The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast

Welcome back to the podcast where you supply the questions, and we bravely refuse to look at them before hitting record. Truly, we like to live on the edge.Each episode, we attempt, with varying degrees of success, to bring an environmental twist to whatever you throw at us. Sometimes it fits beautifully, sometimes it's like trying to compost a bowling ball.And when the stars align, we even suggest actions you can take. Other times, the actions just sort of tumble out naturally as we talk.Either way, we've got two fresh listener questions today, and we're diving in completely unprepared, just how you like us.Grzegorz from Opole, Poland asks - “Can love exist without God?”Stuart points out that people love turning big questions into neat little either/or boxes, when the real answer is usually “well… it depends.” He muses that some ideas can happily exist without God, others seem to lean on belief, and multiple truths can coexist without exploding.William mentions a friend whose faith genuinely fuels their life. Fair enough.Stuart then asks the classic philosopher's grenade: “If we don't even know what love is, how do we know it exists at all?”William offers a warmer take. Love as an acceptance, caring, presence, even being moved by a tree or a dog.Stuart wonders if belief in God shapes belief in love, or vice versa, and why the two get tangled.He asks for five words for love; William gives compassion, caring, kindness, truthfulness, and touch, physical or emotional.Stuart notes that picking five related words is a handy way to pin down slippery concepts.James from Ecclefechan, Scotland sets the next question - “Does “good death” exist?”Stuart kicks things off by saying life is basically one long rehearsal for a “good death.” Not the quick, painless kind people fantasise about, but the kind that reflects how you actually lived. Very cheerful stuff. He also insists nothing is ever truly an object, everything's just a process pretending to sit still.William adds that death is happening constantly anyway; our cells are quietly retiring one by one because our bodies aren't great at photocopying themselves.Stuart doubles down: death isn't a single moment, it's a whole ongoing saga, whether you believe in reincarnation, cosmic recycling, or just the compost heap. And if you want a meaningful ending, maybe don't leave all your emotional admin for your final five minutes.William, ever the realist, says death is unavoidable and comes in two flavours: your own, and the moment the last person who remembers you forgets. Some people, your Genghis Khans, your Caesars, stick around in memory. Meanwhile, entire armies of former US presidents have quietly slipped off the mental bookshelf.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Welcome to our learning‑led discussion series, where William Mankelow, Stuart “The Wildman” Mabbutt, and you—the audience—shape the conversation together.Your questions arrive unopened, and we explore them in real time, discovering the topic at the same moment you do.We don't present ourselves as definitive authorities. Instead, we approach each question as curious learners, ready to examine ideas from fresh angles, embrace uncertainty, and see where thoughtful dialogue can take us.Kholoud, a Palestinian Refugee living in Long Eaton, England sets the initial question for discussion- “Does gun ownership lead to mass shootings and does religion cause wars?”The discussion explores how access to weapons and human decision‑making interact in acts of violence. One view suggests that widespread gun availability increases the potential for mass harm, while another emphasizes that individuals ultimately choose whether to use a weapon. The conversation also examines religion's role in conflict: some argue it is often used as a justification rather than a true cause, while others highlight that many faiths promote peace at their core. Both co-hosts reflect on how cultural influences, personal responsibility, and societal conditions shape behaviour, noting that tools or beliefs become harmful only when people decide to use them in that way.Andrew, from Barrow, Alaska, USA asks the next question - “Do you think it's worthwhile engaging with that which we don't like?”The conversation explores how personal biases shape our preferences and how engaging with unfamiliar or initially disliked ideas can deepen understanding. One perspective highlights that everyone carries assumptions, yet genuine openness can reveal unexpected appreciation. Another view emphasizes the value of examining our dislikes rather than avoiding them, noting that automatic reactions often mask the real reasons behind our judgments. By analysing media, performances, or viewpoints he finds unappealing, one co-host discovers that his reactions often stem from perceived inauthenticity rather than disagreement alone. Examples include reassessing a music genre after giving it proper attention, or recognising why certain styles—such as highly improvised music—do not resonate personally. The discussion concludes with the idea that exploring what we think we dislike is an important part of learning, encouraging listeners to stay curious even when something doesn't immediately appeal to them.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

We're recording this episode at the very beginning of January, our first session after the New Year, and yet it does not feel new at all.In this podcast, listeners send in questions that we do not see before we press record, and we answer them cold, with no preparation. Hopefully that makes us relatable, because life often presents us with difficult questions at unexpected moments. Our first listener question for this episode comes from the lovely village town of Charlbury, Oxfordshire, with John setting the following query:  “Can we disagree with civility?”Stuart makes the stark point off the bat:  if we choose to? Yes. End of episode. Spoiler alert: the episode doesn't end at this point!William argues that managing anger and emotional baggage is essential, but acknowledges that antagonism can arise when someone approaches aggressively. He suggests that in some situations, people respond with aggression because it is the only language they know.The second question for today's ramble comes from Ray in Newmilns, Scotland - “What do you think about someone having a target and announcing it all over social media, as opposed to coming off social media, focusing on the target, and then going back on social media to announce it?”Stuart observes that on social media, even getting through the day is often framed as a series of targets, with people sharing every small achievement. He suggests that when people put targets or goals out into the world, they should make them relatable and meaningful to others, otherwise it becomes unfocused self expression, rather than something people can genuinely engage with.William speaks from experience when he explains that spending too much energy on social media, worrying about what or how to post, can distract from the actual goal. He adds that new ideas often spark impulsive action, but taking a longer term approach, reflecting on the idea, and involving collaborators, can strengthen the outcome and make the project more effective.Stuart believes that focusing on a goal in private allows better concentration and avoids the need for external validation. He emphasizes the impact of reappearing with a finished project, noting that oversharing the journey can bore the audience and reduce engagement.William believes that adults still carry a child inside them seeking approval, which drives much of their social media activity. He warns that people often overinvest in social media, putting energy into things that do not need to be shared.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Surely you have something better to do with your life, than listening to this podcast? There must be something else you could be doing, right now? Perhaps you have some paint to watch dry?No? Then let's dive into today's episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast. We are not the go to experts. We are just two regular guys exploring big issues cold, with every conversation starting from a question sent in by a listener.The first of today's two listener questions comes from John in the lovely village town of Charlbury, in Oxfordshire, England. He asks, “We say making memories with loved ones is what matters, but what is their meaning if they die with us?”Stuart suggests that making memories is an active process, that inevitably has consequences, and those consequences affect other people's lives.William explains that when he spends time with people who matter deeply to him, he focuses on being fully present, rather than trying to create memories.Stuart explains that while people may make memories with those close to them, it's the ongoing shared moments that anchor them in the present, leaving a retained emotional warmth, that motivates future connection and sustains the relationship, even though that residual feeling is intangible.William believes that being present, in meaningful moments, with close friends and loved ones, provides strength in the moment and a reservoir of memories to draw on during difficult times. Ultimately, what sustains him most is the hope of seeing those he cares about again before he dies.The second question in this episode comes from the middle of the ocean, from Kev in St George's, Bermuda. He asks, “Are the drivers of aspiration directly connected to the drivers of reduced biodiversity?”Stuart believes that aspiring to something does not have to be unsustainable. He suggests that one could, for example, aspire to become a leading expert in biodiversity. The doyen if you please.William feels that the common idea of aspiration often involves wanting more than you currently have, which can reduce biodiversity because it increases consumption.Stuart suggests that blindness, or a lack of awareness, is a key driver of aspiration, and a factor in the reduction of biodiversity.William argues that overconsumption extends beyond material goods, to how we use land. He gives the example of Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire, England, questioning whether such a large house and extensive grounds, for a single family are truly necessary, framing it as overconsumption of space, and resources.Stuart concludes this episode: suggesting that culture can influence both aspiration and reduced biodiversity, but the separation is complex. He explains that biodiversity can be affected indirectly. For example, damage along a bird migration route, can impact nesting sites far away. While some impacts are connected to aspiration, others are isolated, making it difficult to separate the drivers entirely. Overall, he concludes, that aspiration and reduced biodiversity are connected, but do not have to be.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

Listeners fling questions at us and we heroically read them cold on air. Preparation? Absolutely not. But after 600‑plus episodes, we've basically earned a PhD in winging it.Kholoud, Palestinian Refugee living in Long Eaton, England - “Should an individual be considered antisemitic just by disagreeing with the state of Israel?"Stuart bravely points out the shocking revelation that a government and an entire people are not, in fact, the same thing — apparently history and whoever's currently holding the keys matter. He suggests we try focusing on everyone living safely now rather than reenacting ancient grievances, a truly radical idea. He also notes that disagreeing with the state of Israel isn't automatically antisemitic, though some insist otherwise, as if criticism itself were a hate crime. William reminds everyone that tone matters, because apparently that still needs saying. Stuart then heads into the uncomfortable territory of how past horrors can be misused to justify present violence, stressing that noticing this isn't bigotry. He highlights that post‑war actions tolerated because of the Holocaust show how thin the line can get. His wild proposal? Apply moral standards consistently. Meanwhile, William reflects on how antisemitism is so deeply baked into history that unpicking it is like trying to convince Britain it isn't the centre of the universe.Andrew, Bradford, England - “Why is being religious, to some, a really odd and repugnant thing for others to be?”Stuart recalls working with someone who hated religion with the fiery passion of a man arguing with his own childhood, noting that the issue wasn't God but his personal baggage. He points out that some non‑religious folks assume every believer is two seconds away from handing them a pamphlet, when often they're just… talking. William reminds everyone that not every religious person is on a recruitment drive, though he admits his friend's recent chat with a very enthusiastic Christian did feel like a one‑man sermon tour. Stuart counters that not all faith conversations are ambush conversions, offering an example where the reverend listened while the atheist had a meltdown — suggesting the ‘repugnance' might come from the listener, not the faith. William adds that spiritual people aren't automatically unbearable, and sometimes timing and context matter more than belief. He even went to a meditation retreat out of curiosity, not crisis. The grand conclusion? People could try talking like adults. Stuart wraps up by noting that neither religion nor guns magically cause violence; humans do. Access isn't the villain — choices are. And if someone's mere belief in God makes your skin crawl, the problem might not be them. In fact, as Stuart delicately puts it, they may not be the **** — you might be.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

There's a Yank invasion on the People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, with two American listeners sending in questions for us to discuss. We're in the middle of January 2026, yet it feels much the same as 2025. We talked in a previous episode about time and the way calendars give us the sense of a fresh start, but in reality nothing changes unless we do. A new year does not create change on its own, you have to actively do something different rather than waiting for time to change for you.So first let's look at the question from Ray, in Sauk Centre, Minnesota, USA - “What is the difference between adults and children?”Stuart insists kids are basically tiny sages because they haven't yet collected the full starter pack of adult neuroses. William counters with the groundbreaking revelation that people don't actually change much—apparently his school reunion was a time‑travel experiment.Stuart then reminds us that adults are just children with bills, flailing confidently into the void. William adds that everyone rushing around pretending to be Very Important is really just their inner toddler begging for a gold star. Finally, Stuart points out that while we're all told to “live sustainably,” the folks running the show are too busy maintaining the unsustainable bits to take their own advice.Andrew, from Barrow, Alaska, USA sets the next question - “I saw a young girl around 9 years old, in a waiting room, sat playing a computer game for a solid hour, oblivious to everything around us. The mother stuffing a banana in the girl's mouth so she would eat. Is this a sign the next generation will have the hidden skill of focus, or a sign they will be disconnected?”Stuart wonders if you can be laser‑focused and totally checked‑out at the same time—apparently yes, just hand a child a screen and watch the magic happen. Babies now get phones like they're upgraded pacifiers, and parents—shockingly—sometimes just want five seconds to breathe. Stuart overthinks whether a nine‑ish‑year‑old's screen‑trance is genius or doom, while noting that kids can become so absorbed they forget hunger, danger, and even the existence of gravity. William adds that screen‑time rules range from “strict monastery” to “digital free‑for‑all,” with dopamine doing its thing. Both agree extreme focus can be a superpower or a train wreck, but labels don't explain everything, and maybe we should stop judging parents in public. Teens may be drifting into digital hermit mode, but humanity will probably drag them back eventually—preferably before they walk off a cliff while texting.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Thanks very much for joining us for this episode of the People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast. We answer listener questions that we've not seen before we press record, approaching each one cold. We're not experts, but we talk freely and honestly, as people often do when faced with important issues unexpectedly.The first listener question in this episode comes from Andrew in Bradford, England. He asks, “Are individualistic cultures intrinsically selfish?”Stuart questions whether focusing on your own health, benefit and wellbeing, is truly selfish, arguing that helping others first requires taking care of yourself.William suggests that the core of the question comes from Andrew's lived experiences, particularly from repeatedly observing people behaving in selfish or overly individualistic ways without considering how their actions affect others.Stuart suggests that people can be individuals without being selfish, and that perceptions of selfishness often depend on the perspective and expectations of other parties.The second question comes from Clodagh in Larne, County Antrim, Northern Ireland. She asks, “Did time, as we now perceive it, start at a specific moment?”Stuart reflects on cutting-edge scientific thinking about black holes and time, suggesting that time may be a human construct and might not have a clear beginning, middle, or end. He admits uncertainty about the nature of time, noting it remains a topic of active scientific debate.William argues that time is a construct of the brain, shaped by our internal experience rather than the external world, noting that subjective perception can make events feel much closer or further away than they actually are.Stuart's concluding action invites listeners to pause when feeling frustrated about sustainability and explore the underlying concepts and assumptions shaping their thinking.William's concluding action encourages taking time to do something without focusing on the clock and simply allowing the experience to unfold.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

You have found our first episode of 2026, well done!This is the podcast where there are no scripts, no prep, just two guys, Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, who are willing to approach the questions sent in by you the listener. They aren't afraid of talking about stuff cold that they've never necessarily explored before.The first listener question for this episode comes from Clodagh in Larne, County Antrim, Northern Ireland - “How does culture form?” Stuart asserts  that if you leave something long enough, it will turn into something. That's a culture.Drawing on David Epstein's Range, William notes that NASA's rigid, procedure-bound culture before the Challenger accident, discouraged challenge and contributed to failure. The example shows that culture can be examined and, when it no longer serves its purpose, changed, or let go.The second of the two listener question for this episode comes from Zbigniew in Chorzów, Poland - ”If someone has recently relocated to a new country, should there be leniency for breaking minor laws they did not know about, or should they be prosecuted the same as their counterpart raised in that culture?”William argues that breaking a law should not depend on cultural background, since even lifelong residents often do not know every rule. He suggests that enforcement already allows for discretion, and that there is always room for leniency and judgment in how minor offences are handled.Stuart argues that while there is room for leniency, claims of ignorance must be balanced with judgment. He suggests that this balance often depends on a police officer's experience and discretion, as well as situational factors, including the officer's state of mind.William notes that during COVID, police often showed leniency toward people who shoplifted out of necessity, using discretion based on circumstances rather than background. He argues that the same approach can apply to people new to a country.Stuart concludes with an environmental action: that is to step back and examine the hidden motivations behind a system or process. He advises considering the broader, macro-level impacts and reflecting thoughtfully on what's really driving production or decisions.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

On this New Year's Day special from The Peoples Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast we want to say how grateful we are for your support, your voices, and your commitment.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

You send the questions; we discuss them, highlight the environmental insights, and share practical takeaways. John, from Charlbury, Oxfordshire, England sets today's initial question - “We're fishing our oceans to death. Where's the business sense in that? Would we then become vegan and vegetarian?”Your co-hosts feel industrial fleets and small-scale fishers face the same shrinking seas. Unsustainable catch levels and market demand drive harmful practices, so solutions must address both how we fish and how much we eat. Support sustainable seafood, local fishers, and policies that protect stocks and livelihoods. Try one meat-free day a week or swap a familiar recipe for a vegetarian/vegan version to reduce pressure on marine life. Change can come from health, ethics, or curiosity—trying a plant-based meal is an easy first step.Ray, from Sauk Centre, Minnesota, USA asks  - “Optimism is better than pessimism?”William argues for a balanced outlook: regular optimism—focusing on what you can learn and carry forward—tends to produce better outcomes and, with practice, becomes a habit. He recommends stepping back from thoughts through meditation or grounding techniques to build resilience. Stuart agrees optimism can help but stresses realism and timing; he prefers assessing each situation and his own feelings first. Both recommend a simple daily check‑in with how you feel as the first step toward constructive action.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

It's a Merry Christmas to you from Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, the co-hosts of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast!Whether you're surrounded by family, friends, or just a strong cup of something warming, we hope the day brings a moment of calm, laughter, or at least decent food.Whether you celebrate or not, whether today's loud or quiet, busy or blissfully uneventful, have a great day. Be kind to yourself, laugh when you can, and we'll see you on the other side of the festivities.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Digital IDs and homophobia. Two huge topics co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow have attempted to tackle in this episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, the podcast where you, the listeners, send in questions for us to discuss.Stuart and William don't see the questions before recording and they usually try to relate them back to nature, the countryside, or the environment but you the listener often take us in unexpected directions.The first unexpected turn comes from this question sent in by Clodagh in Larne, County Antrim, Northern Ireland - “The Prime Minister in England has said digital ID cards will come in. What do you think about that? Some say it won't stop the migrants coming across the channel in the small boats which is the quoted aim, others say its design is to squash people who show images of themselves on Twitter with a St Georges flag saying they are proud English. Is the idea good for anything, or abhorrent to you both?”.Stuart doubts digital ID cards will have any effect on migrants, since the process they use isn't legal and operates through the black market, while William notes that consolidating all IDs into one digital system could create security risks. Stuart compares the topic of digital ID cards to Brexit, saying he doesn't have enough information to form an opinion, and it currently doesn't concern or affect him at all. It “ doesn't even flex a hair follicle on my back at the moment.” William on the other hand observes that those who find digital ID systems abhorrent see them as excessive state interference, often influenced by a simplistic reading of George Orwell's novel 1984.The second bend in the metaphorical road comes in the guise of this question from Steven in Port Carlisle, England - “Do the Homophobes out there realise Homosexuals come from Heterosexual stock?”William compares homophobes to racists, suggesting they are either driven by an agenda, ignorance, or both. He emphasizes that a person's sexuality only matters to him in the context of a romantic relationship; otherwise, it is irrelevant. Stuart suggests taking an environmental perspective, examining arguments on environmentalism or sustainability, and identifying where any hypocrisy may exist.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Our listeners send in thoughtful questions, and we dive into them without preparation or prior review. This way, our responses stay spontaneous and authentic. Today's questions come from Bradford and Port Carlisle—two communities in Northern England with rich histories and unique local perspectives.Andrew, from Bradford, England sent us this - “Are we too focused on Net Zero etc? Why don't we drill our own oil, instead of importing and sustaining economies elsewhere? Aren't we at risk of falling behind?”William highlights that oil extraction requires years of infrastructure development, making it unsuitable for immediate energy needs. He advocates prioritizing renewables, arguing fossil fuel dependence risks long-term disadvantage. Stuart counters that relying on foreign technology, such as Danish wind turbines, could weaken the UK's energy independence unless domestic innovation is fostered. William stresses planning for the next century, pointing to offshore wind as a strategic investment given Britain's coastal geography. Stuart notes some politicians dismiss net zero as “net stupid,” while William observes that short electoral cycles often hinder long-term policy, urging a broader vision beyond four- to five-year terms.Steven, from Port Carlisle, England sent in this question - “Charlie Kirk's killing. Are those who say that his death was about a man exercising his right to free speech and saying what he wants, leaving us to think more deeply about our own views right? Or are others who discuss other contributing factors right? Religion, Debate, Guns, Antagonism, Politics, Division, Conspiracies, For and Against, Disquiet etc etc etc”.Stuart reflects on whether Charlie Kirk's death stemmed from free speech or political division, concluding multiple influences were at play. He argues that freedom of speech is not absolute, noting the individual involved was both intellectual and religious, and sees the event as a symptom of wider societal fractures in America. Stuart admits limited engagement with Kirk's content, focusing instead on psychology and body language to assess truthfulness. William, aware of Kirk's presence online, suspects his approach was designed to provoke reactions and generate revenue. He cautions that expressing opinions can trigger extreme consequences, though he did not follow Kirk closely. Stuart proposes examining what freedom of speech truly means, distinguishing between genuine restrictions and social politeness, and questioning whether a universal definition exists.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

We're a veteran podcast, two surprise listener questions per episode, zero prep—cold takes, hot chaos.Ryszard, from Bydgoszcz, Poland offers up the first question - ”How did life evolve from nonliving matter?”Stuart feels after eons of cosmic boredom, water shows up, algae crash the party, oxygen gatecrashes, and then life takes a billion-year nap before evolution finally stumbles in. He squints at the universe and asks, “What nudged that first awkward step?”William shrugs, points to Earth's comfy orbit, a clingy Moon that keeps our tilt polite, and Jupiter—the hulking bouncer—scooping up space junk. Together they made a cozy stage for chemistry to improvise, even if the opening line remains a mystery.Dmitry, from Novosibirsk, Russia has set todays second listener question - “The poor in the UK seem to hate poor immigrants, yet it's the rich taking the money the world over. Divide and concur, yes? Interestingly, many people who don't like migrants heading to the UK are supporters of your royal family, who many say are immigrants, don't work, and have a suspect pedophile amongst them!l”William jokes that the tabloids seem less like news outlets and more like fear factories run by mystery billionaires with a fondness for stirring the pot. Stuart suggests that many struggling Brits oddly resent struggling immigrants—because that's the script they've been handed—while the real resource-hoarders are sipping champagne in mansions. With a smirk, Stuart notes the irony that some of the loudest anti-immigrant voices wave flags for the royals, who, if you trace the family tree, are basically the original foreign imports. William adds that the word “immigrant” is a blunt instrument, lumping everyone from his EU-born wife to refugees into one box, while “expat” magically makes Brits abroad sound like glamorous adventurers—even when they're just in Spain refusing to learn “hola.” He points out that the loudest anti-immigrant towns often have no immigrants at all, yet still bought into Farage's “breaking point” drama. Stuart suggests imagining Dmitry's outsider lens, while William advises popping the bubble and sampling news beyond the usual echo chamber.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

Trigger warning, this episode includes a discussion around a sensitive topic that you might find distressing. Listener discretion is very much encouraged.Criticism of the Catholic church, the concept of existence, and whether infinity is real. They are the three big topics for this episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, the place where you the listener send in questions for co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow to discuss, dissect, deliberate, sometimes dispute, but very rarely debate, even though that word is in the podcast's title! The first question for this episode comes from Ryszard in Bydgoszcz, Poland - ”If everyone in the world suddenly forgot you existed, did you ever truly exist?”William notes that countless people have lived and died, and that thousands more are dying at this very moment. Many of them pass without anyone knowing or remembering them.Stuart considers whether a person truly exists if everyone forgets them. He notes that actions and thoughts create ripples that persist regardless of memory. Reflecting on identity, he suggests “you” may be an illusion, with the soul merely electrical brain activity, meaning existence could be just a consequence of the bodily functions. He concludes the question remains fundamentally uncertain.William's action: He reflects on mortality by considering two types of death: the physical death of oneself, and the death of the last person who remembers you. He encourages using this perspective to guide actions in life, aiming to leave a positive influence and be remembered meaningfully. Through the podcast, he and Stuart model this by addressing big issues and challenging listeners to think deeply.Stuart's action: whether being unacknowledged or forgotten diminishes a person's impact, and what the nature of “you” truly is. He struggles with the idea of existence tied to memory and suggests it may be possible to be remembered without truly existing. His focus is on examining the concept of self.The second question for this episode comes from Zbigniew in Chorzów, Poland - ”Is infinity real, or is it a mental construct?” William considers the limits of human knowledge about the universe. He notes that the universe's accelerating expansion and the finite speed of light prevent us from fully knowing its size. Despite observing distant regions with telescopes like Hubble and James Webb, much remains beyond our reach.  We never really know if infinity is real. This could all be a simulation. Stuart examines the concept of infinity, suggesting it may or may not be real. He emphasizes that what is certain is that our understanding of it is a human mental construct, shaped by our interpretation of what infinity might or might not be.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Should we shift to electric in all motor sports? Are we too sensitive these days? These are the two big questions your co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow discuss in today's episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast. On this podcast we never see the questions before we press record. They are presented to us on the spot, often challenging and always unexpected. We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.Our first of two listener questions for today's episode comes from Elodie, Brittany, France - “Do you think that all forms of current motor racing, including motorcycle racing, develop into and be replaced by electric versions in the pursuit of environmental sustainability?”Stuart states he has no objection to electric racing and sees it as an interesting experiment, noting that Formula One already uses hybrids. He argues though, that introducing electric or hybrid alternatives would likely draw a different, and maybe even new audience, with only some current fans switching over, as they can feel something is being lost from their experience, and not being replaced or enhanced within the electric versions.William questions whether using finite resources to power motorsport is justified at all, noting that fuels like methanol likely still come from oil.Stuart feels that with few young fans being attracted to some of these current sporting models anyway, they must become more interactive and engaging too. Removing the visceral experience as you are with electric versions, makes it even less attractive to some people, so electrification is not enough on its own.The second listener question comes from Paul, Queensland, Australia - “Is it wrong for comedians to laugh and ridicule the disabled, vegans and environmentalists? Are we too sensitive these days? Is something not funny because we don't like the person telling it or is the essence funny whatever?”William states that people can be overly sensitive, treating feeling offended as more significant than it actually is. He observes that if someone is offended, then they are simply experiencing that feeling, nothing more.Stuart questions whether laughing or using humour is inherently wrong, noting that humour can highlight the absurdity of situations rather than ridicule people. He illustrates this with a café incident where he joked about not being able to “run away” in his wheelchair, showing that humor can simply acknowledge reality, without mocking anyone.William explains that he challenges his own bias by listening to favourite musicians as if they are new to him and approaching unfamiliar musicians as if he already knows their work. He applies the same mindset to comedians he dislikes, giving them fair attention to see whether it is the material or his own bias shaping his reaction.During this conversation, William mentions a stand up routine by British comedian Peter Kay talking about the British TV series Crimewatch, here a link to that video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPsu-PCubvsWhat do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

We sit here bravely tackling listener questions hurled at us from every corner of the globe — completely unprepared and slightly afraid. We don't see them until we hit record, which explains a lot. As for Grzegorz's name, William took one look and noped out like a man dodging a spelling bee in Polish. He respects names too much to turn them into interpretive dance.Paul, from Queensland, Australia places the first question for discussion today- “Nothing is morally right or morally wrong. Right, wrong and morality don't even exist in some people's eyes. The world is not just meaningless, but also absurd. What do you think?”William kicks things off by declaring humans are the cosmic equivalent of a plot twist no one saw coming — absurd creatures who somehow made it this far despite centuries of questionable decisions and poor impulse control. Stuart zooms out and says, “Nope, it's all absurd,” pointing to algae that spent two billion years evolving and making oxygen like the world's slowest intern. William agrees, but finds beauty in the chaos — Earth's lucky lottery of moon tilts, Jupiter's debris vacuuming, and rotational chill make life both ridiculous and miraculous. Stuart questions morality itself, wondering if it's just a group project we all pretend to understand. William, meanwhile, marvels at humanity's obsession with upgrades, even though we're all headed for the same existential exit — suggesting we cherish the people who make the absurdity worthwhile.Grzegorz, from Opole, Poland sets the next question- “Is Reform UK really a political party outside of the UK establishment?”William shuts it down with a firm “No. End of episode,” like a man refusing to debate whether water is wet. Stuart's intrigued that the question came from someone outside the UK — or maybe just someone pretending to be exotic while living in Croydon. He agrees: Reform UK isn't some rebellious outsider, no matter how many pub speeches say otherwise. William adds, noting Farage is basically the Hogwarts head boy of the establishment — all robes, no magic. He vents that Farage is a walking cartoon of privilege, somewhere between a monocle and a Boris Johnson impersonator. Starmer, he concedes, has made some eyebrow-raising moves, but at least he doesn't look like he was grown in a Westminster petri dish.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Welcome back to another episode of Greenwashed & Unhinged — the podcast where we pretend to care about the planet while blindly stumbling through your questions like eco-conscious toddlers in a philosophy seminar.Before we dive in, a heartfelt shoutout to our beloved listener Hannen Beith. Hannen, darling, pull your finger out and send us a question. We know you're lurking. Contribute or be composted.Elodie, from Brittany, France sets the first question today - “Does absolute power corrupt absolutely?”Stuart muses that human power corrupts faster than compost rots in July—unless wielded by a unicorn of selflessness. He compares it to gravity: powerful, universal, and blissfully unaware of politics. William argues corruption is a human invention, like spreadsheets or reality TV. Together, they liken it all to gardening: no plant is evil unless it takes over. So, when in charge, don't believe your own hype—listen twice as much as you talk. Nature does, and it hasn't tried to run for office.Debs, from Didcot, Oxfordshire, England set the second of today's questions -  “Someone from Thames Water, when talking about the potential new Oxfordshire reservoir, said, “we need to focus on identifying and moving the wildlife out of the way”, that shows a distinct lack of understanding of mitigating ones environmental impact”.Stuart fondly recalls the time builders lovingly flattened an ancient wildflower meadow for six months, then heroically promised to fix it with a sprinkle of generic grass seed — because clearly, green equals biodiversity. He reminds us that ecosystems aren't IKEA furniture: you can't just relocate wildlife and expect it to “assemble itself.” William adds that animals aren't invading cities — we built over their homes and now call them “urban” like it's a lifestyle choice. Stuart, ever the diplomat, declares his tulip rights while denying nature any. William defends the underdogs — foxes, pigeons, crows — nature's misunderstood freeloaders. Moral of the story? Think long-term. Or at least longer than six months.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

If you want the go to experts, that's not us, you've come to the wrong podcast. This is however the podcast where co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, discuss questions sent in by you the listeners.The first of the two listener questions for today's episode comes in the form of this epic enquiry from Bronwen, in Atlanta, Georgia, USA - “Does hardship make our species stronger?”William tentatively starts out by saying that hardship does make our species stronger.Stuart feels it does too, but it's not necessarily what makes us stronger. Instead, it's the whole package of experience that helps us along.Stuart explains that hardship depends on mindset; for him, it's simply something to endure, and move through, rather than dwell on as good or bad.William notes that people often dwell too much on such things; he feels tired after two days of physical work, but views it not as a hardship, rather as a natural consequence of effort.Off the back of Bronwen's question Stuart comes up with the following action:  drill down into the words you use in your daily vocabulary.William, not wanting to feel left out, comes up with this action: He reflects on how people in the UK often label weather as good or bad, though he believes it is simply a matter of mindset. He tries to view weather neutrally, whether wet, hot, or dry, and focuses instead on preparing for it. He suggests this perspective can be applied more broadly to life.The second question for this episode, which really got Stuart and William thinking, comes from Paul, in Queensland, Australia - “Is it more important to help yourself, help your family, help your society, or help the world?”Stuart emphasizes that change begins with one's self; one cannot change anything else without first changing themselves. He likens the self to an umbrella, with various aspects extending in different directions, none more important than the others.William agrees with the umbrella metaphor, noting that if you can manage yourself, you can help others. He also believes that small, thoughtful actions in everyday life can make a significant difference.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

This is the podcast where  listeners send questions for us to conversate around, and although not always to do with the environment, we always try to bring an action back to the that in some way.  We're not the go-to experts. We're the go-to guys who are willing to explore things cold, and change our minds as we go through.The first listener question comes from Unity, in Paddock Wood, Kent, England - “Do you guys feel overwhelmed by the mass migration into and across Europe? Many react when cultures collide in these situations. We don't think about the countries these migrants are leaving behind, as often it can be the brightest and the best that are leaving out of desperation, heading for beacons of better lives. Though there may also be darker reasons too. Those left behind can include the weak, who have no support. We need to support these countries as they rebuild and manage the drivers that lead to others leaving. This is just the start of modern mass migration”.William sees it as Unity states in her question, that it is only the start of a mass migration.Stuart reflects on how migration often involves the most capable individuals, leaving their countries out of desperation, sometimes leaving behind those with fewer resources or who need support.William observes that society is increasingly building metaphorical walls between cultures, fostering unnecessary division and misunderstanding.Stuart feels we are millennia away from being anything but the tribal animal we are.William's environmental action: he encourages taking practical, manageable steps toward addressing the climate crisis. When feeling overwhelmed by its scale, he believes it's important to break the challenge into smaller, achievable actions.Stuart highlights the importance of empathy ,and self-awareness in everyday interactions. He suggests that when someone feels irritated by another person—say, on a bus—it's worth remembering that the other person is human too and not necessarily a total c***!The second question comes from Estefania, in Jalisco, Mexico - “Does talking about death, speak it into existence? Is that why some cultures don't discuss it?”Stuart believes that talking about death doesn't bring it into existence—it's a reality that already exists.William argues that avoiding talk of death stems from superstition and taboo rather than reason. He compares it to the idea of “tempting fate” by mentioning the weather—pointing out that words don't influence these events in his opinion. Stuart feels that many cultures have just got into the habit of not talking about death, and this has turned into a taboo.William believes it's important to talk openly about death from an early age. He feels that understanding death as a natural part of life helps people accept it, regardless of their personal beliefs.William's action is to remember that everything eventually ends. He sees this not as morbid, but as a reminder to appreciate the present.Stuart's action: to  filter out the stuff that doesn't matter and you'll begin to realize very little does matter. It's all a distraction.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

An episode where there's no one in the Listeners Chair as Alex has returned to university to study Microsoft Paint so the remaining panel records blind. Listeners submit questions in advance; the hosts open them only when the red light goes on, responding cold and unrehearsed. The podcast welcomes teasing and detours, but the conversation always returns to the core question. This episode is candid, focused, and unsparing — real-time thinking, no script.Tracey, from Oxford, England sets William and Stuart the first question to explore - “Badgers are undermining my house but I can't relocate them. They should be in the countryside, not urban areas”.William argues badgers don't distinguish countryside from towns; animals simply follow suitable habitats. Stuart recounts badgers collapsing a road and the Highways Agency relocating them, and he sympathizes with homeowners denied the same protection. Both call for consistent rules and balanced action: protect property foundations, manage habitat to reduce encroachment, and minimise harm to badgers while recognising their ecological role.Sally, from Mildura, Australia offers up the next question - “Knowledge drives everything, some say. How do we live well without making the planet unlivable for ourselves then?”Stuart and William debate humanity's role in the world: Stuart argues knowledge isn't the sole driver of events and that unseen forces shape the universe, while William warns that human comforts often come at the expense of other species as people reshape the planet for their own benefit. They challenge the idea that humans are simply parasites, presenting instead a nuanced view of our adaptability and resilience. Both contend that “living well” can mean comfort or ecological responsibility and that most choices sit in shades of gray. William closes with a practical action: listen twice as much as you speak to learn from diverse perspectives and find more balanced solutions.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

Today's episode marks a special moment as we welcome back Alex Kauffmann to the Listeners Chair for one final time before he returns to university. Before signing off, he expressed his gratitude for being part of the podcast and acknowledged that it may be a few months before he returns.This episode also highlights an important aspect of podcasting: listener interaction. Each episode features two questions submitted by our audience. These questions vary in frequency—some listeners become regular contributors, while others send in a single question and are never heard from again. This dynamic creates a rich tapestry of engagement, showcasing the diverse interests and curiosity of our audience.Sally, from Mildura, Australia sets the first question for us today  - “I feel where social media has gone wrong, is we use it as a backdrop to our lives, giving others the perception that our lives have meaning. For example, people are incessantly posting about their holidays, and their food. The posts don't add value to the observer, they just seem designed to impress others how well travelled and cultured we are, and giving others an insight into our digestive process. I'm not sure where it went wrong, but the value is in living and not living to prove the value of our life through social media.”Social media often promotes curated highlights over authentic experiences. William advocates purposeful posting to inspire or inform, while Alex critiques its superficiality, viewing it as attention-seeking and disconnected from real life. Stuart uses social media strategically to communicate impact, urging reflection over validation. Both Alex and Stuart call for mindful engagement—living in the moment and posting with clear intent, especially in environmental contexts.Aine, Dublin, Republic of Ireland - “Man is having as big an impact if not a bigger one as the meteor that killed the non-avian dinosaurs. Can we fathom the size of that problem?”Stuart highlights Aine's insight that only non-avian dinosaurs went extinct. Alex views humanity's resilience as part of ongoing evolution, suggesting extinction is less probable than other natural threats. The group explores the limits of human perception, noting difficulty in grasping large-scale issues like climate change or asteroid impacts. William questions whether full comprehension is necessary, proposing local awareness as a practical alternative. Stuart further challenges temporal understanding, suggesting time may be a human construct without fixed boundaries.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

It's our 600th episode! I know what you're thinking, they don't sound jaded and tired, which could easily be the case, after so many episodes. That's because with every episode, the tone is set by you dear listeners, who continue to send in questions for us to discuss. We've only got nine questions lined up at present, so get 'em in now and you'll be answered quite quickly, maybe even in time for Christmas, wouldn't that be the best present you've ever received!?Alex Kauffmann is back in the listener's chair for his penultimate episode before he buggers off back to college. Has he been  with us too long, or not long enough maybe? Only you can decide.Today's first question comes from Estefania, Jalisco, Mexico - “We're told the new green economy will save us, yet that's still utilising the same system that's destroying us. Green tech, if done well and for the right reasons is the right thing to do, but what we're not told is there's one thing we can all do, that has a positive impact on all areas of climate change, that much green tech doesn't. Eat less meat and dairy”William jumps straight in: he says that one of the biggest contributors to climate change is meat, specifically beef.  So if you could eat less meat, and particularly beef, it would have a better impact, he thinks, than any new technology.Alex explains that while challenges are inevitable, Green Tech is not destined to replicate unsustainable systems. He envisions it developing into an ecosystem, that connects with society, much like nature does, an aspiration that takes time but follows the pattern of past innovations.Stuart recalls warning that investing in green inventions often meant funding big oil companies, which buy up patents, only to shelve them. He argues that these corporations suppress alternatives to maintain dependence on oil, later reintroducing the innovations as if they were entirely new.And the second question for today's charade comes from Vinroy, Linstead, Jamaica - It is a long question, and we only get 4,000 characters to play with, you can find Vinroy's bumper of a question right here: Vinroy's questionAlex notes that while some societies adapt to governmental and economic structures, extreme wealth concentration remains a persistent issue. He adds that cultural differences make universal solutions difficult to implement.William highlights the organization Led by Donkeys, which exposes how the very wealthy can easily obtain foreign citizenship to offshore money and avoid taxes. He emphasizes that some people will always prioritize their own financial interests above all else. There are ways that people can actually get around it by going to organizations like this where they can actually offshore their money. Stuart reflects that while the wealthy and the poor often operate on different value systems, true richness isn't financial. He suggests that instead of chasing flashy wealth, society could adopt a different set of values that doesn't revolve around material accumulation.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

This is the People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast. Every episode we conversate around two listener questions, and where possible, spin the conversation around to the environment in some way, regardless of the topic covered. In today's episode we begin with an educational question from Unity in Paddock Wood, Kent, England - “What do you think about bringing climate change into the mainstream UK curriculum in schools? 10 years ago children's favourite word was minion, now it's climate change. Do we risk scaring children by catastrophizing? Is it better to teach older school children solutions and tools? Are we making the younger ones anxious? Do we risk promoting political activism if we educate about climate change in the wrong way? If we teach that we have no agency for change we risk just making children grow up angry, instead of driving actual change”.Alex feels that the subject of climate change really would be best added to the subject of geography. He recalls being taught about earthquakes, pollution, and overpopulation, so there's already catastrophising in schools. He recalls his time in secondary school, and concludes that climate change really should be there as a subject.William brings this whole conversation around to whether this is once again an avoidance of our own mortality issue? That the subject of death around children can be an even more taboo subject than sex for example.  Stuart recalls a conversation with a teacher after listening to a past episode  about climate change in the curriculum.  And they were absolutely convinced that climate change had infiltrated every single lesson, but it was so subtle that nobody noticed it.We then move onto this taxing question from Brice in Crieff, Scotland - “Should we be taxing on wealth and assets and not just income? The super rich are buying up everything and enslaving people to be in debt to them. Can we do anything until wealth is more fairly distributed, like after the second world war in the UK?”Alex thinks that  we should tax the rich which he feels everyone can agree with, but the way our societies are run, with corrupt governments, they're money hungry and therefore the rich live in the best conditions because of that. So there's not really much we can do.  Who is going to tax the rich? The government, who are corrupt?Stuart raises the point that he doesn't necessarily think the super rich are intentionally enslaving us, but the by-product of process does. William brings up the idea of a universal income, where everyone can afford  the basics in their life, food, shelter etc. He goes onto say that he feels that is maybe idealistic, and that we humans are greedy buggers, and we don't want anyone to have a slice of our pie.Stuart comes up with an environmental action: We need to be more realistic with environmentalism and not think about utopian ideals. We need balance and measure.William's action with an environmental twist: He encourages you to  get off that aspiration train, and that in itself will definitely have a positive impact on the environment.Alex's environmental action:  We always talk about the tool and the master quite a lot. Money is a tool, not a master. It doesn't shape your life. It's what you use to live. It's not everything in life. So just think of it that way. It's a tool so use it as one.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Send us an email ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: Petition LinkThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends Podfollow Link , support our work through Patreon Patreon Link. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: Linktree Link

Alex is back in the listeners chair again today. You send in the questions, we tackle them live—always with an environmental twist and no peeking beforehand.Jess, from  Bishop's Tatchbrook, Warwickshire, England sets the initial question - “I've been thinking about the police Stop and Search tactics in the UK. Should we keep it? Done for the right reasons, with truthful explanations, is it wrong? It's about how it's done I think, without aggression, reasonably and respectfully. Done well it lasts seconds, done badly it progresses and escalates”.Alex hasn't had much direct experience with stop and search but has heard mixed views. William sees outcomes as shaped by the officer's mindset, while Stuart argues stereotyping is inevitable—but misuse is harmful. Stuart's been stopped often and feels both sides share responsibility. William stresses the need for solid reasoning, though Stuart defends instinct. They discuss vague intel, lost police experience, and knowing your rights. Stuart calls for balance; William urges activists to check their egos to avoid pointless conflict.Vinroy, in Linstead, Jamaica sent us the next question - “Not been well recently so I have been thinking about some big issues. The world around us, including buildings and the sea, is it dominated by objects or processes?”William sees our world as shaped by habitual processes—things built, then replaced. Alex adds that automation plays a growing role. Stuart argues nearly everything is a process, not an object: the sea, buildings, even plastic all undergo constant change and decay. He struggles to see anything as static. William agrees, linking deterioration to environmental forces. Alex counters that objects exist as matter, while life itself is a process. The conversation dips into philosophy. William's action: don't over define everything. Stuart's: take time to reflect—or not. Alex's: contemplate life's full arc and step back from reality.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Alex Kauffmann has resumed his role as principal moderator of ‘The Listeners Chair', reclaiming the central chair from which audience questions are drawn. These are then picked apart and reframed within environmental contexts to tease out wider significance.Lilly, from Summertown, Oxford, England sets the first question - “Should Oxford colleges open up more of their greenspaces to the wider population and tourists, or is it ok to keep them private and it is only the poor driving the move as they want some of what the rich have? Some people actually attending the college don't even get to see some of the private internal areas. I heard it said opening up threatens students GDPR protection, and that students don't really want to be disturbed. The Town and Gown rivalry still lives on, and the university often gets bad press. People often forget there are two universities in Oxford”.Stuart, forever Lily's “expert” after one fateful consultation, swears they're basically besties—especially now she's firing off another sly jab at the critic who dared to be dismissive back then.He digresses into the “sleeve Olympics,” where longer gown fabric apparently equals status. Then, like a city tour guide, he sketches a divide between the postcard-perfect centre and “real Oxford,” the suburbs where life actually happens.Alex, all cynicism, scoffs that locals couldn't care less about polished lawns—they're strictly tourist bait. William, sounding like the tourist board, notes that plenty of colleges open their gates—sometimes free for residents—though all the quads blur together: same stones, same chapels.Back with Stuart, who moans these patches are so tiny you'd wreck your shoes circling them—and forget walking on grass.Alex delivers his verdict: if dons don't stroll freely, neither should tourists. William agrees students do deserve their hush-hush study sanctuaries, but insists that visitors tread as reverently as in a cathedral.Luna, San Hose Del Cabo, Mexico brings the next question - “I see the biggest threats to humanity outside of the multiple climate related issues as truth distortion, feral social media and runaway AI. What do you think?”Stuart resets by clarifying that “threats to humanity” means existential doom, not oat‑milk prices. He drops the wisdom of belly‑button gazing: stare too long and all you get is fluff, not enlightenment. Translation? Stop spiraling—take action, even if it's just colour‑coding your apocalypse survival kit alphabetically.Alex wonders whether “threats” means asteroids or endless propaganda. William connects social media, AI, and collapsing truth like red string on a board, warning not to trust any single source.Alex, ever the optimist, claims independent news influencers are thriving, which he counts as hopeful. He advises we stop fretting constant climate doom, since total self‑destruction is unlikely. His news tip? “News Daddy,” a TikTok oracle free of corporate spin.William closes with the mic‑drop: the gravest threat to humanity is “believing our own bullshit.” Hard to argue with that—now hand me the navel fluff.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org petitionWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Ever wondered what happens when a housing ladder turns into a pyramid, a mortgage that outlives its owner, and funding applications start behaving like job adverts? Then this is the episode for you!Welcome to The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast where you, the listener, send in questions for co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow to conversate around.In today's episode we once again welcome back Alex Kauffmann to ‘The Listener's chair. Alex has been in the ‘Listener's Chair' so often that it already feels like home for him.The first listener question for today's episode comes from Grace in Ipswich, England and is as follows: “We have pressures put upon us and by ourselves and others in the UK to get on the housing ladder. Is being on there really important, or is it more about people higher up the pyramid enslaving us to debt?”From Grace's question, Stuart highlights the difficulty of paying off mortgages, that it's hard to pay the mortgage off in your own lifetime with current wages. He stresses that housing should be about shelter, and questions whether progress on the housing ladder is real.Alex shares his hope of becoming a homeowner, admits it's harder than expected, and says he values a home that meets needs rather than something excessive.William raises concerns about intergenerational mortgages, which Stuart brings as potentially being a thing in Japan. He goes on to distinguish between buying a house and climbing the housing ladder, and argues it's not essential to be on the ladder.The second listener question comes Lilly in Summertown, Oxford, England: “Many say in the UK grant funders in the UK make it difficult for those seeking funding as they have different agendas and methodologies that applicants have to tap into. Yet if funders worked together, streamlined, it could iron out some of the duplication work. Funders could pool their efforts so people seeking funding have less hoops to jump through. I see to that funders want applicants to justify their impact, whereas refocusing on asking applicants what they need, to be even more impactful, could be more beneficial. Yet other people say applicants should just accept its hard work getting funding and funders are in actual fact already communicating to iron things out. Are we too willing to accept these days?”From Lily's question William notes the challenges of grant funding, describes the application process as a filter, and warns that securing funding is just the start of the hard work.Stuart, who recalls meeting Lily, the person who has set this question, at a consultation, reflects on the importance of genuine impact assessments, and insists funding is only as hard as people make it.Alex says collaboration between funders is possible, though he admits has little experience in this area, and encourages listeners to pursue their ideas without fear of failure.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

In this episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow are once again joined by Alex Kauffmann, in the ‘Listener's chair,' to explore two very different, but equally thought-provoking questions sent in by listeners. Faye from Islington, London, England, asks the first question: “We often talk about societal addictions and highlight drugs and alcohol, but isn't addiction to salaries in there too?”From Faye's question, William argues that salary addiction is real, but often “unseen.” He links it to ancient hunter-gatherer instincts: we have always wanted more resources for survival, and that same drive now fuels the endless chase for wealth. Like billionaires who never stop wanting more, the craving for higher salaries rarely ends. Alex describes addiction as “a drug within the mind.” He argues salary addiction sits in the same category as drugs, alcohol, or gaming because all trigger brain chemicals that can become compulsive. Stuart highlights how salaries often act as status symbols. He recalls meeting people introduced by their salary amounts, saying this fuels social pressure and unhealthy comparison.Mark from Horspath, Oxfordshire, England, brings us the second question in today's episode, which is as follows: “People often say about the Rhodes statue on Oriel College in Oxford that they don't like him looking down at us during the modern day. Others say we don't have to look, and history is history after all. Any thoughts?”Off the back of Mark's big question, Stuart argues that the problem isn't statues themselves, but how they're presented. Placed high on plinths without explanation, statues imply respect. He believes they should present both the good and the bad, not sanitize history. William observes that many people barely notice statues at all — like the Rhodes statue on Oriel, which blends into the architecture. He suggests adding plaques or context boards to show “the whole picture” rather than encouraging idolization. Meanwhile Alex sees that many statues function as little more than decoration unless people actually recognize who or what they represent. Without context, they risk being “just decoration.” He compares them to religious statues, which only have meaning because people recognize their stories.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Welcome to the podcast that's not really about people, and definitely not about the countryside—unless you count emotional landscapes and the occasional sheep metaphor.Since the Great Plague of Zoom Calls (aka COVID), you lot have been flinging questions at us like confetti at a wedding we weren't invited to. We don't read them beforehand—because where's the fun in preparation? We hit record and hope for the best.We've got 18 more questions queued up, which means we're either wildly popular or someone's cat walked across a keyboard and hit “send” repeatedly. Either way, if you want your question featured, now's your moment.And yes, somewhere buried beneath our rambling, sarcasm, and occasional existential dread, there's probably a nugget of actionable wisdom. Like a motivational quote scribbled on a pub napkin.Jess, from Bishop's Tatchbrook, Warwickshire, England sets the first question  - “How do different forms of love (platonic, romantic, familial) direct and orchestrate our lives individually and collectively?”Love: the emotional Swiss Army knife. Stuart says it grounds you, energizes you, distracts you, levels you out, and occasionally hijacks your to-do list. William's all in—love is life, especially if it involves hugging trees. Stuart's less sentimental: family is great unless you're stuck with them like mismatched socks, and friends might just be the upgrade. William assumes families love each other (adorable), but also warns that love can morph into grief-monsters and toxic clinginess. Sometimes, the most loving thing is to ghost your relatives. And finally, William wonders: do we love the planet, or are we just swiping right on nature for the aesthetic?Luna, from San Jose Del Cabo, Mexico sets the next question - “ What do you think of your critics?”Stuart's approach to criticism? Less “What did they say?” and more “How dare they make me feel things?” He's basically running a one-man emotional focus group. William, ever the sage, thinks critics can be useful—like unsolicited life coaches with better vocabulary. But he refuses to create with critics in mind, because nothing says artistic paralysis like trying to please everyone. Stuart suggests we interrogate our environmental beliefs (cue existential crisis), while William wraps it all up with a TED Talk to a bank: be authentic, not beige. Because nothing screams soul like ignoring your shareholders.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

We're the kind of people who'd lick a glacier just to say we've “explored it cold.” No matter what we're talking about—be it cheese, space travel, or ancient plumbing—we'll somehow loop it back to the environment. And yes, between two questions, we casually teleport 11,000 miles—from croissants in Paris to kiwis in the Bay of Plenty. Our carbon footprint is basically a world tour.Margot, from Paris, France is the listener setting the first question today. “What is the significance of pilgrimage in different religions?”Alex thinks pilgrimages are just fancy holidays with extra soul-searching. Stuart's like, “Pilgrimage? Could be a museum binge or a walk to your nan's—whatever moves you.” William treats Finland like his personal Zen dojo. Alex says you don't even need to leave your sofa—just vibe deeply. Stuart reckons all pilgrimages, religious or not, are just brain space with a passport. William's in it for the emotional detox. Environmentally? Alex hugs trees locally. Stuart reads the fine print before jumping on the eco-bandwagon. William wants pilgrimages with less carbon and more conscience.Ryan, from Bay Of Plenty, New Zealand sets the next question. “Does the concept of fate or destiny play a role in the meaning of life and choices we make?”Alex treats destiny like a cosmic suggestion box—no proof, but hey! Stuart's into fate with a side of free will, like life's a GPS with optional detours. William's not buying it—he's Team DIY Life Plan. Alex likes spreadsheets over spontaneity. Stuart says embracing life's chaos is liberating, like nihilism but with better PR. William, after hearing the others, realizes he's never properly Googled “destiny” and might give it a second thought. Eco twist? Alex says ponder fate while hugging a tree. Stuart suggests debating destiny to save the planet. William wants to slow-cook his existential crisis and see if it's compostable.The video link of the race William refers to which was when Australian Steven Bradbury won gold medal at the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUi4-H6hfw8What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities Fundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Since COVID, this podcast has pretty much been all about the questions that you, the listener, have sent in for Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, the two co-hosts, to conversate around.In every episode, two of these listener questions are discussed, and by sheer coincidence, both questions in today's episode, have come from the same person; Elodie in Brittany, France.The first of Elodie's questions is as follows: “What does the ideal form of government look like, and why?”From this question the conversation begins with an exploration of what constitutes an ideal form of government. Stuart advocates for a system that is fair, progressive, and breaks free from traditional constraints, even referencing John Lydon's controversial support for Donald Trump, as an example of challenging the establishment. William counters with a stark reality check, arguing that Trump causes real harm to working people and asserting that no truly ideal government can exist, due to inherent human disagreement and dissent.The discussion evolves into a fascinating examination of power dynamics, with William drawing unexpected parallels between government structures and the music industry's shift from record label dominance to streaming platform control. Both hosts ultimately agree that effective governance requires balance - strong leadership willing to make difficult decisions, paired with robust opposition ready to find middle ground through reconciliation.The second question from Elodie is “How do names and labels influence our perceptions and reality?William expresses discomfort with gendering non-human objects like hurricanes and ships, leading to a broader conversation about the difference between grammatical gender and sexual identity. Stuart provocatively argues that society's obsession with labeling - whether by profession, sexuality, or identity - may actually hinder progress, rather than advance it.The hosts examine the LGBTQ+ movement through different lenses, with William viewing it as necessary activism against those who deny gender diversity, while Stuart questions whether continued focus on gender categories prevents true social evolution.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

We cover two listener questions in today's episode, with two guests once again in the Listener's Chair, those being Alex Kauffmann and Suzi Darrington, who sit alongside the regular co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow.The two questions up for discussion are: “How do technological advancements alter scientific methodologies?” which was sent in by Floss in Gimli, Manitoba, Canada, and “Can ethical consumption ever exist in a capitalistic society?” which was posed by Paul in Queensland, Australia.From Floss's question, Alex feels that technology evolves to become more accurate and precise over time, forcing scientific methodologies to adapt accordingly. Suzi sees positive AI applications in science (early breast cancer detection for example) but is concerned about how it's being used in the creative fields, while Stuart advocates for technology to enhance rather than replace human skills and awareness. William emphasizes viewing AI as a tool rather than a master, for example it can be useful for mentoring when human mentors aren't accessible. He feels it all comes down to how AI is used.Then from Paul's question, William attempts to define ethical consumption by encouraging you to "stop buying crap and just buy what you actually need to exist", while Suzi posits the idea that “ if consumption is ethical, it would have to be good, not just neutral. But she thinks when people criticize consumption under capitalism, the suggestion is that it's not only not ethically good, it's actually ethically bad because it relies on someone's exploitation.” Meanwhile Alex believes that pure ethical consumption under capitalism is impossible, and advocates to be conscious of your environmental impact in consumption decisions. Stuart questions whether anyone is truly outside the capitalist system - he asks "aren't we all in the system?"What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

We don't necessarily talk about the countryside on this podcast as much as we used to or should do, maybe. You, the listeners, now send in questions for us to conversate around. We don't see the questions until we press record, and we always try to spin it back to the environment in some way.In this episode we have two guests in the listener's chair, the first guests in a long while, or should we say chairs? One returning guest, and one podcast newbie, those being Suzi Darrington, and Alex Kauffmann.Jess, from Bishop's Tatchbrook, Warwickshire, England asks the first question  - “Can we trust our memories, or do they alter our perception of reality in the moment and over time?”Stuart kicks off with two oldies, two newbies—this'll be fun!. He suspects age might split opinions. Suzi, the memory maestro, says perception's shaped by memories but isn't totally unreliable (even if your brain sometimes edits like a bad film director). Stuart wonders if we can trust memories at all. Alex chimes in: nostalgia is basically Photoshop for the past. William notes childhood memories are fuzzy, recent ones clearer—but we all cherry-pick. They all agree: memory messes with reality, but it's still useful. Final takeaway? Use your warped recollections to fuel eco-action. Just don't trust them to find your lost keys.Unity, from Paddock Wood, Kent, England sets todays second question  - “What role does genetics play in the debate between free will and determinism?”Suzi wonders if we're just meat robots running on genetic Wi-Fi. Alex compares determinism to infinity—huge, mysterious, and not great dinner party material. William shrugs: He acts like he has free will, even if he's just a well-dressed algorithm.Stuart brings up Zimbabwe's hyperinflation to prove some things are just too bonkers to grasp. Suzi asks: if we're coded, can we still be blamed for binge-watching reality TV? Tribalism and cognitive dissonance get a shoutout—because ignoring facts is basically a hobby. Alex muses that evolution is slow genetic editing. William says we're built to adapt, even to climate chaos. Final takeaway? Whether you're free or pre-programmed, use your mysterious powers for good—especially for the planet.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

You could rewind the podcast, listen in reverse, and Stuart (co-host) would still sound like he's decoding alien transmissions. People keep saying we should be 'industry voices'—but the world has plenty of self-appointed sages peddling their predictable patter. We'd rather stay unpredictable than be another echo in the expert chamber.Vinroy, from Linstead, Jamaica sets the first listener question today  - “Would a multiverse be compatible with our current understanding of reality?”William (your other co-host) ponders, what even is reality? Stuart shrugs and suggests reality's just a dodgy software update away from collapsing. Cue William, citing His Dark Materials, where every time you pick tea over coffee, another universe spins off with deeply confused baristas. Stuart steers things into, if it feels good, it's probably carbon neutral territory, while William counters, change hurts. Stuart argues life shouldn't feel like an eco bootcamp. William admits his internal habits committee is... inefficient. The multiverse? Tempting. But for now, this one's tricky enough.Scott, Arisaig, Scotland - “Can we ever claim to have absolute knowledge about anything? The human brain can't conceive  the notion of nothingness. Before the big bang, there was nothing. What did that look like? Can a human brain ever conceive of that.”William isn't buying Scott's nothing before the Big Bang theory—he reckons there was probably something, even if it was just cosmic awkward silence. Stuart thinks time is just our brains trying to make calendars feel important. William drops in 14 billion years like it's a fun fact; Stuart counters with do we really know why water's wet? Before spiraling into Newtonian conspiracy. William argues for concrete truths—like sogginess—and Stuart, mid-meditation, wonders if truth is just our neurons doing improv. William challenges listeners to imagine nothing. Stuart wants the Dalai Lama's take. William just wants anyone's.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

If you're listening to this podcast, you've officially run out of things to do with your life.Now we've got your attention, here's the first of two listener questions, your co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt, whose known for his willingness to challenge mainstream perspectives, and William Mankelow who always tries to anchor the discussion with thoughtful reflections, that blend aesthetics with reality. But most of the time, they are both trying their best not to swear.The first question then comes from Rithipol in Phnom Penh, Cambodia - “When you look back, those creatures considered most intelligent, dominated less intelligent species, and maybe even contributed to their demise and extinctions. Considering this against the upsurge in AI, if we are considering inventing something that could in some ways be more intelligent than ourselves, are we signing our own death warrant?” From Rithipol's inquiry, Stuart focuses on questioning fundamental assumptions about AI and intelligence. He challenges whether AI is truly "new" by drawing parallels to genetically modified crops, which had been around for decades before public awareness peaked. He questions the consistency of arguments about intelligence - if humans claim to be the only intelligent species, then other animals causing extinctions can't be attributed with intelligence, but if other species are intelligent, then humans aren't unique.William takes a balanced perspective on AI as being a transformative but double-edged technology. He acknowledges that fear around AI stems from it being new and unknown, while recognizing its potential as one of the most important developments in human history that will inevitably be used for both good and bad purposes.The second question is from Fred in St Just, Cornwall, England - “Stuart you say we should do one thing well before moving on to the next. That would be a good thing to do during the ongoing process of human evolution don't you think? Or would it have held us back with hidden consequences? I'd add to your statement Stuart - we should be the best at the stuff that needs no talent, and build from there".Here's what Stuart made of this question that was directed at him.Stuart believes in doing one thing well before moving to the next, viewing this as essential for avoiding the common mistake of spreading ourselves too thinly across multiple areas. However, he makes an important distinction between individual and collective action - while individuals should focus on mastering one thing at a time, as a species we need to pursue multiple endeavors simultaneously because this diversity drives evolution and progress.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

There is quite a bit to unpack in this, the latest episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast. Where conversations serve as springboards for deeper discussions that weave through nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice, all with the starting point of a question sent in by a listener. In today's episode your co-hosts discuss two such questions, the first coming from Ray, Sauk Centre, Minnesota, USA - “The Biden and Trump administrations worked together as one came to an end and the other started. Should the two parties power share and work together as a better version of future US politics? 77 million voted for Trump and 75 million, I think, voted for Harris. The country is split so is it time to share?”.Off the back of Ray's question Stuart comes up with an action: if you went to kindergarten or you went to nursery school. When you think about how your life progressed in school and you ceased to share, and it was about self gain, self gratification, getting grades, and all the rest of it was just me, me, me, me, me .Think if the sharing had continued through your education, and on into your adult life, how would it have looked different?And William's action: Realize that we are polarized in our thinking, that what you think is true for yourself, is not necessarily right, it can just be your opinion, not fact. And be mindful of that, and be ready to have your mind changed.The second question comes from Vinroy, Linstead, Jamaica - “A million Earths could fit into the space taken up by our Sun. With that concept in mind, do our problems, issues, disagreement, fashions etc etc etc, really mean anything?”For such a BIG question which Vinroy has raised here, your co-hosts come up with two big actions.Stuart's action: look at a problem you've got today and set it against the enormity of the universe. Any issues long term, or short term that you may have, your friends, may have , the people around you may have. Does it matter? Is it of anything of significance? Be it disagreements and fashions? They're just like a blip. Does any of this really mean anything?William's action: he encourages you  to go out there and, and lead a good life, and actually just be kinder to people that are around you. And if you operate from that point of view, and you see that somebody else is actually having struggles themselves. You are only gonna make the world a better place.During the discussion of this question, William mentions the Hubble Telescope Deep Field, you can find out more about this with the following link: Hubble Telescope Deep FieldWhat do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

 Stuart and William don't see the listener questions before they press record. They don't really have guests. They explore these topics cold without preparation. Not trying to be the go-to experts as they feel there are enough out there already, they see themselves as the go-to guys who are willing to explore things cold.Scott, Arisaig, Scotland - “What are your biggest challenges personally in 2025, and what are the biggest culturally?”Stuart marched into 2025 armed with flipcharts, fire in his belly, and a dream of accessible fields for all. But by March, the flipcharts were supporting a sad-looking houseplant, and his greatest obstacle was not uneven terrain, but patience and acceptance toward his own ill-health. He'd tried yoga, herbal tea, and shouting at ducks—none worked.Meanwhile, William's job title changed so often it needed a loyalty card. One day consultant, next day “freelance strategist of vibes.” He embraced the chaos like a man at a buffet who forgot what he came for.Culturally, both were baffled. Stuart declared British culture was invisible but everywhere—like damp. William wondered if he was English, British, or just someone who owned a teapot and too many socks.Their shared mission? End othering, talk to strangers, and dismantle the great wall of cultural confusion one biryani-powered chat at a time. Because progress starts with a ramp—and maybe a really good biscuit.Jess, Bishop's Tatchbrook, Warwickshire, England - “Unless it's on the edge of disaster and on the precipice, humanity never seems to want to change, adapt and evolve. Discuss”.Stuart insists that “change,” “adapt,” and “evolve” are not synonyms, despite what motivational posters and management consultants would have us believe. Change, he says, is swapping oat milk for cow's milk and pretending it's just as good. Adapt is realising your oat milk curdles in tea but drinking it anyway. Evolve is becoming lactose-intolerant and being smug about it.William thinks the climate crisis is like waiting for a Hollywood meteor—we want a big dramatic moment before reacting. Meanwhile, Europe is quietly crisping like the forgotten toast languishing in the bottom of a bag belonging to a fellow Speedway supporter of Stuart's. He points out we've already had the disaster movie, we just missed the trailer.They agree: humanity is great at adapting... often in ways that make things worse. Evolution won't save us—it takes millennia, and we've barely got until next Thursday. But if individuals act, influence leaders, and maybe stop voting for people who think climate change is just “weather being moody,” there's hope.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

 You the listeners send in questions to talk about. Your co-hosts Stuart and William, try and spin it round to the environment in some way. Neither see the questions before they press record. No preparation, they try and hopefully, a little bit like you, approach this stuff cold.Scott, Arisaig, Scotland - “Rewilding, a significant contemporary movement, entails the restoration and enhancement of local, regional, and international food chains and biodiversity. However, there is no singularly correct method for ecosystem management and conservation. Should we not, therefore, prioritize the rewilding of our own lives, thoughts, and perspectives first, before starting this journey? Alternatively, should we at the very least consider rewilding ourselves concurrently with wider ecological initiatives? Presently, this personal aspect of rewilding is often deferred until substantial progress has been made in ecological rewilding elsewhere, which creates separation between humankind and the wider natural world”.William affirms that humans are part of nature—we're animals, not separate. Stuart shares a curiosity about rewilding, which he sees as enriching biodiversity, not just letting things grow unchecked. William outlines three approaches: maintaining the present, restoring the past, or imagining something new. Stuart argues there's no single right way, stressing that nature is diverse and complex. Stuart feels somewhat “wild” already and values continually challenging his perspective. Insight, he believes, is fluid—something earned over and over. William echoes this, asking how disconnected we've become from nature and whether we're aligning with broader ecological efforts or staying isolated.In terms of action, Stuart calls for personal reflection: what does rewilding mean to you? William challenges rewilding's stereotypes, arguing it's not just for the whimsical—it's a conscious break from consumerism and disconnection. Floss, Gimli, Manitoba, Canada - “We too readily judge a book by its cover, and we know that, but readily overlook, that to just see the outside is limiting, as most things of substance happen on the inside. One of the greatest freedoms we can experience ourselves, and can offer others, is how we react to things, situations and people. Really, the only things worth doing, of true value, is that which we do for others. So we need to remember to avoid making quick assumptions about people and whether they're decent types, until we have the facts”.William agrees with Floss's point that we instinctively judge by appearances—it's how we try to make sense of things. His call to action is to view those around us as potential allies, friends, or simply connections—there's always potential. Stuart notes we often forget we judge by appearances and reminds us that whether it's a person, animal, or ecosystem, the truly important things happen beneath the surface. William tries to see beyond the exterior. Stuart questions if we're honest about the image we present and sees widespread inauthenticity.William reframes the idea: to help others, we must work on knowing ourselves. There's nothing wrong with also gaining from giving. Stuart advises withholding judgment until we know the facts. What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comHelp us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

“You often talk about the talks you give. Is your style accidental, evolving and planned?”This is the first of two listener questions your co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow discuss in this episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast. This question was sent in by Unity in Paddock Wood, Kent, England.From Unity's question, Stuart and William discuss how, though their talks are planned, with bullet-pointed scripts, they allow THEM to naturally evolve, and are mostly improvised. In particular their talk ‘Wildlife In Everyday Gardens', which has aspects of audience participation, including them choosing what topics will be covered from a list of 10 challenges.Stuart concludes the discussion around Unity's question with some sage advice for environmental speakers: Engage your audience, don't lecture down to them. Take your audience with you rather than presenting them the top of your head as you read a script.The second listener question for this episode comes from Kate in Rathlin Island, Northern Ireland. “It's said that the ghosts of childhood rattle around in adult bodies. I've been thinking about this and wondered what you both think. What still rattles in you? We maintain arguments in our adult heads, often with people who don't exist anymore, or just a memory. How others were when you were a child, in part, is due to their own upbringing, and we all have to try and move on from that. Surrounding ourselves with the people who get the best out of us. I also agree with the statement that life happens through us, not to us. Little is set in stone. We need to avoid jumping to the first response that comes to mind, we have the ability to focus and send our thoughts in directions of our choosing. People's opinions of us are often none of our business, it's their stuff. The pressure they put on us is more about them. We all, if we choose to recognise it, put things on others and criticise on things, that we feel we are weak on ourselves. When we realise things can be more fun, simply by changing nothing apart from how we think, things can just fall into place. I agree we are performing mental gymnastics just to exist, but we do occasionally need an outsider to point out our behaviours and triggers. We really should get therapy before we need it, and realise what we are capable of. We need to live in conscious ways and be self secure. We need to truly listen more and realise what we are trying to teach and advise others about, is again often what we need to learn ourselves”.William sees that our childhood self isn't separate, we still are that child, just an older version. He goes on to reflect on how the lack of guidance in his young life still affects him.Stuart talks of how he grew up in a "very unpleasant family" and how he is constantly motivated by not wanting to be like them.Stuart goes on to compare the human the mind to soil - without constant work, it reverts to its original state. He concludes that therapy comes in many forms, including walking.William philosophises that "Little is set in stone" - the only constant is change. An action: He advises persistence in breaking negative thought patterns, and to be prepared as it might take multiple attempts to break those patterns.Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsHelp us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Floss from Gimli, Manitoba, Canada set the first of two listener questions in today's episode  “Do either of you feel you have guardian angels?”Stuart and William come at Floss's question in two very unique ways, which reflects how different they are from each other.William refuses to believe in literal guardian angels, as he feels you need to believe in actual angels. He does however acknowledge how the presence of important people in his life could be like having a guardian angel.Stuart believes that he has certain people from his past "on his shoulder", informing his thinking, and that he has felt their physical presence at periods in his life. He feels that he has at least two guardian angels.Stuart puts an environmental spin on this question, with a question of his own: How can humans be guardian angels of planet Earth?The second listener question comes from Paula in Norfolk, England.“Anything currently annoying you with the use of modern language?”Off the back of Paula's question, Stuart shares his dislike for fashionable phrases that are essentially meaningless filler. William agrees. He has a particular dislike of the overuse of “bro” and "super". Both do acknowledge however that they might just be "old and cranky".The big takeaway from this discussion is that Stuart and William advocate for using a varied vocabulary and not to rely on the same words, repeatedly, and most importantly, for communication to be genuine. Listen to yourself and others, use varied vocabulary, fill sentences with value rather than filler words.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Scott, a listener from Arisaig, Scotland sets today's first question  - “We have rebranded tourism, to backpacking, walking, cycling, mountaineering and exploring etc, so as to get an authentic experience of a place. Though in getting that authentic experience, often we turn a blind eye and we see places how we want to, not how they really are. In ways that fit our own narrative, maybe overly romantic? Maybe that's why when we revisit a place it often is not as good as we remember it? So those authentic experiences are skewed and informed by our own internal habits and processes. We readily overlook the impacts we are having, behaving like sheep, following the crowd, and going on mass to get these authentic experiences?”Join co-hosts Stuart and William on a wild ride through the contradictory world of travel. Stuart argues that all that backpacking, hiking, and cycling is mere "passing through"—nothing like truly diving into the heart of a culture. He even recounts safari adventures that leave you questioning if you're witnessing nature or a scene from a horror flick (spoiler: those animals aren't just posing for a selfie—they're feasting without mercy!). Meanwhile, William champions the power of local interactions, insisting that true cultural insights come from chatting with the locals, not ticking off tourist landmarks on a map.In each episode, our duo engages in a hilarious tug-of-war: Is travel about immersing yourself in the raw, unpredictable pulse of a foreign land, or merely curating a safe, picture-perfect postcard life? Stuart's anti-tourism stance collides with William's conscious, soul-searching travel vibe, leaving no cliché unchallenged and no tourist untouched. Their final piece of advice? If you're going to be a tourist, do it sustainably—think outside the mass flock and embrace your inner rebel.Strap in for candid debates, laugh-out-loud stories, and a fresh perspective on how travel can either be a genuine adventure or just another scheduled excursion. Tune in, because when authenticity meets absurdity, the conversation is anything but ordinary!What unconventional travel mishap or unexpected local encounter has made you question your holiday choices? Let's keep the conversation going!Oisin, from Cork, Ireland sets the second question  - Oisin's QuestionHistory isn't just written—it's wielded. In this thought-provoking chat, Stuart and William unravel the complexities of Ireland's past and its lingering impact on today. From the historic rivalry between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael to the British government's strategic hands-off approach that allowed internal strife to flourish, they explore how political maneuvering has shaped nations.Stuart delves into how famines can be leveraged for social change, citing the Irish famine as a tragic example where suffering became an opportunity—intentional or not. Meanwhile, William sheds light on the erasure of Irish history in British education and asks: What do we conveniently forget, and why? The conversation expands to immigration, drawing parallels between past acceptance of Irish migrants in America and current hostility toward newcomers.Together, they emphasize a vital message: We must acknowledge history without weaponizing it—learning from past injustices without falling into the trap of blame. Tune in for an educational deep dive that challenges perceptions and uncovers the hidden forces shaping societies today.Which overlooked moments in history have shaped the world more than we realize? Let's dig into it!Send us a question to discuss to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wowHelp us to spread the podcast. Share this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

“I  heard someone on TV say they didn't think Essex had wildlife, until someone said wildlife is everywhere. What is the world coming to?” That's the question left by listener James, in Ecclefechan, Scotland for your co-hosts Stuart and William to delve into. Wildlife? More Like Wild Conspiracies! Join William and Stuart as they dissect the absurdities of British wildlife with all the enthusiasm of a damp Saturday in Colchester. William opens by suggesting that if you haven't graced Colchester with your presence, then clearly you've missed out on all the subtle wonders it has to offer—even if they're as unexciting as a bus stop in the drizzle.Stuart then delves into the baffling story from thirty years back, when someone reckoned that North Wales was practically bird-free—simply because no one bothered to record them. That is, until a slightly under-the-weather bird watcher on Anglesey made the inconvenient discovery that, shocker, birds do exist. Yes, even in a landscape where no one takes notes, nature finds a way to upend common sense.Ever the inquisitor, William questions which part of Essex this supposed wildlife desert applies to, considering that even the busiest corners of the county attract a touch of life. Stuart is quick to chime in: if your idea of wildlife is confined to roaming elephants and lions, you're in for a rude awakening—try rolling back your carpet and what's under there. For the pièce de résistance, they tackle the wild conspiracy theories claiming that not only does New Zealand not exist, but neither does Finland. So naturally, it's a short leap of logic to imagine that Essex is just a barren wasteland devoid of any real wildlife. Martin, from Portree, Scotland sets the next question - “Heard you say you are not that active as a photographer these days William, do you see a time where you'd go back to it? Here in Portree, for a large part of the year, the landscape is multiple layers of grey. Have you done much photography with such a simple pallet?”Martin's question was the wake-up call William didn't know he needed. While other projects hogged the schedule, the camera was left gathering dust, and he admits he never quite granted himself the freedom to simply go out and shoot. Now though, he's slowly easing back into photography, sharing the notion that layers in landscape photography can transform even the most ordinary view into something with unexpected depth. Meanwhile, Stuart spices things up with a side story. He recounts a tale of a Portree painter who was so fixated on capturing the ever-changing moods of grey that she found herself painting four different canvases in the span of a single day. Apparently, the local weather wasn't content with just one look—each passing moment demanded its own portrait.Reflecting on his past and looking to the future, William confesses a need for subject matter that truly resonates with him. Back in the day, he was a prolific railway photographer with a portfolio that got plenty of press and the satisfaction of mastering a craft he loved. Now, with a renewed sense of purpose, he's dipping his toes into photography once again—and you can catch his latest snaps on Instagram under the handle @shotatanangle.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsHelp us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

“I've heard youngsters say in the olden days we never had mobiles, and how did we survive? This worries me. Ok youngsters are tech savvy, but they perhaps lack the ability to adapt quickly if tech fails them?”This is the first of the two listener questions sent in for Stuart and William to discuss in today's episode, this particular question came from Wayne in Bangor, Maine, USA.Off the back of Wayne's question, William recounts his own observations, where he has witnessed a younger person than him, attempting to pay for a bus ride on their phone, and when it hasn't worked, they have not been able to pay by any other method, and therefore haven't been able to travel. Off the back of this point, he comes up with an action: to always carry a backup with you, in this case a wallet with a physical payment card.Stuart comes at the question from a different angle, he sets the lofty challenge of giving life without a mobile a go, and to see how you get on. William takes Stuart's point and posits the idea that we need to strike a balance here. That phones are useful, but not to overly rely on them.The second question for this episode comes from Paula in Norfolk, England.“Huge amounts of trees are being planted to combat climate change, perhaps too many? Many die, because they are not cared for. How about Community Tree Ambassadors to keep an eye on them?”The big bee in Stuart's bonnet regarding Paula's question is that though tree ambassadors can be potentially helpful, they can also just be a token gesture. He relates a story about one man in Oxford who set up a committee to plant more trees in the city, called The Forest of Oxford. The committee was populated by local people, but if this guy disagreed with you, he would overrule it and say the committee had made an alternative decision, when it was really him as an individual making that move. The group was really a toothless tiger, only there to give false credence and facilitate the guy's vision, which he couldn't implement alone. He raises the question: How do we stop the tree ambassadors becoming a token gesture?William's opinion takes us to the very root of the matter, that planting trees is  not the sole solution to the environmental crisis as trees only form one part of the ecosystem in the first place. And when they are planted, they often aren't looked after.In this podcast your co-hosts Stuart and William discuss questions the listeners have sent in. Get ready to join the chaos of their live audio circus, where your intrepid hosts dive headfirst into your listener-supplied mystery boxes of questions. They may chat, they might bicker—but rest assured, there's no fancy pre-reading. They discuss them, they rarely debate them. Sometimes a surprise guest or an unsuspecting listener takes center stage in The Listeners Chair, adding extra spice to the mix. It's unscripted, unpredictable, and as raw as your first cup of coffee—so buckle up and enjoy the unfiltered ride! Most importantly Stuart and William don't see the question before the press record, so their reactions and opinions come to you in real time, and they most likely start from the same position as you the listener at the start of the recording. Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

On this podcast there aren't necessarily debates, more often they are off the cuff conversations. You, the listeners, set the questions that your, co-hosts don't see until they start recording. This episode is not an exception to that as there's talk about Stuart's recent appearance on the ProGRESS Podcast, and a thought-provoking reflection questioning whether humanity's progress is driven by rare geniuses, while the rest of us cling to their achievements and grapple with uncomfortable truths about our nature, and opinions.The first of the two listener questions comes from Lucas in Punta Arenas, Chile - “Stuart heard your interview on The ProGRESS Podcast. Where does your drive to be genuine and honest in business come from, do you think? Where do you think your internal drive comes from that you spoke about separately at the end?”From this question, Stuart talks about how his drive to be genuine and honest in business comes from the same place as where the drive to be genuine and honest in personal life. He grew up in a family full of bullshit, distortion, lies, suppression, oppression and belittlement. He doesn't want to be like them.He goes onto spin the question to an environmental slant:  what drives you to care about the environment? And maybe put yourself in the shoes of somebody who is having a negative impact on the environment, and what drives them to do that and to maybe not even care.If you would like to listen to the episodes, here are the links:Part 1Part 2The second question today comes from Bronwen in Atlanta, Georgia, USA - “Are humans really that advanced, or do we rely on the occasional genius to make our species jump, leaving the rest of us merely hanging on to their coattails, and just narcissistic apes? I know some people will deny that we are apes, and they are entitled to their opinion, as am I. It doesn't mean their or my opinion overthrows a point of fact, it's still just their opinion. Are we really advanced if we fool ourselves into thinking we are offended by someone's opinions that differ from ours, when they are really offended by points of fact?”Off the back of Bronwen's question, William feels that we have more geniuses around us, he cites the progress humans have made over the past 200 years.  There's always people out there with interesting minds, and they come up with really interesting ideas.Stuart asks the question: are our evolutionary jumps driven by these geniuses?  When those geniuses make their discoveries, a large volume of the rest of us then jump on that bandwagon. Is that mass movement what makes us have an evolutionary jump, not the genius's actions?Stuart picks up that there are two sides to Bronwen's question, and the core to the second part is that opinion is not fact.  There are facts out there that as far as we understand them to be facts, and people can be offended by someone's unfounded opinion or founded facts, but it's just how you deal with that offense.  You're offended. Deal with it. Process it. Feedback on it, try and improve the situation. Just because you are offended, doesn't mean someone is always being offensive.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/PeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/peoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

This episode was recorded in Stuart's garden, so expect in the background,  people shouting, horns, sirens, Harley's revving, all sorts. If you're struggling to filter out the background noise and not focus in on the question, that's something you need to practice, because when your co-hosts are out having a conversation in this garden space, they don't even notice the background sounds very often. So that's the thing, life is a noisy place and you get presented with these big questions at inconvenient times, so we all need to learn to filter at any given moment.Ray, from Sauk Centre, Minnesota, USA is the lucky listener asking the first question - “Do you think countries that benefited from the slave trade should pay compensation to the descendants of slaves. Is it fair to pay for wrong doings of ancestors, and is it wrong to accept compensations for things your ancestors experienced? Are all white people racist if they are living off privileges afforded them by their forefathers? For balance, are modern day slave descendants, victims? Is it potentially better though to work towards a fairer society, instead of compensation? It can maybe be argued that compensations won't make a difference in a society that remains inherently unfair?”Stuart and William discuss reparations, fairness, and historical context. Stuart emphasizes the importance of understanding history to build a better future. William examines unconscious biases and how ancestral privilege shapes opportunities. Rather than financial compensation, Stuart argues for acknowledgment and proactive change. William stresses that achieving a fair society requires recognizing existing privilege. They both highlight the need for balanced historical perspectives and thoughtful action beyond monetary solutions.Mateusz, from Rzeszow, Poland sets the second question for discussion today and as it is quite lengthy, we have put it in a separate document which you can find here - Mateusz's QuestionWilliam and Stuart dive into pronouns, identity, and how labels can matter—or not. William, a self-described "CIS white male (but don't call him that)," sees pronouns mostly in emails and social media but acknowledges that openly sharing them can help others feel comfortable. Stuart recounts an awkward business meeting where he avoided stating his pronoun and paid the price. They agree that inclusion means normalizing differences without making a spectacle of them. William sees identity as secondary to kindness and competence, while Stuart laments society's slow progress in LGBTQ+ acceptance since the 1970s. They conclude with a universal truth—offending someone is inevitable, so keep messaging clear, direct, and free of unnecessary complexity.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

Floss, in Gimli, Manitoba, Canada is the listener who set the first question today - “What are your objectives, personally and with your work?”William aspires to live a fulfilling life by practicing kindness, spending time with loved ones, and embracing diverse experiences. Both personally and professionally, he seeks growth through challenges and stepping out of his comfort zone.Stuart, on the other hand, values enjoying life's journey. His professional focus is on establishing the Disabled Countryside Access CIC to enhance accessibility, with the long-term aim of transitioning to part-time work to prioritize health and well-being.These perspectives highlight different approaches to personal and professional fulfillment.James, from Ecclefechan, Scotland is the listener setting the next question - “In the little known mountainous areas of Greece, down toward Albania I think, the government are issuing sheep farmers with huge sheep dogs, to help keep bears and wolves away that roam the area. We need to find ways like this to live alongside larger animals and not shoot on sight. What do you think?”Stuart and William feel farmers are now adopting non-lethal strategies to manage bear encounters, choosing to deter rather than eliminate these animals. This approach not only promotes more humane interactions but also influences local decision-making towards sustainable practices.Understanding that bears view farms as extensions of their territory emphasizes the importance of educating communities about animal behavior—a key step in reducing conflicts.Moreover, drawing an analogy to coastal sea defenses, one can question whether such interventions might shift bear activity in unforeseen ways, much like how sea defenses alter the natural energy flow of the ocean. Investigating these hidden dynamics could lead to more effective and balanced wildlife management strategies.Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsWhat do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

The first question that Stuart and William wade into in today's episode, comes from Ray in Sauk Centre, Minnesota, USA - “None of us are getting out of this alive. We're all heading in the same direction. Don't you think there's something profound in that?”Right off the bat, William agrees with Ray, that none of us are getting out of this alive. He goes on to make the point that we like to avoid the subject of our own mortality. Stuart feels there is a profundity to the fact that we all eventually die, and how it is the one shared experience that we all will have.Stuart then tries to bring the conversation around to the environment:  if we have very few shared experiences, how can we hope to live sustainably? Both he and William find this a tough question to even begin to answer, it is a big question.There are always two listener questions per episode, and the second one comes from another Ray, this time from Newmilns, Scotland - “I hear people talking about the Cocaine trade, and the submarines arriving in Spain, smuggling the drugs from Latin America. I'm also hearing the drug trade in UK prisons is worth a reported 1 billion pounds a year, which is interesting when set aside something like the UK carpet industry, which I know is worth just 900 million pounds a year. It's reported that some prison wardens themselves are smuggling drug packages into prisons as they know how to bypass checks, and that they are paid £400 per package. Now, what I want you to explore on this podcast is, corruption amongst those tasked with administering positive change, in the prison system and also in the climate change world, is seriously damaging. How can the rest of us manage the impact of these disruptors?”Stuart starts off the conversation, talking about how some prison wardens are good, some are bad, but these drugs are getting into the prisons somehow. He likes how Ray has spun this question towards the environment.Stuart recognises the corruption among those people who are tasked with making a change. He  knows people who have been through the prison system, are going through the prison system, will go through the prison system, and their families think they'll be rehabilitated. And if the people who are meant to be rehabilitating the prison prisoners are corrupt in themselves, the point's been missed. He feels that you can't avoid corruption, but it just needs to be flagged up, and the boil lanced.Stuart carries on the point that we need to openly talk about this issue, and instead of getting annoyed, we need to be proactive, remove the disruptors, and get better people in.William follows on this point, how we as humans can be easily motivated, particularly by money. This is sometimes because we need the money, or it could be that we are bullied into it. It is part of a system which the prison officers are quite literally locked into.Stuart and William conclude the conversation about vetting processes, and how they can be used to weed out the disruptors.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

On this podcast, the questions are set by you, the listeners. Even though the questions are often detached from the environment, we always try and bring back the discussion to it in some way.In today's episode, Stuart and William, your co-hosts, chew the fat over two intriguing questions, the first of which comes from Bartek in Abingdon, Oxfordshire, England - “I have not asked any question since 2020 I don't think, but always listen whilst I work. I see some of the UK royal family are pushing forward anti homelessness and anti domestic abuse projects. Should they abstain from such things or should they use their status in these ways?”Stuart feels an undercurrent from the question, that Bartek  is possibly an anti monarchist. He sees the question being more “should they exist and should they be sticking their nose in if they do?” His conclusion though, is that the royal family do have a status in society, and they should be doing something good, however he often feels they do more bad than good.Throughout this discussion, both Stuart and William in some way, express anti-monarchy sentiment, which deviates from Bartek's question a bit, but that is how they rock on this podcast, they often allow the conversation to weave and meander, like a shopping trolly with a dodgy wheel, as you never know where the conversation might lead?The second question comes from a listener that William is, for no reason at all, particularly afraid of, that person being Debs in Didcot, Oxfordshire, England - “1 in ten (if not more) of 4 year olds in the UK are considered obese. Yet when parents are advised how to help their children lose wait, they often close their ears. Is that because as a nation we're not emotionally mature enough to take this feedback on board?”William starts the conversation by bringing up how people don't like to be told when they are doing something wrong in their lives. Off the back of this bold statement, Stuart relates a story from his time in Manchester, how a group of kids were seen as feral, and their parents weren't bothered as it was how they were brought up, and it hadn't harmed them in their opinion.Stuart and William then steer the conversation towards how we need to consider the impact of cheap processed foods. Stuart sees it as an  indication of the lifestyle, the processes we live by. That it isn't all down to telling parents how to bring up their children better. He feels that we need to look at the whole way we live.Stuart's conclusion for this question: we need to  put systems in place to allow people to make better decisions.William concludes that a good community can also make a positive impact. The difference between a person in power like a teacher, and a member of your own community advising you, can make a big difference.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

This podcast is  not really a debate. It's more of a conversation. Listeners send in questions for discussion and we've got up to 50 questions still to get through. Some aren't about the countryside or the environment, but co-hosts Stuart and William try and bring them beck to the environment in some way, with the actions they come up with. Ched, sets the first question from Port-Au-Prince, Haiti - “Who or what is the world's super power?”William initially suggests the USA as an answer to Ched's question but quickly shifts to a broader perspective. He identifies the real superpower as the ability to create an inclusive and effective community—a dynamic where people from diverse backgrounds connect, exchange ideas, and spark transformative progress. Stuart views Earth's superpower as its innate ability to foster and sustain life, a universal and extraordinary quality beyond the confines of planet Earth.William quotes physicist Brian Cox, emphasizing humanity's unique capacity to marvel at the universe and suggesting that losing this trait would be a profound loss. Their discussion diverges into intriguing tangents: William explores the concept of large numbers by converting them into relatable measures like time, while Stuart delves into the mysteries of black holes, pondering what happens to the matter within if a black hole ceases to exist.Fendy, from Dajabon, Haiti offers up the next question - “Is it good to be busy?”William begins by asserting that busyness for its own sake is counterproductive, though it may serve as a useful distraction in difficult times. He cites gardening and housework as examples of purposeful activity. Drawing on his business experience, Stuart observes that many people appear busy while accomplishing little, which he describes as a form of self-sabotage. They further note that some individuals maintain an image of busyness without engaging in substantively meaningful work. Stuart then shifts the focus to consider how one might achieve effectiveness without unnecessary preoccupation, prompting William to recall a U.S. podcast on activism that stressed the importance of balancing dedicated efforts with periods of disengagement to avoid missing critical opportunities.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comWe like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we're not after numbers.This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountrysideSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheels

Debs, in Didcot, Oxfordshire, England is the listener who sets the first question for discussion -  “You often say we are part of nature and not separate from it. To that end, with balance, it's ok for humans to alter land. So restoring it back to how it was before man even walked the Earth may be a red herring. I've heard you say when we are trying to look after a section of land, are we aiming to turn it into what it was, what it is or what we want it to be? So planting trees everywhere, maybe even where trees wouldn't normally be found, may be destroying rare biodiversity. It may also become a monoculture, with some things dieing out as we are only thinking of the canopy, not the understory and other kinds of habitats. Maybe with the correct management from humans biodiversity could increase more than if we died out and left nature to do its own thing?”Stuart kicks off the chat by pointing out that humans have really done a number on the landscape. Apparently, habitats are all over the place, literally. You get the driftwood from the destruction and a lovely patch of what might eventually be woodland if we keep our fingers crossed. The countryside's current look? Yeah, that's courtesy of 10,000 years of human tinkering. And to keep biodiversity afloat, we can't just sit back and do nothing—we need to roll up our sleeves and get involved.Stuart reckons Debs hits the nail on the head about tree planting. Unfortunately, we seem to have mastered the art of doing it all wrong. He then goes on to clarify that rewilding isn't just a fancy term for sitting on our hands.William chimes in, pointing out the environmental wreckage visible from aerial images. His book, featuring aerial maps of the UK, seems to suggest fields dominate the view—fields and more fields.Stuart raises the important point that, pre-humans, biodiversity was thriving. If we don't give nature a helping hand, that biodiversity might just wave us goodbye.Finally, Stuart pops the big question: What's the endgame when we meddle in nature? He reckons we ought to aim for greater biodiversity and, yes, it's perfectly fine for us to step in.William throws in the idea of thinking long-term about biodiversity. He mentions Capability Brown, the landscape gardener who never actually saw the fruits of his labor mature. But he had a long-term vision, and that's something we should all aspire to.Ray, Sauk Centre, Minnesota, USA - “Here's a challenge! What 3 words would you use to describe each other?”Stuart sums up William in three delightful words: Unguided, as if he missed the memo from the wisdom club; Doubtful, because a healthy dose of skepticism is apparently his thing; and Creative, which could be either a compliment or a polite way of saying "a bit out there."On the flip side, William describes Stuart with: Contradictive (yes, he just invented this gem), Focused, like a dog with a bone, and Ridiculous, because why not add a splash of absurdity?If they ever revisit this exercise, they'd probably choose completely different words.Stuart quips to Ray, “Please, spare us from such questions in the future—it was sheer torture!”What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesExtreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair Fundraiser: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Before we get into the meat and bones of this episode, an announcement. This podcast will be ending in 2030 and by our calculations, if we carry on the same rate of listens for the next five years, we'll reach 800,000 in total. So dear listener, here is where you come in. Share this podcast with 5 of your friends today and help us reach the 1 million listen mark before we bring this podcast to a close. Simples!Now on with the show, and in today's episode Stuart and William discuss two of those listener questions, beginning with this corker from Jess in Bishop's Tatchbrook, Warwickshire, England - “Random question for you today. Whats the most memorable live musical performance you've seen?”For Stuart, the most memorable performance was Jimi Hendrix at Woodstock in 1969. He goes on to elaborate about the timing of the performance and what he gained from the experience, particularly highlighting Hendrix's improvisational skills.When William interpreted this question, he saw it as being about performances actually witnessed in person, and since he has seen many memorable performances, he finds it difficult to select just one. However after a little internal deliberation he settles on two particular performances. One recent, and one from around 20 years ago. The first was a performance of Beethoven's 5th piano concerto at Oxford's Sheldonian Theatre, where he was amazed by a virtuoso pianist playing entirely from memory. His second pick was seeing The White Stripes at the Shepherd's Bush Empire, where he was impressed by Jack White's stage presence and the duo's chemistry. He also concludes with an action: to see The Flaming Lips live, you won't regret it!After all that musical waffle, Stuart and William then go onto talk through the following question from Brenda in Northumberland, England - “I notice you don't have too many promotional platforms, or try to do too many things. Is this because of time constraints or do you feel doing too many things and having too many offerings for your audience could be a distraction and divide your audience?”Stuart initiates the discussion by explaining that time constraints limit their promotional efforts. He notes that expanding to new platforms can divide audience attention and potentially serve as an excuse for failure.William goes on to describe their recording process, which ensures the podcast is consistently released on time. He emphasises that word of mouth remains their most effective form of promotion.Stuart expands the conversation by expressing his frustration with creatives who constantly launch new channels or ideas rather than committing to one project and seeing it through.Stuart points out for this podcast their listener numbers remain stable even without active promotion, which he sees as a testament to the podcast's success. He prefers maintaining a consistent audience rather than pursuing a boom-and-bust approach that chases listener numbers.William concludes by questioning whether creatives truly understand the implications of having a large audience, suggesting many pursue big numbers without considering the consequences.What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.comSign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilitiesFundraiser For An Extreme 8 All-terrain Wheelchair: justgiving.com/wildmanonwheelsThis podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast, support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside