The « show » is about (the assault on)social ties… . And ALL the people who have come will be kept away from the discussion… ???

(For real ???!!!)

After viewing the first 6 minutes (and a bit more)... of the « show (?) », one question- among many (really many !) others, stands out from the crowd : « They're not going to include the audience in the discussion  » ?

Are u implying that you regret that the « resistance and protest » ONLY lasted for one night ?

That, would be an act of resistance and protest as well.

AND

Beg ur pardon plz. Is the Nation-Stae/Empire in or out of your focus ?
Would u consider d following ?
Ch8 of d book below starts like this :
« ONE MIGHT WELL ASK: If our political and legal ideas really
are founded on the logic of slavery,
then how did we ever abolish it? ».

Would u agree to debate (gently) about that plz?
To begin , would u read Ch4 of the book below on ur left plz?
After, regarding debt as a means of enslavement, perhaps the book below on ur right? Ch6 only?

WHY ? Why do the « remittances play a big role in Pacific economies » ? Min09:40s to 10:00 .

May I suggest a book for a trip back in time. The English Financial Revolution.

Carl Wennerlind : « Casualties of Credit » ?

Negatively(a bit), cuz u ignore(or seem to) the subprime crisis. Ann Pettifor, Steve Keen, Michaël Hudson… . 
« Instead, public finance is seen as being dependent on the ‘wealth-creating’ private sector, leading to a fundamental misunderstanding of how states are funded ». p.12.

It IS also exceptional(!) that a journalist(chic as well AND open-minded !) accepts to tag along a critical interpretation !

Your speech was sparkling, chic, passionate, critical… .
I am truly amazed.
Positively and a bit negatively.
Positively because, again, you are a passionate scholar aiming for a critical interpretation.
That’s rare.

Right. Queen Elizabeth also had no idea why the subprime crisis happened. So she asked. To the top economists from the London school of economics. They too had no idea... .

 « Instead, public finance is seen as being dependent on the ‘wealth-creating’ private sector, leading to a fundamental misunderstanding of how states are funded ». These lines are from the book of Mary MELLOR : « MONEY- Myths, Truths and alternatives », p.12.

Beg ur pardon.
The story IS fascinating indeed.
However from my point of view, there’s more to it because of : « (...)Dorji-Wangchuck asked Todd to help Bhutan raise a $10m loan from the World Bank ».
Why ???

Well noted. Thanks.

My bad. Sorry. Let's try with Carl Wennerlind:"Casualties of Credit -The English Financial revolution". Plz stop reading Dr
GRAEBER,for the time being.
It's about the "background" as an illusion/utopia.
You, going to buy a book(?) AND d very same thing, but this time in a Jumanji-like world... .

P18/662:"For most of human history- at least, the History of states and empires-most human beings have been told that they are debtors(plz see note4!).

1) than by reframing them in the langage of debt(...)"

1/2P14/662:"The very fact that we don't know what debt is, the very flexibility of the concept,is the basis of it's Power. If History(of the States?) shows anything, it is that there's no better way to justify relations FOUNDED ON VIOLENCE, to make such relations seem moral,

If so, why not? Being able to open debates -and not closing them, should be the norm.

Well noted. However, perhaps after reading Ch6... . Who knows?

"Warlord", against "the revolting populace"... .

Repartions is indeed the correct move, IF we were living in "human economies". BUT it's NOT in Market/State economies(!)... . From my point of view.

If I may also. There is an ongoing "reparations movement". Not only about Haiti. Rather slavery, I'd say. From my perspective,it's about MONEY. But..., what is MONEY? WHERE does it come from? Ch6 of the book, you are reading... .

So u always think of social relations in a vertical way? Not horizontal? You do know that societies WITHOUT State exist. Do u?

I am working on that. But isn't revolution about imagining new ways of social interactions? In a community. Where one voice is equal to another? Have u heard of Pierre Clastres?

There's a u2be video about that. Graeber+Wengrow. Kondriak(?), I think. Could u give it a try?

The (Nation-)State(/Empire). How do you look at this institution? It is Power. Something violently coercive(and utopian). Oppressive. So, d 1st move of "former" slaves is to reinstitute THIS institution? That's what u call a "revolution"???

Well, 1st of all, thanks. Extremely rare nowadays to find a scholar who acts like one.

Beg ur pardon. May I suggest another perspective? Ch4 of the book below on ur left? AND, Ch8 of the book below on ur right, starts like this :
« ONE MIGHT WELL ASK: If our political and legal ideas really
are founded on the logic of slavery,
then how did we ever abolish it? ».

Please look closelly. With a critical eye, if possible, this time. Maybe(!) there's more to it... .
And regarding your hope. Well, what is money? Where does it come from?