that we had a financial crisis in 1907 and the solution to that was the Aldrich plan, which was basically a monopoly on money. It's called a money trust. And Charles Lindbergh, SR was railing against it, as were many people at the time, going, No, this is terrible. So they renamed the Aldrich plan the Federal Reserve Act. And instead of going for a bank charter, they went for a constitutional amendment, and they got it in the 16th Amendment, and that's where we got the IRS. That's where we got the income tax, which was only supposed to be 7% only affect like the top one or 2% of earners, right? And that's where we got, you know, the Federal Reserve. That's where all that was born. Since that happened, to your point, the dollar has been on with a slight little rise up in the 20s, which, you know, there's a whole thing about whether that caused the crash or not. But at the end of the day, if you go look at St Louis Fed, which you go look at all the time, and you just look at the long term trend of the dollar, it's terrible. And the barometer, that's gold, right? $20 of gold in 1913 and 1933 and then 42 in 1971 or two, whatever it was, three, and then eventually as high as 850 but at the turn of the century, this century, it was $250 so at $2,500 it would have lost 90% in the 21st Century. The dollars lost 90% in the 21st Century, just to 2500 that's profound to go. That's right, it already lost more than 90% from $20 to 250 so it lost 90% and then 90% of the 10% that was left. And that's where we're at. We're worse than that. Today, no currency, as far as I understand, I've been told this. Haven't done the homework, but it's my understanding, no currency in the history of the world has ever survived that kind of debasement. So I think a lot of people who are watching are like, okay, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. And then the big question is, is when that when comes? What does the transition look like? What rises in its place? And then you look at things like a central bank digital currency, which is not like Bitcoin, it's not a crypto, it's a centrally controlled currency run by the central bank. If we get that, I would argue that's not good for privacy and security. Could be Bitcoin would be better. I would argue, could go back to gold backing, which I would say is better than what we have, or we could get something nobody's even thought of. I don't know. We don't know, but I do think we're at the end of the life cycle. Historically, all things being equal. And I think all the indication with a big run up of gold, gold is screaming something's broken. It's just screaming it right now, not just because the price is up, but who's buying it. It's just central banks.   Keith Weinhold  20:12   Central banks are doing most of the buying, right? It's not individual investors going to a coin shop. So that's really screaming, telling you that people are concerned. People are losing their faith in giving loans to the United States for sure. And Russ, as we talk about gold, and it's important link to the dollar over time, you mentioned how they wanted it, to get it out of the bank's hands for a while. Of course, there was also a period of time where it was illegal for Americans to own gold. And then we had this Bretton Woods Agreement, which was really important as well, where we ended up violating promises that had to do with gold again. So can you speak to us some more about that? Because a lot of people just don't understand what happened at Bretton Woods.   Russell Gray  20:56   What happened is we had the big crash in 1929 and the net result of that was, in 1933 we got executive order 6102 In fact, I have a picture of it framed, and that was in the wake of that in 1933 and so what Franklin Delano Roosevelt did in signing that document, which was empowered by a previous act of Congress, basically let him confiscate all The money. It'd be like right now if, right now, you know, President Trump signed an executive order and said, You have to take all your cash, every all the cash that you have out of your wallet. You have to send it all, take it into the bank, and they're going to give you a Chuck E Cheese token, right? And if you don't do it, if you do it, it's a $500,000 fine in 10 years in prison. Right? Back then it was a $10,000 fine, which was twice the price of the average Home huge fine, plus jail time. That's how severe it was, okay? So they confiscated all the money. That happened in 33 okay? Now we go off to war, and we enter the war late again. And so we have the big manufacturing operation. We're selling munitions and all kinds of supplies to everybody, all over the world, right? And we're just raking the gold and 20,000 tons of gold. We got all the gold. We got the biggest army now, we got the biggest bomb, we got the biggest economy. We got the strongest balance sheet. Well, I mean, you know, we went into debt for the war, but, I mean, we had a lot of gold. So now everybody else is decimated. We're the big dog. Everybody knows we're the big dog. Nine states shows up in New Hampshire Bretton Woods, and they have this big meeting with the world, and they say, Hey guys, new sheriff in town. Britain used to be the world's reserve currency, but today we're going to be the world's reserve currency. And so this was the new setup. But it's okay. It's okay because our dollar is as good as gold. It's backed by gold, and so anytime you want foreign nations, you can just bring your dollars to us and we'll give you the gold, no problem. And everyone's like, okay, great. What are you going to say? Right? You got the big bomb, you got the big army. Everybody needs you for everything to live like you're not going to say no. So they said, Yes, of course, the United States immediately. I've got a speech that a guy named Beardsley Rummel did. Have you ever heard me talk about this before? Keith, No, I've never heard about this. So Beardsley Rummel was the New York Fed chair when all this was happening. And so he gave a speech to the American Bar Association in 1945 and I got a transcript of it, a PDF transcript of it from 1946 and basically he goes, Look, income taxes are obsolete. We don't need income tax anymore because we can print money, because we're off the gold standard and we have no accountability. We just admitted it, just totally admitted it, and said the only reason we have income tax is to manipulate behavior, is to redistribute wealth, is to force people to do what we want them to do, punish things and reward others, right? Just set it plain language. I have a transcript of the speech. You can get a copy of you send an email to Rummel R U, M, L@mainstreetcapitalist.com I'll get it to you. So it's really, really interesting. So he admitted it. So we went along in the 40s and the 50s, and, you know, we had the only big manufacturing you know, because everybody else is still recovering from the war. Everything been bombed to smithereens, and we're spending money and doing all kinds of stuff. And having the 50s, it was great, right, right up until the mid 60s. So the mid 60s, it's like, Okay, we got a problem. And Charles de Gaulle, who was the president of France at the time, went to a meeting. And there's a YouTube video, but you can see it, he basically told the world, hey, I don't think the United States is doing a good job managing this world's reserve currency. I don't think they've got the gold. I think they printed too much money. I think that we should start to go redeem our dollars and get the gold. That was pretty forward thinking. And he created a run on the bank. And at the same time, we passed the Coinage Act in 1965 and took all the silver out of the people's money. So we took the gold in 33 and then we took the silver in 65 right? Because we got Vietnam and the Great Society, welfare, all these things were going on in the 60s. We're just going broke. Meanwhile, our gold supply went from 20,000 tons down to eight and Richard. Nixon is like, whoa, time out. Like, this is bad. And so we had inflation in 1970 August 15, 1971 year before August 15, 1971 1970 Nixon writes an executive order and freezes all prices and all wages. It became illegal by presidential edict for a private business to give their employee a raise or to raise their prices to the customers.    Keith Weinhold  25:30   It's almost if that could happen price in theUnited States of America, right?    Russell Gray  25:36   And inflation was 4.4% and it was a national emergency like today. I mean, you know, a few years ago, like three or four years ago, we if we could get it down 4.4% it'd be Holly. I'd be like a celebration. That was bad. And so that's what happened. So a year later, that didn't work. It was a 90 day thing. It was a disaster. And so in a year later, August 15, 1971 Nixon came on live TV after Gunsmoke. I think it was, and I was old enough I'm watching TV on a Sunday night I watched it. Wow. So I live, that's how old I am. So it's a lot of this history, not the Bretton Woods stuff, but from like 1960 2,3,4, forward. I remember I was there.    Keith Weinhold  26:13   Yeah, that you remember the whole Nixon address on television. We should say it for the listener that doesn't know. Basically the announcement Nixon made, he said, was a temporary measure, is that foreign nations can no longer redeem their dollars for gold. He broke the promise that was made at Bretton Woods in about 1945   Russell Gray  26:32   Yeah. And then gold went from $42 up to 850 and a whole series of events that have led to where we're at today were put in place to cover up the fact that the dollar was failing. We had climate emergency. We were headed towards the next global Ice Age. We had an existential threat in two different diseases that hit one right after the other. First one was the h1 n1 flu, swine flu, and then the next thing was AIDS. And so we had existential pandemic, two of them. We also had a oil shortage crisis. We were going to run out of fossil fuel by the year 2000 we had to do all kinds of very public, visible, visceral things that we would all see. You could only buy gas odd even days, like, if your license plate ended in an odd number, you could go on these days, and if it ended on an even number, you could go on the other days. And so we had that. We lowered our national speed limit down to 55 miles an hour. We created the EPA and all these different agencies under Jimmy Carter to try to regulate and manage all of this crisis. Prior to that, Nixon sent Kissinger over to China, and we opened up trade relations. And we'd been in Vietnam to protect the world from communism because it was so horrible. And then in the wake of that, we go over to Communist China, Chairman Mao and open up trade relations. Why we needed access to their cheap labor to suck up all the inflation. And we went over to the Saudis, and we cut the petro dollar deal. Why? Because we needed the float. We needed some place for all these excess dollars that we had created to get sucked up. And so they got sucked up in trading the largest commodity in the world, energy. And the deal was, hey, Saudis, here's the deal. You like your kingdom? Well, we got the big bomb. We got the big army. You're going to rule the roost in the in the Middle East, and we'll protect you. All you got to do is make sure you sell all your oil in dollars and dollars only. And they're like, Well, what if we're selling oil to China, or what if we're selling oil to Japan? Can they pay in yen? Nope, they got to sell yen. Buy dollars. Well, what do we do with all these dollars? Buy our treasuries. Okay, so what if I got this? Yeah, and so that was the petrodollar system. And the world looked at everything went on, and the world is like, Hmm, the United States coming back to Europe, and Charles de Gaulle, they're like, the United States is not handling this whole dollar thing real well. We need an alternative. What if all of us independent nations in Europe got together and created a common currency? We don't want to be like one country, like the United States, but we want to be like an economic union. So let's create a current let's call it the euro. And they started that process in the 70s, but they didn't get it done till 99 and so they get it done in 99 as soon as they get it done, this guy named Saddam Hussein goes, Hey, I'm now the big dog here. I got the fourth largest army in the world. I'm here in, you know, big oil producing nation. Let's trade in the euro. Let's get off the dollar. Let's do oil in the euro. And he's gone. I'm not sure I should put my hat back on. I'm not sure, but somehow we went into Afghanistan and took a hard left and took this guy out.   Keith Weinhold  29:44   Some credence to this. Yes, yeah, so. But with that said,   Russell Gray  29:47   you know, we ended up with the Euro taking about 20% of the global trade market from the United States, which is about where it sits today. And the United States used to be up over 80% and now we're down below 60% still. The Big Dog by triple and the euro is not in a position to supplant the US, but I think China, whose claim to fame is looking at other people's technology and models and copying it, looked at what the United States did to become the dominant economic force, and I think they've systematically been copying it. I wrote a report on this way back in 2013 when I started really paying attention to it and began to chronicle all the things that they were doing, this big D dollarization movement that I think still has legs. It's the BRICS movement. It's all the central banks buying gold. It's the bilateral trade agreements where people are doing business outside the dollar. There's been not just that, but also putting together the infrastructure, right? The Asian Infrastructure Bank is an alternative to the IMF looking, if you have you read Confessions of an economic hitman. No. Okay, so this is a guy that used to work in the government, I think, CIA or something, and he would go down and he'd cut deals with leaders of countries to get them to borrow from the United States to put in key infrastructure so they could trade with the US. And then, of course, if they defaulted, then the US owned that in the infrastructure. You can look it up. His name is Perkins, right. Look it up confessions of economic hit now, but you see China doing the same thing. China's got their Belt and Road Initiative. And you go through, and if you want to trade with China on that route, you have traded, you're gonna have to have infrastructure. You can eat ports. You're gonna need terminals for distribution. But you, Oh, you don't have the money. We'll loan it to you, and we'll loan it to you and you want. Now we're creating demand for you want, and we also are enslaving borrower servant to the lender. We're beginning to enslave these other nations under the guise of helping them by financing their growth so they can do business with us. It's the same thing the United States did and Shanghai Gold Exchange, as opposed to the London Bullion exchange. So all of the key pieces of infrastructure that were put in place to facilitate Western hegemony in the financial markets the Chinese have been systematically putting in place with bricks, and so there's a reason we're in this big trade war right now. We recognize that they had started to get in a position where they were actually a real threat, and we got to cut their legs out from underneath them before they get any stronger. Again, I should put my hat back on. Nobody's calling me up and telling me, I'm just reading between the lines. Sure,   Keith Weinhold  32:23   there certainly are more competitors to the dollar now. And can you imagine what rate of inflation that we would have had if we had not outsourced our labor and productivity over to a low wage place like China in the east? Russ and I have been talking about the long term debasement of the dollar and why. More on that when we come back, including what Russ is up to today. You're listening to get rich education. Our guest is Russell Gray. I'm your host, Keith Weinhold, the same place where I get my own mortgage loans is where you can get yours. Ridge lending group and MLS, 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than anyone because they specialize in income properties. They help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. Start your pre qual and even chat with President Chaley Ridge personally while it's on your mind, start at Ridge lendinggroup.com that's Ridge lendinggroup.com. You know what's crazy? Your bank is getting rich off of you. The average savings account pays less than 1% it's like laughable. Meanwhile, if your money isn't making at least 4% you're losing to inflation. That's why I started putting my own money into the FFI liquidity fund. It's super simple. Your cash can pull in up to 8% returns, and it compounds. It's not some high risk gamble like digital or AI stock trading. It's pretty low risk because they've got a 10 plus year track record of paying investors on time, in full every time. I mean, I wouldn't be talking about it if I wasn't invested myself. You can invest as little as 25k and you keep earning until you decide you want your money back. No weird lockups or anything like that. So if you're like me and tired of your liquid funds just sitting there doing nothing. Check it out. Text family, 266, 866, to learn about freedom family investments, liquidity fund again. Text family, 266, 866,   Garrett Sutton  34:36   hi. This is Rich Dad advisor, Garrett Sutton. You're listening to the always valuable. Get rich education with Keith Weinhold, don't quit your Daydream.    Keith Weinhold  34:52   Welcome back to get rich education. We're talking with the main street capitalists Russell gray about this long term debasement of the dollar. It's an. Inevitable. It's one of the things we actually can forecast with pretty good predictability that the dollar will continue to debase. It's one of the few almost guarantees that we have in investing. So we can think about how we want to play that Russ one thing I wonder about is, did we have to completely de peg the dollar from gold? Couldn't we have just diluted it where we could instead say, Well, hey, now, instead of just completely depegging the dollar from gold, we could say, well, now it takes 10 times as many dollars as it used to to redeem it for an ounce of gold. Did it make it more powerful that we just completely de pegged it 100%   Russell Gray  35:36   it would disempower the monopoly. Right? In other words, I think that the thing from the very beginning, was scripted to disconnect from the accountability of gold, which is what sound money advocates want. They want some form of independent Accountability. Gold is like an audit to a financial system. If you're the bankers and you're running the program, the last thing in the world you want is a gold standard, because it limits your ability to print money out of thin air and profit from that. So I don't think the people who are behind all of this are, in no way, shape or form, interested in doing anything that's going to limit their power or hold them accountable. They want just the opposite. I think if they could wave a magic wand and pick their solution to the problem, it would be central bank digital currency, which would give them ultimate control. Yeah. And it wouldn't surprise me if we maybe, perhaps, were on a path where some crises were going to converge, whether it's opportunistic, meaning that the crisis happened on its own, and quote Rahm Emanuel and whoever he was quoting, you know, never let a good crisis go to waste, and you're just opportunistic, or, you know, put the conspiracy theory hat on, and maybe these crises get created in order to facilitate the power grab. I don't know. It really doesn't matter what the motives are or how it happens at the end of the day, it's what happens. It happened in 33 it happened in 60. In 71 it's what happens. And so it's been a systematic de pegging of any form of accountability. I mean, we used to have a budget ceiling. We used to talk about now it's just like, it's routine. You blow right through it, right, right. There's you balance. I mean, when's the last time you even had a budget? Less, less, you know, much less anything that looked like a valid balanced budget amendment. So I think there's just no accountability other than the voting booth. And, you know, I think maybe you could make the argument that whether you like Trump or not, the public's apparent embrace of him, show you that the main street and have a lot of faith in Main Street. I think Main Street is like, you know what? This is broken. I don't know what's how to fix it, but somebody just needs to go in and just tear this thing down and figure out a new plant. Because I think if you anybody paying attention, knows that this perpetual debasement, which is kind of the theme of the show is it creates haves and have nots. Guys like you who understand how to use real estate to short the dollar, especially when you marry it to gold, which is one of my favorite strategies to double short the dollar, can really magnify the power of inflation to pull more wealth onto your balance sheet. Problem is the people who aren't on that side of the coin are on the other side of the coin, and so the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. Well, the first order of business in a system we can't control is help as many people be on the rich get richer. That's why we had the get rich show, right? Let's help other people get rich. Because if I'm the only rich guy in the room, all the guns are pointed at me, right? I wanted everybody as rich as possible. I think Trump and Kiyosaki wrote about that in their book. Why we want you to be rich, right? When everybody's prospering, it's it's better, it's safer, you have people to trade with and whatnot, but we have eviscerated the middle class because industry has had to go access cheap labor markets in order to compensate for this inflation. And you know, you talk about the Fed mandate, which is 2% inflation, price inflation, 2% so if you say something that costs $1 today, a year from now, is going to cost $1 too, you think, well, maybe that's not that bad. But here's the problem, the natural progression of Business and Technology is to lower the cost, right? So you have something cost $1 today, and because somebody's using AI and internet and automation and robots and all this technology, right? And the cost, they could really sell it for 80 cents. And so the Fed looks at and goes, Let's inflate to $1.02 that's not two cents of inflation. That's 22 cents of inflation. And so there's hidden inflation. The benefits of the gains in productivity don't show up in the CPI, but it's like deferred maintenance on an apartment building. You can make your cash flow look great if you're not setting anything aside for the inevitable day when that roof is going to go out and that parking lot is going to need to be repaved, right? And you don't know how far out you are until you get there and you're like, wow, I'm really short, and I think that we have been experiencing for decades. The theft of the benefit of our productivity gains, and we're not just a little bit out of position. We're way out of position. That's   Keith Weinhold  40:07   a great point. Like I had said earlier, imagine what the rate of inflation would be if we hadn't outsourced so much of our labor and productivity to low cost China. And then imagine what the rate of inflation would be as well, if you would factor in all of this increased productivity and efficiency, the natural tendencies of which are to make prices go lower as society gets more productive, but instead they've gone higher. So when you adjust for some of these factors, you just can't imagine what the true debased purchasing power of the dollar is. It's been happening for a long time. It's inevitable that it's going to continue to happen in the future. So this has been a great chat about the history and us understanding what the powers that be have done to debase our dollar. It's only at what rate we don't know. Russ, tell us more about what you're doing today. You're really out there more as a champion for Main Street in capitalism.   Russell Gray  41:04   I mean, 20 years with Robert and the real estate guys, and it was fantastic. I loved it. I went through a lot, obviously, in 2008 and that changed me a little bit. Took me from kind of being a blocking and tackling, here's how you do real estate, and to really understanding macro and going, you know, it doesn't matter. You can do like I did, and you build this big collection. Big collection of properties and you lose it all in a moment because you don't understand macro. So I said, Okay, I want to champion that cause. And so we did that. And then we saw in the 2012 JOBS Act, the opportunity for capital raisers to go mainstream and advertise for credit investors. And I wrote a report then called the new law breaks Wall Street monopoly. And I felt like that was going to be a huge opportunity, and we pioneered that. But then after my late wife died, and I had a chance to spend some time alone during COVID, and I thought, life is short. What do I really want to accomplish before I go? And then I began looking at what was going on in the world. I see now a couple of things that are both opportunities and challenges or causes to be championed. And one is the mega trend that I believe the world is going you know, some people call it a fourth turning whatever. I don't consider that kind of we have to fall off a cliff as Destiny type of thing to be like cast in stone. But what I do see is that people are sick and tired of monopolies. We're sick and tired of big tech, we're sick and tired of big media, we're sick and tired of big government. We're sick and tired of big corporations, we don't want it, and big banks, right? So you got the rise of Bitcoin, you got people trying to get out from underneath the Western hegemony, as we've been talking about decentralization of everything. Our country was founded on the concept of decentralization, and so people don't understand that, right? It used to be everything was centralized. All powers in the king. Real Estate meant royal property. That's what real estate it's not like real asset, like tangible it's royal estate. It's royal property. Everything belonged to the king, and you just got to work it like a serf. And then you got to keep 75% in your produce, and you sent 25% you sent 25% through all the landlords, the land barons, and all the people in the hierarchy that fed on running things for the king, but you didn't own anything. Our founder set that on, turn that upside down, and said, No, no, no, no, no, it's not the king that's sovereign. It's the individual. The individual is sovereign. It isn't the monarchy, it's the individual states. And so we're going to bring the government, small. The central government small has only got a couple of obligations, like protect the borders, facilitate interstate commerce, and let's just have one common currency so that we can do business together. Other than that, like, the state's just going to run the show. Of course, Lincoln kind of blew that up, and it's gotten a lot worse after FDR, so I feel like we're under this big decentralization movement, and I think Main Street capitalism is the manifestation of that. If you want to decentralize capitalism, the gig economy, if you want to be a guy like you, and you can run your whole business off your laptop with a microphone and a camera, you know, in today's day and age with technology, people have tasted the freedom of decentralization. So I think the rise of the entrepreneur, I think the ability to go build a real asset portfolio and get out of the casinos of Wall Street. I think right now, if we are successful in bringing back these huge amounts of investment, Trump's already announced like two and a half or $3 trillion of investment, people are complaining, oh, the world is selling us. Well, they're selling stocks and they're selling but they're putting the money actually into creating businesses here in the United States that's going to create that primary driver, as you well know, in real estate, that's going to create the secondary and tertiary businesses, and the properties they're going to use all kinds of Main Street opportunity are going to grow around that. I lived in Silicon Valley, when a company would get funded, it wasn't just a company that prospered, it was everything around that company, right? All these companies. I remember when Apple started. I remember when Hewlett Packard, it was big, but it got a lot bigger, right there. I watched all that happen in Silicon Valley. I think that's going to happen again. I think we're at the front end of that. And so that's super exciting. Wave. The second thing that is super important is this raising capitalist project. And the reason I'm doing it is because if we don't train our next generation in the principles of capitalism and the freedom that it how it decentralizes Their personal economy, and they get excited about Bitcoin, but that's not productive. I'm not putting it down. I'm just saying it's not productive. You have to be productive. You want to have a decentralized currency. Yes, you want to decentralize productivity. That's Main Street capitalism. If kids who never get a chance to be in the productive economy get to vote at 1819, 2021, 22 before they've ever earned a paycheck, before they have any idea, never run a business. Somebody tells them, hey, those guys that have all that money and property, they cheated. It's not fair. We need to take from them. We need to limit them, not thinking, Oh, well, if I do that, when I get to be there, that what I'm voting for is going to get on me. Right now, Keith, there are kids in ninth grade who are going to vote for your next president, right?   Keith Weinhold  45:56   And they think capitalism is evil. This is part of what you're doing with the raising capitalists project, helping younger people think differently. Russ, I have one last thing to ask you. This has to do with the capitalism that you're championing on your platforms now. And real estate, I continue to see sometimes I get comments on my YouTube channel, especially maybe it's more and more people increasingly saying, Hey, I think housing should be a human right. So talk to us about that. And maybe it's interesting, Russ, if I take the other side of it and play devil's advocate, people who think housing is a human right, they say something like, the idea is that housing, you know, it's a fundamental need, just like food and clean water and health care are without stable housing. It's incredibly hard for a person to access opportunities like work and education or health care or participate meaningfully in society at all. So government ought to provide housing for everybody. What are your thoughts there?   Russell Gray  46:54   Well, it's inherently inflationary, which is the root cause of the entire problem. So anytime you create consumption without production, you're going to have more consumers than producers, and so you're going to have more competition for those goods. The net, net truth of what happens in that scenario are shortages everywhere. Every civilization that's ever tried any form of system where people just get things for free because they need them, end up with shortages in poverty. It doesn't lift everybody. It ruins everything. I mean, that's not conjecture. That's history, and so that's just the way it works. And if you just were to land somebody on a desert island and you had an economy of one, they're going to learn really quick the basic principles of capitalism, which is production always precedes consumption, always 100% of the time, right? If you're there on that desert island and you don't hunt fish or gather, you don't eat, right? You don't get it because, oh, it's a human right to have food. Nope, it's a human right to have the right to go get food. Otherwise, you're incarcerated, you have to have the freedom of movement to go do something to provide for yourself, but you cannot allow people to consume without production. So everybody has to produce. And you know, if you go back to the Plymouth Rock experiment, if you're familiar with that at all, yeah, yeah. So you know, just for anybody who doesn't know, when the Pilgrims came over here in the 1600s William Bradford was governor, and they tried it. They said, Hey, we're here. Let's Stick Together All for one and one for all. Here's the land. Everybody get up every day and work. Everybody works, and everybody eats. They starved. And so he goes, Okay, guys, new plan. All right, you wine holds. See this little plot of land, that's yours. You work it. You can eat whatever you produce. Over there, you grace. You're going to do yours and Johnson's, you're going to do yours, right? Well, what happened is now everybody got up and worked, and they created more than enough for their own family, and they had an abundance. And the abundance was created out of their hunger. When they went to serve their own needs, they created abundance forever others. That's the premise of capitalism. It's not the perfect system. There is no perfect system. We live in a world where human beings have to work before they get to eat. When I say eat, it could be having a roof over their head. It could be having clothes. It could be going on vacation. It could be having a nice car. It could be getting health care. It doesn't matter what it is, whatever it is you need. You have the right, or should have, the right, in a free system to go earn that by being productive, but the minute somebody comes and says, Oh, you worked, and I'm going to take what you produced and give it to somebody else who didn't, that's patently unfair, but economically, it's disastrous, because it incentivizes people not to work, which creates less production, more consumption. I have another analogy with sandwich makers, but you can imagine that if you got a group if you got a group of people making sandwiches, one guy starts creating coupons for sandwiches. Well then if somebody says, Okay, well now we got 19 people providing for 20. That's okay, but then all the guys making sandwiches. Why making sandwiches? I'm gonna get the coupon business pretty soon. You got 18 guys doing coupons, only two making sandwiches. Not. Have sandwiches to go around all the sandwiches cost tons of coupons because we got way more financialization than productivity, right? That's the American economy. We have to fix that. We can't have people making money by just trading on other people's productivity. We have to have people actually being productive. This is what I believe the administration is trying to do, rebuild the middle class, rebuild that manufacturing base, make us a truly productive economy, and then you don't have to worry about these things, right? We're going to create abundance. And if you don't have the inflation is which is coming from printing money out of thin air and giving to people who don't produce, then housing, all sudden, becomes affordable. It's not a problem. Health care becomes affordable. Everything becomes affordable because you create abundance, because everybody's producing the system is fundamentally broken. Now we have to learn how to profit in it in its current state, which is what you teach people how to do. We also have to realize that it's not sustainable. We're on an unsustainable path, and we're probably nearing that event horizon, the path of no return, where the system is going to break. And the question is, is, how are you going to be prepared for it when it happens? Number two, are you going to be wise enough to advocate when you get a chance to cast a vote or make your voice heard for something that's actually going to create prosperity and freedom versus something that's going to create scarcity and oppression? And that's the fundamental thing that we have to master as a society. We got to get to our youth, because they're the biggest demographic that can blow the thing up, and they're the ones that have been being indoctrinated the worst.   Keith Weinhold  51:29   Yes, Fed Chair Jerome Powell himself said that we live in a economic system today that is unsustainable. Yes, the collectivism we touched on quickly descends into the tyranny of the majority. And in my experience, historically, the success of public housing projects has been or to mixed at best, residents often don't respect the property when they don't have an equity stake in it or even a security deposit tied up in it, and blight and high crime rates have often followed with these public housing projects. When you go down that path of making housing as a human right, like you said earlier, you have a right to go procure housing for yourself, just not to ask others to pay for it for you. Well, Russ, this has been great. It's good to have your voice back on the show. Here again, here on a real estate show. If people want to connect with you, continue to see what you've been up to and the good projects that you're working on, promoting the virtues of capitalism. What's the best way for them to do that?   Russell Gray  52:31   I think just send an email to follow at Russell Gray, R, U, S, S, E, L, L, G, R, A, y.com, let you know where I am on social media. I'll let you know when I put out new content. I'll let you know when I'm a guest on somebody somebody's show and I'm on the cusp of getting my own show finally launched. I've been doing a lot of planning to get that out, but I'm excited about it because I do think, like I said, The time is now, and I think the marketplace is ripe, and I do speak Main Street and macro, and I hope I can add a nuance to the conversation that will add value to people.   Keith Weinhold  53:00   Russ, it's been valuable as always. Thanks so much for coming back onto the show. Thanks, Keith.   Yeah, terrific, historic outline from Russ about the long term decline of the dollar. It's really a fresh reminder and motivator to keep being that savvy borrower. Of course, real estate investors have access to borrow giant sums of dollars and short the currency that lay people do not. In fact, lay people don't even understand that it's a viable strategy at all. Like he touched on, Russ has really been bringing an awareness about how decentralization is such a powerful force that reshapes society. In fact, he was talking about that the last time that I saw him in person a few months ago. Notably, he touched on Nixon era wage and price controls. Don't you find it interesting? Fascinating, really, how a few weeks ago, Trump told Walmart not to pass tariff induced price increases onto their customers. Well, that's a form of price control that we're seeing today to our point, when we had the father of Reaganomics, David Stockman here on the show, five weeks ago, tariffs are already government intervention into the free market, and then a president telling private companies how to set their prices, that is really strong government overreach. I mean, I can't believe that more people aren't talking about this. Maybe that's just because this cycle started with Walmart, and that's just doesn't happen to be a company that people feel sorry for. Hey, well, I look forward to meeting you in person in Miami in just four days, as I'll be a faculty member for when we kick off the terrific real estate guys Investor Summit and see and really getting to know you, because we're going to spend nine days together. Teaching, learning and having a great time on a cruise ship in the Caribbean. Until then, I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, don't quit your Daydream.   Speaker 3  55:13   Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of get rich Education LLC, exclusively.   Keith Weinhold  55:36   You know whatever you want, the best written real estate and finance info. Oh, geez, today's experience limits your free articles access and it's got pay walls and pop ups and push notifications and cookies disclaimers. It's not so great. So then it's vital to place nice, clean, free content into your hands that adds no hype value to your life. That's why this is the golden age of quality newsletters, and I write every word of ours myself. It's got a dash of humor, and it's to the point because even the word abbreviation is too long, my letter usually takes less than three minutes to read. And when you start the letter, you also get my one hour fast real estate video. Course, it's all completely free. It's called the Don't quit your Daydream letter. It wires your mind for wealth, and it couldn't be easier for you to get it right now. Just text. GRE to 66866, while it's on your mind, take a moment to do it right now. Text, GRE to 66866   The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth, building, getricheducation.com.