O que é ecossocialismo? | Kohei Saito | Opera Mundi

[Music] for mar mar Memorial m for op good morning Professor an honor to have your presence at 20 minutes thank you for accepting our invitation yeah it's 9 p.m here but thank you so much for your invitation and I'm really excited joining uh this program tonight Professor CIT for a long time prevailed the idea that Mark's Legacy had little or nothing to offer for Reflections on ecology even important important e Eco socialist theorists such as Michelle levie came to identify anti-ecological elements in the work of the German thinker you in your book disagree age with

this conclusion for what reason okay so even many good marxists argue that Marx was not really conscious about ecological issues uh rather he was much more optimistic about technological progress you know if you read Communist Manifesto for example he seems to believe that capitalism at first is very destructive so it creates many problems it exploits workers but it also Al you know destroys all the communes Etc but in the end it will bring about progresses new technologies you know convenient life abundance of wealth Etc so he despite his harsh critique against capitalism shares nonetheless a

very optimistic view of brual progress that's what critics of Marx says but the problem is that they only read a Communist Manifesto they don't pay attention to what older Mark said you know marks when he wrote a Communist Manifesto for example he was like middle of 20 something so he was very young and he was passionate about the coming revolution in 1848 but in the 50s and 60s the revolution didn't really happen and capitalism became very you know Lively again he started studying political economy writing D Capital Etc in the process he started studying Natural

Sciences as well and then at that time there were a lot of discussion about sustainability especially in terms of Agriculture but this study on Natural Science conducted by late Marx were never published he integrated some insight into his published writing such as DUS Capital but even after publishing the volume one of capital he continued to study more topics on Natural Sciences but these things remained basically unpublished so I basically investigated his notebooks now published in the mega that you just introduced in the beginning they contain a lot of new insights and I can tell you

which is the correct PR pronunciation of Mega marks Angel gazam alab gazam alab yes this Mega contains lot of new materials Natural Sciences especially like agriculture chemistry geology botanic and if you read those notebooks as I discussed in my book KL marks ecosocialism you will see that Marx was clearly ecologically conscious and he was criticizing capital's destruction of nature because it destroys our potentiality our the material conditions for free and human development so new materials change everything I would say yes I understand do you think that the Socialist movement after the 19th century uh was

able to to develop this Marxist ecological ideas and build an alternative to the insurmountable contradiction in between capitalism and nature all the Socialist movement fail in this task the problem is that so as I said these notebooks were unpublished it just published two years ago or three years ago so until then people did not really know that marks was so much interested in the issues uh of Natural Sciences such as exhaustion of soil deforestation and stock farming or exhaustion of fossil fuels Etc so instead people just read Angel and lening and other people they rather

try to establish the mar Theory as a complete system the problem is that Marx system Mark critique of political economy remained basically unfinished volume two volume three were never completed by Marx himself after his death angel edited uh his manuscripts right so when Marx couldn't complete Capital he left out many issues and elaborated one is ecology but the problem is as Angel after his Mark's death emphasized Mark's system systematic character of capital and his critique of political economy he tended to reduce some of the important aspects of Mark's Theory including ecology and in the end

in the 20th century the Soviet Union was formed but they really advocated after all a very optimistic productivist tendency without a really noticing this marks eological critique of capitalism both capitalism in the west socialism in the East share the same assumption that the technological progress will be the only foundation for the human emancipation but that's not necessarily the case even at Mark's time there are lot of disc about further technological progress do not automatically solve those problems people like Peter kin William Morris Eliza lukulu and those people in Russia France and the UK also criticized

this very positive optimistic view of technological progress Marx actually shared some of the opinions with them but actually in the 20th century State socialism I say ended up emphasizing this technocratic aspect of especially in the Communist Manifesto understand and what about angel's dialectic of nature uhuh that's also a interesting point so many people like traditional Marxist assumed that basically Marx and angel had the same opinion right and Marx didn't talk much about nature and the angel talked about dialectics of nature in dialectics of nature as well as in anti- during so people simply assumed that

you know when we talk about nature we should refer to angles but if we can find dialectics in nature we can simply observe what's happening in nature Etc and then apply the objective dialectics into society to predict the future development Etc but the problem is that the Soviet materialism like damat ended up falling into a positivist and mechanistic view of society because they simply applied the dialectics of nature into the analysis of the society this is what has harshly criticized PE by people like lucar and later by Western Marxism Western Marxism basically said no no

no angel made a huge mistake Marx confined his dialectics to society so we should not really talk about dialectics of nature like Angel did it's it's all that but the problem is that Western Marxism excluded the sufia of nature from Marxism with angles so even today people like SLO J for example he says ecology is an OP masses and that's not true ecology really poses a serious threat to human survival and ecology is one of the most important issues for the left so the problem in the 20th century Marxism is that both Orthodox Marxism in

Soviet Union as well as Western Marxism m in France in Germany Etc shared the same assumption that Marx didn't have much to say about nature because they neglected notebooks right so this my project of the looking at the mega and reading notebooks you know looks boring right like it's just notebooks he he doesn't really it it seems that it doesn't really contain anything new but once you realize that marks very intensively studied Natural Sciences especially in his late years while working up on Capital we can imagine how he would have developed his ecological critique of

capitalism if he had completed volume two and three of capital so we have whole new questions and whole new insights uh opened up by this Marx Eng gam alab this is a also what we need for the 21st century when the ecological crisis is so pressing issue at what point do you think Marxism would have been influenced by a productivist conception so present in your on words in real socialism putting the environmental issue in such a secondary position oh so I'm not saying that you know Angel and learning and maybe after that Stalin were all

guilty and Marx is innocent or anything like that Marx was clearly uh guilty at least to some extent so maybe that's uh where I differentiate myself a little bit from John bami Foster if you follow some of the eological discussions he would say that Marx was always an ecologist uh since his dissertation for example when he told about the glob nature in epicus ETC but my opinion is a little bit different because there are some textual evidence that Marx was quite optimistic about technological progress in the future and especially in socialism uh once capitalist model

production is overcome uh we can freely utilize machines and artificial like chemical fertilizer and we can you know grow anything what we we like and whenever soil in indein yes yes the soil power increases every year Etc but you know that's kind of stupid idea today and even Marx realizes that uh in the 60s but in the 40s you know we have lot of new notebooks and the notebooks in 40s actually document marks was a a quite productivist I would say so even in The Communist Manifesto uh you can find those passages and to some

extent in the grto is written in 1858 too so I would say even up until the end of 1850s he was quite optimistic about the future so if you read or if you highlight those aspects we can have the kind of you know modernist marks eological questions will be overcome by technology and productive forces and socialism can grow even more but in the 60s he had a different opinion he became much more critical about the destructive aspect of productive forces of capital the problem is that once we get rid of this system of capitalism the

productive forces of capital is also gone so we cannot really say that socialism can grow even more or we cannot say that socialism can solve all those issues by technology so now we can pose a new question oh then what kind of socialism we would we have in the future when we cannot really assume that the technological process or the development of productive forces is the driving motor of History so the new questions that we need to ask because the Soviet project failed and we cannot really believe that the farther economic growth or further development

of Technologies would solve today's ecological crisis Professor what's your balance on the environmental issue in socialist experiences by the way what all the same uh exper those all this experience were the same about environmental issue are the differences among them what's your balance about the Practical experience in the relationship between eventually a bitter relationship between social socialism and ecology I see so I would say reflecting upon the history of the Soviet Union or other state socialism in the past it is absurd to say that socialism is always ecological I don't think so the state socialism

can be very environmentally destructive because the problem environment is material process which marks called metabolism the St Vel the metabolism is a which is the word in German St vexel St okay I think it's easier to learn Japanese than German in Japanese it's Bush TAA but this process it's harder as I was a judo practice I I know how to count up to 10 I stopped I stopped here so in any case the metabolism is a process material process the flow of energy and the materials Etc so that exists independently of social forms it doesn't

matter capitalism feudalism or in socialism they are basically the same metabolic process so even if we try to grow or economic grow if we par through too much economic growth in socialism that will be bad for environment as much as in capitalism so then it's quite understandable why the socialism in the Soviet Union had even worse impact upon the environment they basically managed this metabolic process quite badly because they put more importance on the growth than the SU stainability but that doesn't mean that socialism is worse than capitalism in terms of ecology and in terms

of sustainability I would say that socialism has a better chance of being more ecological what ecosocialism uh aims after why is it more why why is it why does it have better chance I would say for example the market competition is regulated so it also regulates uh the production of unnecessary products and selling them by advertisement branding and marketing Etc it can also shorten uh the working hours in socialism we don't really have to work 40 hours every week because everyone shares uh the the equal amount of uh you know work and the burden and

also we can uh eliminate other unnecessary jobs and the we can share the rest of the jobs together so that also contribut to reducing uh the amount of time and so these things are considered I would say that ecosocialism has has uh much or like you know the competition of the market price that they try to produce uh in capitalism people try to produce more and they try to sell cheap as cheap as possible so that's why we have basically having the huge amount of waste the more conscious uh form of production is necessary today

and I would say that's what ecosocialism aims after mhm Professor uh the capitalist world in the last 20 or 30 years began to be interested in environmental preservation it's a kind of mod disc narrative in the capitalism media for instance would would it be possible to overcome the contradiction between capitalism and nature within the capitalist order itself so that's what you know many business people and the capitalist elite uh believe and or they hope to the ecological modernization through renewable energy electrionic Vehicles energy green economy and Concepts and green growth is the hope of you

know but the problem is we need to really question uh whether the further economic growth can be sustainable especially because when we have to for example reduce the carbon to uh carbon dioxide emission uh to Zero by 2050 it means that we have only less than 30 years we can not really believe that the farther economic growth which driven by producing a lot of useless things and you know fast fashion fast food and gigantic cars like SUV can be achieved by sustaining the old old things I don't think so we need to you know abandon

or restrict or regulate those unnecessary or ecologically harmful things and that require is a social regulation but that's not something capitalism is able to do because they always try to talk about you know private property the market competition Etc there's a fundamental contradiction so as long as economic growth is necessary or inherent essential characteristic of capitalism but when the economic growth is actually what uh hinders that our transition to more sustainable economy capitalism and sustainability are incompatible today so I would say that ecosocialism needs to integrate new ideas that is the growth I think when

we pursue the paast that Marx was pursuing after in the 60s and 70s he consciously distanced himself uh from our productivist vision and he became much more interested in ecological questions and he was also learning a lot of things about pre capitalist and nonwestern societies where people lived in more equal way and in the more sustainable manner today this implication is very important because Marx argues actually that equal Society is much more sustainable able in capitalism today economic inequality is a huge problem and in fact lot of rich people in the global North fly a

lot eat a lot of meat they even fly with private jet and they have gigantic houses everywhere possessing many cars and they have huge amount of carbon dioxide emissions right so if we tax them if we regulate or prohibit what those people consume like private jet and the space shuttle or whatsoever we can have much more wealth to share with other people we can tax them and use that money for guaranteeing everyone housing and you know food and other necessary services these activities essential activities are much more ecologically sustainable so by creating uh equal Society

in the means of taxing or regulation and uh prohibition Etc we can also establish equal and sustainable society and this is the path that marks was actually trying to Envision in 1870s and 80 but Marx was not really able to elaborate on those aspects so that's why we need to look into notebooks letters and manuscripts very carefully and bring them back uh to the 21 century then we can have a holy new uh imaginary of post capitalism in the 20s 21st century that was quite unknown in uh 20th century Marxism Professor isn't the a contradiction

between uh the growth and generating jobs f feeding people and fighting against extreme poverty in the world oh yes I'm not saying that the de gross is the best option for the global South right uh I'm sure that the people in Brazil will need not everyone in Brazil but many people in Brazil will still uh need uh economic growth so I'm not calling a immediate uh transition to degrow society in those areas but at the same time it is not reasonable to pursue further economic growth in global North I would say like Japan the US

and the EU all those societies are already quite fluent and they became Rich by extracting resources and energies and exploiting people in global South too so so that the people or countries in the global South can develop more and they can access to what they really need for living we need to secure some resource for those people for that reason Global Norse that has already developed too much I would say need uh to move a transition uh to degross society in the global North but the problem is that we cannot have deoss capitalism deoss capitalism

is a disaster because capitalism is designed U with the Assumption of Eternal economic grow so like in Japan the economy is not growing then we have lot of problems including economic inequality low paid jobs Long working hours etc etc so we cannot have degross capitalism I think the option is degross communism or as a kind of ecosocialism because we need to share care more when economic growth is no longer the option we have enough but the problem in capitalism is that the wealth is monopolized by the few so we need to share more we need

to revive or rebuild the commons and we need to have we need to secure the basic access to housing medical cares education Etc but that's fundamentally a new Direction uh that's you know the world like the grow is unpopular even among Marxism so I'm trying to change this I think on in the face of climate crisis today we cannot really say anymore that ecosocialism can achieve further sustainable economic growth I don't think that's an illusion in your opinion yeah so I would say we have to really ad admit that deg gross communism or socialism without

growth uh is a very important theoretical task and I'm what I'm trying to do currently is to examine whether Marx has something to say about such a new Society in in other words just show soci ISM just in so under socialism would be possible a the growth economy because many people like for example Michelle leev he doesn't like the term dig gross because dig gross is too pessimistic and dig gross doesn't really include uh or doesn't really pay attention to those areas which need to grow more you know for example we need to more we

need to have more education we need to have more medical cares or we need to have more public housing we need to have more public transport Etc so these things need to grow I fully agree but the whole the entirety of economy cannot grow anymore that's simply incompatible with the planetary bound the environmental rest constraint so I I would say the Marxism really needs to fundamentally change the idea I'm sure that the Marxist in Brazil or the left in Brazil still pursue forther technological progress green modernization economic grow reindustrialization but you know if everyone try

to do this uh we are just simply uh destroying our planet in order to eradicate extreme puberty we need a growth but after that we need to somehow carve uh the our progress right not progress but the economic growth so I think this is the new questions uh that Marxism needs to seriously care and what I try to do in my work the Carl Marx ecosocialism is a kind of preparation if Marx were simply a productive is we can never have such a conversation about the possibility of Marxism and dig R that's impossible but if

Marx was a serious ecosocialist we can really think oh then what would Mark say today uh in terms of degrowth or the need of new kind of socialism without growth EOS socialism would be an way out just for the most the richest counters in the world for now yes but at the same time uh when rich countries move a transition to De grow economy the GDP or the scale of economy will go down and then it will create a rooms for a further development for the poor countries especially in Africa for example the problem is

that as long as the rich countries pursue the further green growth that will be the model for all other countries so every country seeks after forther green growth but we don't have enough for example lithium or other rare earth right and that competition will also destroy a natural environment in that sense I think the rich countries has uh kind of responsibility to Envision a new form of affluent life without economic growth that should be the new model uh for uh other countries like China or Brazil or India even and but at the same time I

would I have to correct that you know ecosocialism can be established or they have know the communities indigenous communities for example have a lot of ecosocialist spirit because they they had a much more sustainable production a sustainable way of life over many many years and they took care of forests and other natural resources so in that sense they are already ecosocialist IID say and since something like that is entirely lost in countries like Japan the transition to ecosocialism in Japan or in the US need to learn from those indigenous communities the US people can learn

from their own Native Americans Etc but I think that kind of radical transformation of our conception about well-being sustainability and affluence needs to take happen and that's why we need not just natural scientist or Economist but we need philosophers and historians and other postcolonial studies Etc to have much more intensive dialogue about new conceptions of our way of life does economical degrowth mean uh populational the growth or at least stabilization oh yeah yeah because the rich countries are already declining uh the population of the rich countries already declining like Japan it's it's gonna red we're

gonna re be half in 70 years or so so that's also another reason economic growth is increasing difficult for developed countries because the population is no longer growing and also the question is why do we need economic growth when the population is not growing the idea of economic growth was necessarily because population was growing in the 20th century right Professor Sao sorry for interrupting you uh but we have the immigration issue many people from the poorest countries are going to the rich richest countries in order to look for jobs so if you don't have economical

growth how to generate jobs for these people oh the problem Oh my answer is by reducing or by sharing work so it's work Shing we like easy easy ones that we don't really need fast food we don't really need fast fashion and we don't really need other kind of what David Graver said brushit jobs we can sort of eliminate or regulate those Industries then we have rest of the essential Works those people who used to work in now prohibited Industries can join to work in the essential Works essential Industries we can share everyone can share

and then we don't really need to work 40 hours anymore we can work 25 hours or maybe even 20 hours so why do we need to work less I think it creates more space for individual development but at the same time it's good for environment we work too much we work too long and then during work we use a lot of energ we use lot of resources we use air conditioning we drive cars Etc by working less we don't need technological progress to reduce the environmental impact so I'm talking about the developed countries like Japan

and so the pro the issue would be probably different in Brazil so that's why I'm very happy that we have this kind of dialogue between Japan and Brazil uh my work is translated into Portuguese so that people can react to what I say no that doesn't apply to you know for example Latin America Etc I would be very keen to learn what you think and then we can have a farther discussions to imagine a more Equitable and sustainable uh way of post capitalism Professor SAU would the grow gr represent a comeb back to agriculture to

some extent yes uh what we are experiencing in Japan is that we uh only have 36 or 37% of foods that is produced within Japan the rest is ex imported from China 70% 70% almost 70% is import that's very fragile um you know in the future we will have much more typhoons dought flood like abnormal weathers uh due to the influence of climate change and then there will be a lot of food shortage and water shortage everywhere then we cannot really count on the import right maybe China doesn't export their food anymore as they didn't

uh during the covid-19 they didn't uh export masks anymore to Japan that's why we run out of all the masks uh in Japan last year so that could happen with food but mask you can just stay at home for a while or you can use the old mask again and again but when you run out of food and you cannot produce it with in Japan that's very dangerous simply put food so in that sense we Japan for example concentrated too much on Industries like producing cars computers etc and also today the service Industries but we

also need to rethink about agriculture so the Dig grow in terms of economy economic growth agriculture is not very efficient way of making money but in terms of food Security in terms of use values I would say that agriculture is quite essential the one of those essential industries that I mentioned previously in that sense ecosocialism or the deoss communism surely needs to refocus on agriculture questions do you think that the growth should uh uh stimulate a Chang in in our feeding uh customs in know feeding habits like the vaganis uh def fend sure sure of

course so I said fast food and fast fashion but also you know I mean fast fast food is about eating too much meat but basically rich countries consume too much beef for example and beef is a main driver of climate change and you know the huge impact is actually what what's the name of the famous Japanese beef the one which is consider the best world cor beef right Kobe I have never ate this beef is it good yeah I I don't eat beef anymore but yeah I I why is so expensive this Cobra beef uh

they are not really industrial production the farmers take care of each single cows they're very Carefree so it's not a kind of massive production in the factory style and they eat a lot of good things to have a better meat Etc but the problem is that the beef in any case has a huge environmental impact everywhere and especially in Brazil it's really happening the deforestation of Amazonian rainforest is partially due to the production of beef right and I think it's necessary to rethink about uh we really need to question whether we need to eat so

much meat every day and that kind of question didn't really come up with in Marxism I would say Marxism was uh still trapped within the kind of productivist view you know we we still we used to think that those issues can be solved somehow uh once we move to socialism but apparently it's not an environmental were light in that sense but I think we in my book ecosocialism caral socialism I try to bridge the antagonism between the green and the red and the ecosocialism is a is a kind of fusion of the green and red

now we need to take a next step we need to have a fusion of ecosocialism and degrowth because degross people sometime think that market economy can be sustained but we can have simply different way of organizing commodity production that we don't really have to economic grow anymore but I don't think that's possible as long as the market remains a dominant social institution we will have lot of competition and we will have lot of advantage M lot of consumption Etc so these are bad for environment we need to radically equation uh market economy and capitalism so

that's why Marxism has a lot to offer for degross people but degross people don't like Marxism because of this productivism right so by rethinking uh this uh productivist tendency of Marxism in a critical way with this concept of ecosocialism socialism without growth or even degrowth communism we can have a new Fusion uh of the left in the 21st century I think that's what we really need and especially we need in countries like Japan uh us and Europe but recently I really think that we can also have that kind of movement in countries like China India

and Brazil especially do you think ecosocialist ideas could be strong enough to drive a new anti- capitalist wave in a world where hunger poverty and economic backwardness is still affect a third of humanity yes I think it's more ecosocialism can offer a new insight and that economic growth promised by capitalism doesn't really offer a solution that's a kind of myth right it's capitalism always say when we have economic growth everything will be fine but in the last 30 years sure poverty hunger the numbers were less but it's largely due to the Improvement of living condition

in China the hunger and poverty in Africa for example remain basically if if you pay attention in the numbers without China we are going to have a completely different picture yes exactly so we can really you know have China as a model but the China is a kind of the Socialist model so that's not really capitalism that is working today capitalism is creating much harsh environment for those poor people I don't think that we can continue capitalism under such a pressing climate crisis so this is a really good opportunity uh for rethinking the possibility of

post capitalism because after the collapse of Soviet Union we saw sort of lost the imagination uh for post capitalism but the situation is changing in the last five years or so in the US Barney Sanders in the UK Jeremy Corbin but today even great tbell is you know uh demanding system change not climate change and she's denouncing basically the myth of Eternal economic growth Fair ril of economic growth so I think the mindset of the people especially the young people are changing in uh those affluent countries they have a strong respons huge responsibility because they

are the ones who basically destroy the pl planet and they have uh the responsibility to transform the system for the future Generations as well as for the people in the global South and that move in the Global North can be complemented by the people struggling in the global South for more Independence more Economic Security and more indigenous rights Etc when those movements in global North and South could be uh unified somehow in the next 20 or 30 years we can finally have a good conditions for new uh radical politics I would say Professor saitu a

curiosity is it so hard to be a Marxist in Japan how has have you been converted to Marxism Marxism is actually quite strong was quite strong in Japan uh especially after the World War II Marxism became so popular uh because the Communists were didn't did never convert they kept resisting against Imperial Japan so after the end World War II they became kind of the intellectual hero of freedom and Independence that's why for example the best university like University of Tokyo and University of kyotto had lot of marxist professors in the department of Economics Etc but

this academic Marxism became quite weak uh after the collapse of Soviet Union so I'm the generation I was born in 1987 when I entered the university this academic Marxism was almost dead but at the same time I'm the generation that doesn't know Soviet Union and that also suffered from neoliberal reforms so my age uh has more problem with economic inequality job insecurity and now climate change so gradually I think the younger Generations especially the younger than I mind are also cultivating critical Consciousness even in Japan Japan is generally very conservative but I think the situation

is a gradually changing and especially uh the situation toward uh or the feeling toward Marxism became somewhat positive again like my book has become quite popular I had a second book uh that deal with the question of deos communism uh was published which was published last year and the book sold uh more than 400,000 copies in Japan this book yes this book on and I I have read I have read that Communist Party electoral numbers in Japan are growing up oh yes that's also growing up uh even though the relationship me and the Communist party

is not so good but in any case this there's some kind of Revival uh of marxist tradition so that's a positive tendency I would say say but it's happening very slowly it's not enough we need to have a really huge uh movement for radical system change because the time is running out climate change is really a serious threat and we need to have a more Inspirations uh from the US EU but also from the Latin America I wish I could yeah like learn Spanish and because I assume that there are a lot of movements in

Latin America in the last uh couple decades and I think this is something really uh we need to learn in Japan currently Professor Sait we are nearing the end of our interesting and exciting conversation and I would like to ask you two question that I always ask my guests when we Clos in the interview the first question which book would you like to suggest to our viewers and the second question which movie or series could you indicate uh whom follows us H I would say uh that the book by I don't know it's a very

spontaneous question I I I usually don't watch film so the second question kind of borders my brain but the first the book I like I don't know oh one book that really changed my I mean you all you might be already familiar but the John bami forers Mark psychology is a really pathbreaking book it opened up new aspects of Mark psychology I developed what he said more in my book car maxo socialism but without Foster's book I would not uh be able to write my own book so I surely recommend everyone to read uh John

B Foster Mark echology okay about the movie movie about climate change or climate crisis oh about anything you're not committed to a ecology movies would want to indicate is is going to be well come oh recently I watched a movie titled Miss marks it's a movie about the daughter of Carl Marx and I have to admit that Marxism was not just productivist but also uh anti- feminist I didn't know that uh the daughter of KL Marx uh was already so much talking about female rights and there lot of insights about feminism and that need to

be established in socialism Etc but I'm a Marxist researcher but still I didn't know about these passages that the movie was mentioning so I deeply regretted uh the mind on one-sidedness of the history of Marxism and this movie is about uh Elenor Marx yes eloa and that was really good so if everyone I don't know it's already available in Portuguese but the title is Miss marks so I think it's on YouTube maybe with Portuguese subtitles I have read in somewhere about it Professor CER I would like to thank you very much for your time and

for this very fundamental conversation thank you for the opportunity you gave to our expectators and for myself yeah so sorry for my bad English and please edit well and then good make a good subtitle so that people can understand better what what I say thank you so much thank you thank you Mar www PR