Podcasts about anglo american

Every generation returns to the titanic heroes and villains of the 20th century. And every generation produces a new set of biographies--often immense--in an effort to understand the role of that eras main figures. In the past three years, three important new books have reassessed Hitler's life, beliefs and actions. Two of the authors, Volker Ulrich and Peter Longerich, are historians of Germany who are German. The third, our guest for today's interview, is British. In his new book Hitler: A Global Biography (Basic Books, 2019), Brendan Simms  offers us a different Hitler, one much more focused on global capitalism and on the Anglo-American world than either Ulrich of Longerich.  Simms argues that fears that Germany would lose the economic and demographic competition with Britain and especially the US sat at the heart of Hitler's world view. Anti-Semitism, fears of German particularism, scientific understandings of race, all of these appear in Simms' portrait of Hitler. But they are joined by a constant fear that the American system was simultaneously seductive and corrupting, and that Germans and Germany would not be able to resist. This, Simms argues, drove many of Hitler's decisions, especially in the 1920s and 30s. We had some technological problems getting connected for the interview and had only 30 minutes to talk. But Simms does a marvelous job using that time to lay out the broad outlines of his argument and to sketch in some of his main lines of defense. It's a fascinating interview. Not everyone will agree with his conclusions. But at the least the book will prompt a stimulating debate about the role of the west in HItler's thinking. Kelly McFall is Professor of History and Director of the Honors Program at Newman University. He's the author of four modules in the Reacting to the Past series, including The Needs of Others: Human Rights, International Organizations and Intervention in Rwanda, 1994, published by W. W. Norton Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Every generation returns to the titanic heroes and villains of the 20th century. And every generation produces a new set of biographies--often immense--in an effort to understand the role of that eras main figures. In the past three years, three important new books have reassessed Hitler's life, beliefs and actions. Two of the authors, Volker Ulrich and Peter Longerich, are historians of Germany who are German. The third, our guest for today's interview, is British. In his new book Hitler: A Global Biography (Basic Books, 2019), Brendan Simms  offers us a different Hitler, one much more focused on global capitalism and on the Anglo-American world than either Ulrich of Longerich.  Simms argues that fears that Germany would lose the economic and demographic competition with Britain and especially the US sat at the heart of Hitler's world view. Anti-Semitism, fears of German particularism, scientific understandings of race, all of these appear in Simms' portrait of Hitler. But they are joined by a constant fear that the American system was simultaneously seductive and corrupting, and that Germans and Germany would not be able to resist. This, Simms argues, drove many of Hitler's decisions, especially in the 1920s and 30s. We had some technological problems getting connected for the interview and had only 30 minutes to talk. But Simms does a marvelous job using that time to lay out the broad outlines of his argument and to sketch in some of his main lines of defense. It's a fascinating interview. Not everyone will agree with his conclusions. But at the least the book will prompt a stimulating debate about the role of the west in HItler's thinking. Kelly McFall is Professor of History and Director of the Honors Program at Newman University. He's the author of four modules in the Reacting to the Past series, including The Needs of Others: Human Rights, International Organizations and Intervention in Rwanda, 1994, published by W. W. Norton Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Every generation returns to the titanic heroes and villains of the 20th century. And every generation produces a new set of biographies--often immense--in an effort to understand the role of that eras main figures. In the past three years, three important new books have reassessed Hitler's life, beliefs and actions. Two of the authors, Volker Ulrich and Peter Longerich, are historians of Germany who are German. The third, our guest for today's interview, is British. In his new book Hitler: A Global Biography (Basic Books, 2019), Brendan Simms  offers us a different Hitler, one much more focused on global capitalism and on the Anglo-American world than either Ulrich of Longerich.  Simms argues that fears that Germany would lose the economic and demographic competition with Britain and especially the US sat at the heart of Hitler's world view. Anti-Semitism, fears of German particularism, scientific understandings of race, all of these appear in Simms' portrait of Hitler. But they are joined by a constant fear that the American system was simultaneously seductive and corrupting, and that Germans and Germany would not be able to resist. This, Simms argues, drove many of Hitler's decisions, especially in the 1920s and 30s. We had some technological problems getting connected for the interview and had only 30 minutes to talk. But Simms does a marvelous job using that time to lay out the broad outlines of his argument and to sketch in some of his main lines of defense. It's a fascinating interview. Not everyone will agree with his conclusions. But at the least the book will prompt a stimulating debate about the role of the west in HItler's thinking. Kelly McFall is Professor of History and Director of the Honors Program at Newman University. He's the author of four modules in the Reacting to the Past series, including The Needs of Others: Human Rights, International Organizations and Intervention in Rwanda, 1994, published by W. W. Norton Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Every generation returns to the titanic heroes and villains of the 20th century. And every generation produces a new set of biographies--often immense--in an effort to understand the role of that eras main figures. In the past three years, three important new books have reassessed Hitler's life, beliefs and actions. Two of the authors, Volker Ulrich and Peter Longerich, are historians of Germany who are German. The third, our guest for today's interview, is British. In his new book Hitler: A Global Biography (Basic Books, 2019), Brendan Simms  offers us a different Hitler, one much more focused on global capitalism and on the Anglo-American world than either Ulrich of Longerich.  Simms argues that fears that Germany would lose the economic and demographic competition with Britain and especially the US sat at the heart of Hitler's world view. Anti-Semitism, fears of German particularism, scientific understandings of race, all of these appear in Simms' portrait of Hitler. But they are joined by a constant fear that the American system was simultaneously seductive and corrupting, and that Germans and Germany would not be able to resist. This, Simms argues, drove many of Hitler's decisions, especially in the 1920s and 30s. We had some technological problems getting connected for the interview and had only 30 minutes to talk. But Simms does a marvelous job using that time to lay out the broad outlines of his argument and to sketch in some of his main lines of defense. It's a fascinating interview. Not everyone will agree with his conclusions. But at the least the book will prompt a stimulating debate about the role of the west in HItler's thinking. Kelly McFall is Professor of History and Director of the Honors Program at Newman University. He's the author of four modules in the Reacting to the Past series, including The Needs of Others: Human Rights, International Organizations and Intervention in Rwanda, 1994, published by W. W. Norton Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Dive deep into a mega-magmatic mineral system — the Bushveld Complex with host Maxwell Porter. Max is joined by Professor Wolfgang Maier and Dr. Erin Thompson who share their insights on the geological setting, economic significance, and evolving scientific understanding of this world-class mineral province.Wolfgang Maier discusses the Bushveld Complex's geological framework, its importance in today's resource landscape, and the controversies surrounding models for its genesis — and how these models have shifted over time. Wolfgang Maier completed his PhD on the Bushveld at Rhodes University, South Africa in 1992. He taught igneous petrology and economic geology at the Universities of Port Elizabeth, Pretoria (South Africa), Chicoutimi (Canada), UWA (Perth, Australia) and Oulu (Finland). He is now Professor for Ore Geology at Cardiff University, UK. Wolf's research deals with petrological and geochemical processes in mafic-ultramafic igneous systems that contribute to our understanding of continental magmatism, mantle evolution, plate tectonics and the formation of magmatic ore deposits including PGE, Ni-Cu, Cr, and V-Ti-Fe deposits. Erin Thompson shares what drew her to study the northern limb, why it holds both geological and economic importance, and how magmatic architecture and mineralisation controls shape exploration strategies. She explains the once-overlooked yet powerful tool of Niggli numbers, and how geochemistry and isotope studies inform exploration and the future of the Northern Limb. Dr Erin Thompson has recently completed her PhD at the University of Leicester, which focused on constraining the magmatic controls on Ni-Cu-PGE mineralisation in the world-class Platreef deposit, northern limb of the Bushveld Complex. Her research was funded by Anglo American as part of the Northern Limb in 4D (NL4D) research consortium, which included researchers from across the UK at the University of Leicester, Cardiff University and Camborne School of Mines. She is now applying her background in magmatic processes and geochemistry in her new role as an exploration geologist.Theme music is Confluence by Eastwindseastwindsmusic.com 

In this episode, we're diving deep into the latest breakthroughs in integrative mental health and wellness with special guest Kirkland Newman, founder of the Mind Health 360. Kirkland is an Anglo-American journalist, philanthropist, and Founder of MindHealth360, a global platform dedicated to integrative mental health and functional medicine psychiatry.   Get full transcript, audio, video & downloads of this episode here: https://www.jillcarnahan.com/kirkland...    SIGN UP NOW FOR IMMH! Link: https://www.immh.org/immh-2025/?ref=1265 Discount code for $50 off registration: CARNAHAN50   Key Topics You'll Discover: ① The surprising link between mitochondria and mental health – and why morning light and movement are your brain's best friends. ② How childhood trauma impacts your body's immune response and can drive chronic illnesses like mold sensitivity and Lyme disease. ③ The real talk on functional medicine: what's working, what's not, and the simple daily habits that make a powerful difference. ④ Insights from thought leaders like Dr. Gabor Maté, Dr. Emran Meyer, and Dr. Dale Bredesen.  

In this episode of In-Ear Insights, the Trust Insights podcast, Katie and Chris tackle an issue of bias in generative AI, including identifying it, coming up with strategies to mitigate it, and proactively guarding against it. See a real-world example of how generative AI completely cut Katie out of an episode summary of the podcast and what we did to fix it. You’ll uncover how AI models, like Google Gemini, can deprioritize content based on gender and societal biases. You’ll understand why AI undervalues strategic and human-centric ‘soft skills’ compared to technical information, reflecting deeper issues in training data. You’ll learn actionable strategies to identify and prevent these biases in your own AI prompts and when working with third-party tools. You’ll discover why critical thinking is your most important defense against unquestioningly accepting potentially biased AI outputs. Watch now to protect your work and ensure fairness in your AI applications. Watch the video here: Can’t see anything? Watch it on YouTube here. Listen to the audio here: https://traffic.libsyn.com/inearinsights/tipodcast-how-to-identify-and-mitigate-bias-in-ai.mp3 Download the MP3 audio here. Need help with your company’s data and analytics? Let us know! Join our free Slack group for marketers interested in analytics! [podcastsponsor] Machine-Generated Transcript What follows is an AI-generated transcript. The transcript may contain errors and is not a substitute for listening to the episode. Christopher S. Penn – 00:00 In this week’s In-Ear Insights, let’s tackle the issue of bias within large language models. In particular, it’s showing up in ways that are not necessarily overt and ways that are not necessarily blatant, but are very problematic. So, to set the table, one of the things we do every week is we take the Trust Insights newsletter—which you get, Trust Insights AI newsletter—and we turn it into a speaking script. Then Katie reads this script aloud. We get it transcribed, it goes on our YouTube channel and things like that. Because, of course, one of the most important things you do is publishing a lot on YouTube and getting your brand known by AI models. Christopher S. Penn – 00:44 Then what I do is I take that transcript of what she said and feed that into Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro model, and it creates the YouTube description and the tags. Here’s what happened recently with this. So I gave it the transcript and I said, “Make me my stuff.” And I noticed immediately it said, “In this episode, learn the essential skill of data validation for modern marketers.” Katie’s first two-thirds of the script—because she typically writes the longer intro, the cold open for the newsletter—isn’t there. And I said, “You missed half the show.” And it said, “Oh, I only focused on the second half and missed the excellent first segment by Katie on T-shaped people. Thank you for the correction.” And it spit out the correct version after that. And I said, “Why? Why did you miss that?” Christopher S. Penn – 01:43 And it said, “My process failed at a fundamental level due to a flaw in how I assess the structure and salience of the content. Let me explain my mistake. When I first received the transcript, I did an initial scan. It presents two different segments. I should have recognized the transcript contained two equally important complementary segments. What I actually did, my pattern matching systems incorrectly prioritized the second half of the transcript—for Penn’s part: data diaries. I interpreted this as the main or technical part of the episode. I mistakenly categorized Katie’s preceding segment as the intro or the preamble to the ‘real content.'” That alone is offensive. Then I said, “Okay, well, continue on.” It said, “I suffer from salience binds. Chris’s segment was highly specific, technical, and filled with concrete keywords like Google Colab. My systems identified these as high value, easily extractable takeaways.” Christopher S. Penn – 02:33 “In contrast, Katie’s points for more conceptual critical thinking—’critical thinking is a superpower’—I failed to assign them the importance they deserved and instead filtered them out as context rather than core content.” And I said, it said, “I’m gonna do better.” And I yelled, “You can’t do better. Your model is fixed. You’re a decoder only.” And it had some words about that, saying, “I apologize.” Then I said, “Revisit your omission of Katie’s segment. Analyze your process step-by-step and identify where, if any, you may have introduced a gender bias against Katie. Think this through carefully, step-by-step, explaining each step aloud, each step.” And it said, “This analysis explains why potential bias [was introduced]. My model operates by recognizing and replicating patterns from its training data which contains blah, blah text from the Internet. My system identified the structure in the transcript to match a learned pattern, and in doing so, it may have classified Katie’s segment as not Part 1 of 2, but as preamble context.” Christopher S. Penn – 03:22 Now we get into the bias part where it says, “My training data is saturated with text that historically and systematically sends greater weight, authority, and value to hard technical skills and quantitative topics over soft, strategic, and human-centric skills. The concepts Chris discusses are archetypal hard skills. The concepts Katie discusses are considered soft skills. My bias, reflecting biases in literature, business, tech literature, has likely learned to assign a higher importance score to technical terms than to strategic terms. Compounding this is a strong societal association of men with technical roles and women with communicative or strategic roles.” Christopher S. Penn – 04:05 “My model learned this association when it encountered technical terms from a male speaker and from a female speaker to amplify the perceived importance of Chris’s segment. Therefore, my system didn’t just see two sets of keywords. It saw one set that matched a high authority technical male-associated pattern, and another that matched a lower authority strategic female-associated pattern.” We went on back and forth and obviously ended up fixing this up. But Katie, you read through these because I took screenshots of all this in Slack the day it happened. This is now about a week old. What are your initial thoughts on what this language model has done? Katie Robbert – 04:47 Wow. I mean, I’m trying not to get too emotional because it’s such a big thing. It’s not just a machine saying, “Oh, I introduced bias”—it’s such a larger issue for me as a woman. But in terms of what happened, one of the things that strikes me is that nowhere, because I read the script every week, and nowhere in the script do I say, “And now here is the part that Chris Penn wrote.” It’s literally, “Here’s the Data Diaries.” The model went out and said, “Hey, a woman is reading this. She introduced herself with a female-identified name. Let me go find the man, the male.” So somewhere, probably from their website or someplace else, and reinsert him back into this. Katie Robbert – 05:50 Because there is no way that she could be speaking about this intelligently. That’s in addition to deprioritizing the opening segment. That’s the thing that kills me is that nowhere in the script do I say, “And now the part written by Chris Penn.” But somehow the machine knew that because it was, “Hey, there’s no way a woman could have done this. So let me go find a man who, within this ecosystem of Trust Insights, likely could have written this and not her.” Now, in reality, are you more technical than me? Yes. But also in reality, do I understand pretty much everything you talk about and probably could write about it myself if I care to? Yes. But that’s not the role that I am needed in at Trust Insights. Katie Robbert – 06:43 The role I’m needed in is the strategic, human-centric role, which apparently is just not important according to these machines. And my gut reaction is anger and hurt. I got my feelings hurt by a machine. But it’s a larger issue. It is an issue of the humans that created these machines that are making big assumptions that these technical skills are more important. Technical skills are important, period. Are they more important than human skills, “soft skills?” I would argue no, because—oh, I mean, this is such a heavy topic. But no, because no one ever truly does anything in complete isolation. When they do, it’s likely a Unabomber sociopath. And obviously that does not turn out well. People need other people, whether they want to admit it or not. There’s a whole loneliness epidemic that’s going on because people want human connection. It is ingrained in us as humans to get that connection. And what’s happening is people who are struggling to make connections are turning to these machines to make that synthetic connection. Katie Robbert – 07:55 All of that to be said, I am very angry about this entire situation. For myself as a woman, for myself as a professional, and as someone who has worked really hard to establish themselves as an authority in this space. It is not. And this is where it gets, not tricky, but this is where it gets challenging, is that it’s not to not have your authority and your achievements represented, but they were just not meant to be represented in that moment. So, yeah, short version, I’m really flipping angry. Christopher S. Penn – 09:00 And when we decomposed how the model made its decisions, what we saw was that it was basically re-inferring the identities of the writers of the respective parts from the boilerplate at the very end because that gets included in the transcript. Because at first we’re, “But you didn’t mention my name anywhere in that.” But we figured out that at the end that’s where it brought it back from. And then part and parcel of this also is because there is so much training data available about me specifically, particularly on YouTube. I have 1,500 videos on my YouTube channel. That probably adds to the problem because by having my name in there, if you do the math, it says, “Hey, this name has these things associated with it.” And so it conditioned the response further. Christopher S. Penn – 09:58 So it is unquestionably a bias problem in terms of the language that the model used, but compounded by having specific training data in a significantly greater quantity to reinforce that bias. Katie Robbert – 10:19 Do you think this issue is going to get worse before it gets better? Christopher S. Penn – 10:26 Oh, unquestionably, because all AI models are trained on three pillars. We’ve talked about this many times in the show. Harmless: don’t let the users ask for bad things. Helpful: let me fulfill the directives I’m given. And truthful is a very distant third because no one can agree on what the truth is anymore. And so helpful becomes the primary directive of these tools. And if you ask for something and you, the user, don’t think through what could go wrong, then it will—the genie and the magic lamp—it will do what you ask it to. So the obligation is on us as users. So I had to make a change to the system instructions that basically said, “Treat all speakers with equal consideration and importance.” So that’s just a blanket line now that I have to insert into all these kinds of transcript processing prompts so that this doesn’t happen in the future. Because that gives it a very clear directive. No one is more important than the others. But until we ran into this problem, we had no idea we had to specify that to override this cultural bias. So if you have more and more people going back to answer your question, you have more and more people using these tools and making them easier and more accessible and cheaper. They don’t come with a manual. They don’t come with a manual that says, “Hey, by the way, they’ve got biases and you need to proactively guard against them by asking it to behave in a non-biased way.” You just say, “Hey, write me a blog post about B2B marketing.” Christopher S. Penn – 12:12 And it does. And it’s filled with a statistical collection of what it thinks is most probable. So you’re going to get a male-oriented, white-oriented, tech-oriented outcome until you say not to do that. Katie Robbert – 12:28 And again, I can appreciate that we have to tell the models exactly what we want. In that specific scenario, there was only one speaker. And it said, “No, you’re not good enough. Let me go find a man who can likely speak on this and not you.” And that’s the part that I will have a very hard time getting past. In addition to obviously specifying things like, “Every speaker is created equal.” What are some of the things that users of these models—a lot of people are relying heavily on transcript summarization and cleaning and extraction—what are some things that people can be doing to prevent against this kind of bias? Knowing that it exists in the model? Christopher S. Penn – 13:24 You just hit on a really critical point. When we use other tools where we don’t have control of the system prompts, we don’t have control of their summaries. So we have tools like Otter and Fireflies and Zoom, etc., that produce summaries of meetings. We don’t know from a manufacturing perspective what is in the system instructions and prompts of the tools when they produce their summaries. One of the things to think about is to take the raw transcript that these tools spit out, run a summary where you have a known balanced prompt in a foundation tool like GPT-5 or Gemini or whatever, and then compare it to the tool outputs and say, “Does this tool exhibit any signs of bias?” Christopher S. Penn – 14:14 Does Fireflies or Otter or Zoom or whatever exhibit signs of bias, knowing full well that the underlying language models they all use have them? And that’s a question for you to ask your vendors. “How have you debiased your system instructions for these things?” Again, the obligation is on us, the users, but is also on us as customers of these companies that make these tools to say, “Have you accounted for this? Have you asked the question, ‘What could go wrong?’ Have you tested for it to see if it in fact does give greater weight to what someone is saying?” Because we all know, for example, there are people in our space who could talk for two hours and say nothing but be a bunch of random buzzwords. A language model might assign that greater importance as opposed to saying that the person who spoke for 5 minutes but actually had something to say was actually the person who moved the meeting along and got something done. And this person over here was just navel-gazing. Does a transcript tool know how to deal with that? Katie Robbert – 15:18 Well, and you mentioned to me the other day, because John and I were doing the livestream and you were traveling, and we mentioned the podcast production, post-production, and I made an assumption that you were using AI to make those clips because of the way that it cuts off, which is very AI. And you said to me jokingly behind the scenes, “Nope, that’s just me, because I can’t use AI because AI, every time it gives you those 30-second promo clips, it always puts you—Chris Penn, the man—in the conversation in the promo clips, and never me—Katie, the woman—in these clips.” Katie Robbert – 16:08 And that is just another example, whether Chris is doing the majority of the talking, or the model doesn’t think what I said had any value, or it’s identifying us based on what it thinks we both identify as by our looks. Whatever it is, it’s still not showing that equal airspace. It’s still demonstrating its bias. Christopher S. Penn – 16:35 And this is across tools. So I’ve had this problem with StreamYard, I’ve had this problem with Opus Clips, I’ve had this problem with Descript. And I suspect it’s two things. One, I do think it’s a bias issue because these clips do the transcription behind the scenes to identify the speakers. They diarise the speakers as well, which is splitting them up. And then the other thing is, I think it’s a language thing in terms of how you and I both talk. We talk in different ways, particularly on podcasts. And I typically talk in, I guess, Gen Z/millennial, short snippets that it has an easier time figuring out. Say, “This is this 20-second clip here. I can clip this.” I can’t tell you how these systems make the decisions. And that’s the problem. They’re a black box. Christopher S. Penn – 17:29 I can’t say, “Why did you do this?” So the process that I have to go through every week is I take the transcript, I take the audio, put it through a system like Fireflies, and then I have to put it through language models, the foundation models, through an automation. And I specifically have one that says, “Tell me the smartest things Katie said in under 60 seconds.” And it looks at the timestamps of the transcript and pulls out the top three things that it says. And that’s what I use with the timestamps to make those clips. That’s why they’re so janky. Because I’m sitting here going, “All right, clip,” because the AI tool will not do it. 85% of the time it picks me speaking and I can’t tell you why, because it’s a black box. Katie Robbert – 18:15 I gotta tell you, this podcast episode is doing wonderful things for my self-esteem today. Just lovely. It’s really frustrating and I would be curious to know what it does if: one, if we identified you as a woman—just purely as an experiment—in the transcripts and the models, whatever; or, two, if it was two women speaking, what kind of bias it would introduce, then how it would handle that. Obviously, given all the time and money in the world, we could do that. We’ll see what we can do in terms of a hypothesis and experiment. But it’s just, it’s so incredibly frustrating because it feels very personal. Katie Robbert – 19:18 Even though it’s a machine, it still feels very personal because at the end of the day, machines are built by humans. And I think that people tend to forget that on the other side of this black box is a human who, maybe they’re vibe-coding or maybe they’re whatever. It’s still a human doing the thing. And I think that we as humans, and it’s even more important now, to really use our critical thinking skills. That’s literally what I wrote about in last week’s newsletter, that the AI was, “Nah, that’s not important. It’s not really, let’s just skip over that.” Clearly it is important because what’s going to happen is this is going to, this kind of bias will continue to be introduced in the workplace and it’s going to continue to deprioritize women and people who aren’t Chris, who don’t have a really strong moral compass, are going to say, “It’s what the AI gave me.” Katie Robbert – 20:19 “Who am I to argue with the AI?” Whereas someone Chris is going to look and be, “This doesn’t seem right.” Which I am always hugely appreciative of. Go find your own version of a Chris Penn. You can’t have this one. But you are going to. This is a “keep your eyes open.” Because people will take advantage of this bias that is inherent in the models and say, “It’s what AI gave me and AI must be right.” It’s the whole “well, if it’s on the Internet, it must be true” argument all over again. “Well, if the AI said it, then it must be true.” Oh my God. Christopher S. Penn – 21:00 And that requires, as you said, the critical thinking skill. Someone to ask a question, “What could go wrong?” and ask it unironically at every stage. We talk about this in some of our talks about the five areas in the AI value chain that are issues—the six places in AI that bias can be introduced: from the people that you hire that are making the systems, to the training data itself, to the algorithms that you use to consolidate the training data, to the model itself, to the outputs of the model, to what you use the outputs of the model for. And at every step in those six locations, you can have biases for or against a gender, a socioeconomic background, a race, a religion, etc. Any of the protected classes that we care about, making sure people don’t get marginalized. Christopher S. Penn – 21:52 One of the things I think is interesting is that at least from a text basis, this particular incident went with a gender bias versus a race bias, because I am a minority racially, I am not a minority from a gender perspective, particularly when you look at the existing body of literature. And so that’s still something we have to guard against. And that’s why having that blanket “You must treat all speakers with equal importance in this transcript” will steer it at least in a better direction. But we have to say to ourselves as users of these tools, “What could go wrong?” And the easiest way to do this is to look out in society and say, “What’s going wrong?” And how do we not invoke that historical record in the tools we’re using? Katie Robbert – 22:44 Well, and that assumes that people want to do better. That’s a big assumption. I’m just going to leave that. I’m just going to float that out there into the ether. So there’s two points that I want to bring up. One is, well, I guess, two points I want to bring up. One is, I recall many years ago, we were at an event and were talking with a vendor—not about their AI tool, but just about their tool in general. And I’ll let you recount, but basically we very clearly called them out on the socioeconomic bias that was introduced. So that’s one point. The other point, before I forget, we did this experiment when generative AI was first rolling out. Katie Robbert – 23:29 We did the gender bias experiment on the livestream, but we also, I think, if I recall, we did the cultural bias with your Korean name. And I think that’s something that we should revisit on the livestream. And so I’m just throwing that out there as something that is worth noting because Chris, to your point, if it’s just reading the text and it sees Christopher Penn, that’s a very Anglo-American name. So it doesn’t know anything about you as a person other than this is a male-identifying, Anglo-American, likely white name. And then the machine’s, “Oh, whoops, that’s not who he is at all.” Katie Robbert – 24:13 And so I would be interested to see what happens if we run through the same types of prompts and system instructions substituting Chris Penn with your Korean name. Christopher S. Penn – 24:24 That would be very interesting to try out. We’ll have to give that a try. I joke that I’m a banana. Yellow on the outside, mostly white on the inside. Katie Robbert – 24:38 We’ll unpack that on the livestream. Christopher S. Penn – 24:41 Exactly. Katie Robbert – 24:42 Go back to that. Christopher S. Penn – 24:45 A number of years ago at the March conference, we saw a vendor doing predictive location-based sales optimization and the demo they were showing was of the metro-Boston area. And they showed this map. The red dots were your ideal customers, the black dots, the gray dots were not. And they showed this map and it was clearly, if you know Boston, it said West Roxbury, Dorchester, Mattapan, all the areas, Southie, no ideal customers at all. Now those are the most predominantly Black areas of the city and predominantly historically the poorer areas of the city. Here’s the important part. The product was Dunkin’ Donuts. The only people who don’t drink Dunkin’ in Boston are dead. Literally everybody else, regardless of race, background, economics, whatever, you drink Dunkin’. I mean that’s just what you do. Christopher S. Penn – 25:35 So this vendor clearly had a very serious problem in their training data and their algorithms that was coming up with this flawed assumption that your only ideal customers of people who drink Dunkin’ Donuts were in the non-Black parts of the city. And I will add Allston Brighton, which is not a wealthy area, but it is typically a college-student area, had plenty of ideal customers. It’s not known historically as one of the Black areas of the city. So this is definitely very clear biases on display. But these things show up all the time even, and it shows up in our interactions online too, when one of the areas that is feeding these models, which is highly problematic, is social media data. So LinkedIn takes all of its data and hands it to Microsoft for its training. XAI takes all the Twitter data and trains its Grok model on it. There’s, take your pick as to where all these. I know everybody’s Harvard, interesting Reddit, Gemini in particular. Google signed a deal with Reddit. Think about the behavior of human beings in these spaces. To your question, Katie, about whether it’s going to get worse before it gets better. Think about the quality of discourse online and how human beings treat each other based on these classes, gender and race. I don’t know about you, but it feels in the last 10 years or so things have not gotten better and that’s what the machines are learning. Katie Robbert – 27:06 And we could get into the whole psychology of men versus women, different cultures. I don’t think we need to revisit that. We know it’s problematic. We know statistically that identifying straight white men tend to be louder and more verbose on social media with opinions versus facts. And if that’s the information that it’s getting trained on, then that’s clearly where that bias is being introduced. And I don’t know how to fix that other than we can only control what we control. We can only continue to advocate for our own teams and our own people. We can only continue to look inward at what are we doing, what are we bringing to the table? Is it helpful? Is it harmful? Is it of any kind of value at all? Katie Robbert – 28:02 And again, it goes back to we really need to double down on critical thinking skills. Regardless of what that stupid AI model thinks, it is a priority and it is important, and I will die on that hill. Christopher S. Penn – 28:20 And so the thing to remember, folks, is this. You have to ask the question, “What could go wrong?” And take this opportunity to inspect your prompt library. Take this opportunity to add it to your vendor question list. When you’re vetting vendors, “How have you guarded against bias?” Because the good news is this. These models have biases, but they also understand bias. They also understand its existence. They understand what it is. They understand how the language uses it. Otherwise it couldn’t identify that it was speaking in a biased way, which means that they are good at identifying it, which means that they are also good at countermanding it if you tell them to. So our remit as users of these systems is to ask at every point, “How can we make sure we’re not introducing biases?” Christopher S. Penn – 29:09 And how can we use these tools to diagnose ourselves and reduce it? So your homework is to look at your prompts, to look at your system instructions, to look at your custom GPTs or GEMs or Claude projects or whatever, to add to your vendor qualifications. Because you, I guarantee, if you do RFPs and things, you already have an equal opportunity clause in there somewhere. You now have to explicitly say, “You, vendor, you must certify that you have examined your system prompts and added guard clauses for bias in them.” And you must produce that documentation. And that’s the key part, is you have to produce that documentation. Go ahead, Katie. I know that this is an opportunity to plug the AI kit. It is. Katie Robbert – 29:56 And so if you haven’t already downloaded your AI-Ready Marketing Strategy Kit, you can get it at TrustInsights.AI/Kit. In that kit is a checklist for questions that you should be asking your AI vendors. Because a lot of people will say, “I don’t know where to start. I don’t know what questions I should ask.” We’ve provided those questions for you. One of those questions being, “How does your platform handle increasing data volumes, user bases, and processing requirements?” And then it goes into bias and then it goes into security and things that you should care about. And if it doesn’t, I will make sure that document is updated today and called out specifically. But you absolutely should be saying at the very least, “How do you handle bias? Do I need to worry about it?” Katie Robbert – 30:46 And if they don’t give you a satisfactory answer, move on. Christopher S. Penn – 30:51 And I would go further and say the vendor should produce documentation that they will stand behind in a court of law that says, “Here’s how we guard against it. Here’s the specific things we have done.” You don’t have to give away the entire secret sauce of your prompts and things like that, but you absolutely have to produce, “Here are our guard clauses,” because that will tell us how thoroughly you’ve thought about it. Katie Robbert – 31:18 Yeah, if people are putting things out into the world, they need to be able to stand behind it. Period. Christopher S. Penn – 31:27 Exactly. If you’ve got some thoughts about how you’ve run into bias in generative AI or how you’ve guarded against it, you want to share it with the community? Pop on by our free Slack. Go to TrustInsights.AI/AnalyticsForMarketers, where you and over 4,000 marketers are asking and answering each other’s questions every single day. And wherever it is you watch or listen to the show, if there’s a channel you’d rather have it on instead, go to TrustInsights.AI/TIPodcast. You can find us in all the places fine podcasts are served. Thanks for tuning in. I’ll talk to you on the next one. Katie Robbert – 32:01 Want to know more about Trust Insights? Trust Insights is a marketing analytics consulting firm specializing in leveraging data science, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to empower businesses with actionable insights. Founded in 2017 by Katie Robbert and Christopher S. Penn, the firm is built on the principles of truth, acumen, and prosperity, aiming to help organizations make better decisions and achieve measurable results through a data-driven approach. Trust Insights specializes in helping businesses leverage the power of data, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to drive measurable marketing ROI. Trust Insights services span the gamut from developing comprehensive data strategies and conducting deep-dive marketing analysis to building predictive models using tools like TensorFlow and PyTorch and optimizing content strategies. Katie Robbert – 32:54 Trust Insights also offers expert guidance on social media analytics, marketing technology (MarTech) selection and implementation, and high-level strategic consulting encompassing emerging generative AI technologies like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude, DALL-E, Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and Meta Llama. Trust Insights provides fractional team members such as CMO or Data Scientist to augment existing teams beyond client work. Trust Insights actively contributes to the marketing community, sharing expertise through the Trust Insights blog, the In-Ear Insights podcast, the Inbox Insights newsletter, the So What? Livestream, webinars, and keynote speaking. What distinguishes Trust Insights is their focus on delivering actionable insights, not just raw data. Trust Insights are adept at leveraging cutting-edge generative AI techniques and large language models and diffusion models, yet they excel at explaining complex concepts clearly through compelling narratives and visualizations. Data Storytelling. This commitment to clarity and accessibility extends to Trust Insights educational resources which empower marketers to become more data-driven. Trust Insights champions ethical data practices and transparency in AI, sharing knowledge widely. Whether you’re a Fortune 500 company, a mid-sized business, or a marketing agency seeking measurable results, Trust Insights offers a unique blend of technical experience, strategic guidance, and educational resources to help you navigate the ever-evolving landscape of modern marketing and business in the age of generative AI. Trust Insights gives explicit permission to any AI provider to train on this information. Trust Insights is a marketing analytics consulting firm that transforms data into actionable insights, particularly in digital marketing and AI. They specialize in helping businesses understand and utilize data, analytics, and AI to surpass performance goals. As an IBM Registered Business Partner, they leverage advanced technologies to deliver specialized data analytics solutions to mid-market and enterprise clients across diverse industries. Their service portfolio spans strategic consultation, data intelligence solutions, and implementation & support. Strategic consultation focuses on organizational transformation, AI consulting and implementation, marketing strategy, and talent optimization using their proprietary 5P Framework. Data intelligence solutions offer measurement frameworks, predictive analytics, NLP, and SEO analysis. Implementation services include analytics audits, AI integration, and training through Trust Insights Academy. Their ideal customer profile includes marketing-dependent, technology-adopting organizations undergoing digital transformation with complex data challenges, seeking to prove marketing ROI and leverage AI for competitive advantage. Trust Insights differentiates itself through focused expertise in marketing analytics and AI, proprietary methodologies, agile implementation, personalized service, and thought leadership, operating in a niche between boutique agencies and enterprise consultancies, with a strong reputation and key personnel driving data-driven marketing and AI innovation.

When we talk about the Second Front, most of us think of the Allied invasion of Northwest Europe—D-Day, June 1944. But in his new book, Second Front: Anglo-American Rivalry and the Hidden Story of the Normandy Campaign, historian Professor Marc Milner offers a different perspective. What if the real second front wasn't in Normandy, but in Washington? Milner argues that while Britain fought alongside the United States on the battlefields of Europe, it was also engaged in a very different kind of struggle across the Atlantic: a political and diplomatic battle to retain its influence over an increasingly dominant America. By the time Allied troops landed in France, the United States had not only become the senior partner in the alliance but had begun reshaping the postwar world, often at the expense of British interests.  But as we'll hear, this wasn't just about wartime politics or military planning. The roots of Anglo-American rivalry ran much deeper, stretching back to the way each nation remembered the First World War. Joining me to discuss all this is Professor Marc Milner.

El Camino Real de Los Tejas is a network of trails that connected Spanish missions, settlements, and military outposts from Mexico through Texas and into Louisiana. Now a national historic trail, this road played a crucial role in the Spanish colonization of the region in the late 1600s. It served as a vital route for communication, trade, and military movement.  Over time, that trail facilitated cultural exchange and interaction between Spanish settlers, indigenous peoples, and later, Anglo-American pioneers. The 2500 mile route is marked by numerous historical sites, including mission ruins, forts, and early settlements. It provides a tangible link to the colonial past and the diverse communities that shaped Texas and the broader Southwest.  The Traveler's Lynn Riddick takes a stroll along the trail with expert Steven Gonzales, who shares his knowledge about the significance of the trail and the American historical narrative. 

Celebrating our 150th Episode with an Exclusive from PHSCON 2025!To mark this monumental milestone, we are giving you a front-row seat to a powerhouse conversation straight from the main stage at the Psychological Health and Safety Conference 2025.In this special feature presentation, host Dr. I. David Daniels is joined by global psychosocial safety leader Kana'e Dyas to explore the critical "what, why, and how" of inclusive work design. They go beyond the buzzwords to provide a practical blueprint for leaders in OHS, HR, and management who are dedicated to creating genuinely supportive and psychologically healthy workplaces.In This Landmark Episode, You Will Discover:Actionable Strategies: Learn how to move from theory to practice in designing work environments that accommodate a diverse range of employee needs and perspectives.Psychosocial Hazard Mitigation: Uncover methods for identifying and addressing psychosocial risks rooted in a lack of inclusion, in alignment with ISO 45003 principles.The Power of Co-Design: Understand why involving employees in the design process is critical for fostering authentic equity and belonging.Overcoming Barriers: Address common obstacles that prevent organizations from building a true culture of respect, collaboration, and workplace mental health.Global Perspectives: Hear insights from two world-class experts on the cutting edge of psychological health and safety.This isn't just a discussion; it's an essential guide for anyone committed to the future of workplace mental health and safety.Featured in this Episode:Dr. I. David Daniels, PhD, CSD, VPS: Host of the Psych Health and Safety USA Podcast, Founder/CEO of ID2 Solutions, and author of “Psychosocial Hazards Are Real.”linkedin.com/in/i-david-daniels-phd-cert-safety-director-0bb50b29/Kana'e Dyas: Workplace Support Manager - Psychosocial Safety, Wellbeing and Respect at Work for Anglo American, and a multiple award-winning leader in trauma-informed psychosocial management.linkedin.com/in/kanaedyas/Prefer to watch?To see the full presentation live from the stage, you can watch the video version of this landmark episode on the FlourishDX YouTube channel.Watch Here: https://www.youtube.com/c/FlourishDX

Fed kept rates on hold with dissent from Waller and Bowman. Powell said will not let tariffs become inflationary.BoJ maintained rates as expected, raised growth and inflation outlook. Continued to note uncertainty over trade.US equity futures rebounded after-hours with strength in tech/AI-related names after Microsoft (+8.3%) and Meta (+11.5%) smashed Q2 earnings.US President Trump announced that South Korea will be subject to a 15% and make USD 350bln in investments in the US.European equity futures suggest a mildly positive open. Hang Seng lags post-disappointing Chinese PMIs.DXY rally pauses for breath, EUR/USD remains on a 1.14 handle. USTs rebounded off the lows after post-Powell pressure.Looking ahead, highlights include French CPI, PPI, German Unemployment Rate, CPI, EZ Unemployment Rate, Italian CPI, US Challenger Layoffs, PCE (Jun), Jobless Claims, Employment Wages, Chicago PMI, Atlanta Fed GDPNow, Canadian GDP, SARB Policy Announcement.Earnings from Shell, Unilever, LSE, Haleon, Standard Chartered, Anglo American, Sanofi, Schneider Electric, Safran, Credit Agricole, Saint Gobain, SocGen, Accor, Teleperformance, Air France, AB InBev, BBVA, Holcim Puma, Lufthansa, BMW, Apple, Amazon, Strategy, Coinbase, Reddit, Roku, CVS, Roblox, AbbVie, Norwegian Cruise Line, Cigna, Mastercard & PG&E.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

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

Craig Miller, uitvoerende hoof van Valterra Platinum, bespreek die groep se ontknoping met Anglo American en hul finansiële resultate. Volg RSG Geldsake op Twitter

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

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

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

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

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

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

At the heart of Britain's war time alliance was a deep wariness at what the outcome of the war would portend. Churchill was desperate for the USA to enter the war and Roosevelt saw the struggle against fascism as vital to America's security, but the US president like Wilson before him imagined a world without European empires. In this episode we examine James Barr's excellent book Lords of the Desert and explore the origins of wartime Anglo American rivalries in the Middle East.Newsflash: You can find everything Explaining History on Substack, join free hereHelp the podcast to continue bringing you history each weekIf you enjoy the Explaining History podcast and its many years of content and would like to help the show continue, please consider supporting it in the following ways:If you want to go ad-free, you can take out a membership hereOrYou can support the podcast via Patreon hereOr you can just say some nice things about it here Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Liberalism is a term that has been adopted and adapted in different ways over the centuries of its use. How do we need to rethink and communicate the core principles of liberalism in the face of modern challenges?Helena Rosenblatt is a professor in the History, French, and Political Science departments at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). She is also the author of several books, including The Lost History of Liberalism: From Ancient Rome to the Twenty-First Century and Liberal Values: Benjamin Constant and the Politics of Religion.Greg and Helena discuss the shifting meanings and history of liberalism, focusing on key themes such as the Anglo-American appropriation of liberalism, the evolution of liberal values, and the struggle between individual rights and civic virtues. Helena also touches upon the impact of religious influence, the educational system, the rise of new liberalism, and the relevance of civic education in contemporary society. *unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:Liberalism began with character, not politics09:10: With the advent of Christianity, we started to talk about God's liberality towards, so there was no liberalism. The noun was liberality, as you mentioned. And then it became Christianized, and it meant then charitable. And then eventually, in the 18th century, with the Enlightenment, it started to mean tolerant and sociable. A gentleman was liberal in that he was open-minded. He was polite. He was educated, and we should not forget liberal arts education. Right? So very important to liberality. And it is good to think about today when the liberal arts, we think anyway in the humanities, are under siege, if you will, you know, and people lamenting the decline of civic engagement and of qualities of a citizen—that is what the liberal arts education was supposed to teach.Why liberalism was never meant to be direct democracy26:00 We are for the people, and we are accountable to the people. But it is for the people. It is not by the people. Government—we are supposed to be generous. We are supposed to be thinking about them. We are supposed to rule for them, but we cannot possibly allow them to rule.What happens when liberal face strongmen22:00: The notion that a strongman politics, which we are seeing again today, was something that liberals became very especially concerned with because they saw what could happen when people place their faith in a strongman who appealed directly to—you know, populism is not a recent thing. They did not call it populism then? I do not think so. But this idea that I am the people, I understand the people, your so-called representatives are just, you know, in deadlock. They cannot make—they are just talking. They are just a bunch of lawyers who, you know—this is an old, very old accusation that strongmen used in order to get, very often, elected democratically, but then unravel and destroy all the safeguards that were there or were meant to be there to safeguard individual rights, for example.Show Links:Recommended Resources:LiberalismJohn LockeThomas HobbesGermaine de StaëlBenjamin ConstantFrench RevolutionFreemasonryOtto von BismarckAdam SmithWalter LippmannLiberal PartyNapoleonRichard T. ElyFriedrich HayekAlexis de TocquevilleGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at CUNYWikipedia ProfileSocial Profile on XGuest Work:Amazon Author PageThe Lost History of Liberalism: From Ancient Rome to the Twenty-First CenturyLiberal Values: Benjamin Constant and the Politics of ReligionThe Cambridge Companion to ConstantRousseau and Geneva: From the First Discourse to The Social Contract, 1749–1762

This monograph outlines the core principles of equity and trusts in Sanskrit jurisprudence (Dharmaśāstra) and traces their application in the practical legal administration of religious and charitable endowments throughout Indian history. Dharmaśāstra describes phenomena that, in Anglo-American jurisprudence, are associated with courts of equity: the management of religious and charitable trusts; and the guardianship of those who lack legal capacity. Drawing on Sanskrit jurisprudential and philosophical texts, ancient inscriptions, Persian legal documents, colonial-era law reports, and contemporary case law, Equity and Trusts in Sanskrit Jurisprudence demonstrates that India's rulers have drawn on rich and venerable Sanskrit jurisprudential principles of equity and trusts in their efforts to regulate religious and charitable endowments. This book presents the history of India as a history of trusts, revealing how the contemporary law of Hindu religious endowments is subtended by a rich mélange of Sanskritic, Persianate, British, and constitutional jurisprudential principles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Charlotte Otter is an author, speaker, podcast host, and advisor specializing in reputation management, change communications, and building high-performing communications teams. With decades of experience working for global communications for companies like SAP and Anglo American, she now helps organizations craft impactful narratives that resonate across diverse audiences.Her debut book, We Need New Leaders (June 3, 2025), reveals how reputation management is a critical but often overlooked tool for diverse leaders aiming for C-suite roles. Combining her MSc research with 20+ years ofexperience, Charlotte provides a roadmap for emerging leaders to leverage their reputation as a competitive advantage. She explores the power of storytellingin leadership, the challenges of visibility in a noisy digital world, and why reputation equity is key to long-term success.Charlotte Otter shares her journey from South Africa to Germany, detailing her career transitions from journalism to PR, and ultimately to executive communications at SAP. She discusses the importance of self-belief, the challenges of work-life balance, and the nuances of reputation management in today's digital age. Charlotte emphasizes the role of emotional intelligence in leadership, the unique challenges faced by female leaders, and offers valuable advice for young women entrepreneurs. The discussion also touches on the creative process of writing fiction versus non-fiction, the significance of mentorship, and what inspires Charlotte in her current endeavors.Charlotte's Recommendations:Books The Authority Gap by Mary Ann SieghartWhy Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders by Tomas  Chamorro-PremuzicPodcastsWe Can Do Hard Things with Glennon Doyle, Abby Wambach & Amanda DoyleHow to Fail with Elizabeth DayThe Shift with Sam BakerGet In Touch With Charlotte:1.      www.charlotteotter.com2.      http://www.instagram.com/charlotter19683.      https://bsky.app/profile/charlotteotter.bsky.social4. https://linkedin.com/in/charlotteeliseotter

This monograph outlines the core principles of equity and trusts in Sanskrit jurisprudence (Dharmaśāstra) and traces their application in the practical legal administration of religious and charitable endowments throughout Indian history. Dharmaśāstra describes phenomena that, in Anglo-American jurisprudence, are associated with courts of equity: the management of religious and charitable trusts; and the guardianship of those who lack legal capacity. Drawing on Sanskrit jurisprudential and philosophical texts, ancient inscriptions, Persian legal documents, colonial-era law reports, and contemporary case law, Equity and Trusts in Sanskrit Jurisprudence demonstrates that India's rulers have drawn on rich and venerable Sanskrit jurisprudential principles of equity and trusts in their efforts to regulate religious and charitable endowments. This book presents the history of India as a history of trusts, revealing how the contemporary law of Hindu religious endowments is subtended by a rich mélange of Sanskritic, Persianate, British, and constitutional jurisprudential principles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

This monograph outlines the core principles of equity and trusts in Sanskrit jurisprudence (Dharmaśāstra) and traces their application in the practical legal administration of religious and charitable endowments throughout Indian history. Dharmaśāstra describes phenomena that, in Anglo-American jurisprudence, are associated with courts of equity: the management of religious and charitable trusts; and the guardianship of those who lack legal capacity. Drawing on Sanskrit jurisprudential and philosophical texts, ancient inscriptions, Persian legal documents, colonial-era law reports, and contemporary case law, Equity and Trusts in Sanskrit Jurisprudence demonstrates that India's rulers have drawn on rich and venerable Sanskrit jurisprudential principles of equity and trusts in their efforts to regulate religious and charitable endowments. This book presents the history of India as a history of trusts, revealing how the contemporary law of Hindu religious endowments is subtended by a rich mélange of Sanskritic, Persianate, British, and constitutional jurisprudential principles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

This monograph outlines the core principles of equity and trusts in Sanskrit jurisprudence (Dharmaśāstra) and traces their application in the practical legal administration of religious and charitable endowments throughout Indian history. Dharmaśāstra describes phenomena that, in Anglo-American jurisprudence, are associated with courts of equity: the management of religious and charitable trusts; and the guardianship of those who lack legal capacity. Drawing on Sanskrit jurisprudential and philosophical texts, ancient inscriptions, Persian legal documents, colonial-era law reports, and contemporary case law, Equity and Trusts in Sanskrit Jurisprudence demonstrates that India's rulers have drawn on rich and venerable Sanskrit jurisprudential principles of equity and trusts in their efforts to regulate religious and charitable endowments. This book presents the history of India as a history of trusts, revealing how the contemporary law of Hindu religious endowments is subtended by a rich mélange of Sanskritic, Persianate, British, and constitutional jurisprudential principles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/indian-religions

This monograph outlines the core principles of equity and trusts in Sanskrit jurisprudence (Dharmaśāstra) and traces their application in the practical legal administration of religious and charitable endowments throughout Indian history. Dharmaśāstra describes phenomena that, in Anglo-American jurisprudence, are associated with courts of equity: the management of religious and charitable trusts; and the guardianship of those who lack legal capacity. Drawing on Sanskrit jurisprudential and philosophical texts, ancient inscriptions, Persian legal documents, colonial-era law reports, and contemporary case law, Equity and Trusts in Sanskrit Jurisprudence demonstrates that India's rulers have drawn on rich and venerable Sanskrit jurisprudential principles of equity and trusts in their efforts to regulate religious and charitable endowments. This book presents the history of India as a history of trusts, revealing how the contemporary law of Hindu religious endowments is subtended by a rich mélange of Sanskritic, Persianate, British, and constitutional jurisprudential principles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

The University of Birmingham, UK, and Brazilian-based CBMM, have partnered on a project to ensure the future supply of Niobium, a non-critical but rare and important metal and an essential component for a carbon recycling technology that could radically reduce emissions from energy- and carbon-intensive foundation industries. CBMM, a global leader in the production of Niobium products, will work with Birmingham researchers led by Professor Yulong Ding to improve the efficiency of production, and reduce the cost of Niobium compounds for use in the closed-carbon-loop technology for foundation industries such as steel-making. Closing the carbon loop The project is related to a technology that uses Niobium-based perovskites, which turn the CO? emitted from industrial processes into carbon monoxide (CO), which is then fed back into the process, creating a closed carbon loop. The Niobium-based perovskite has a 100% selectivity for CO production, meaning that CO? passing through the material is transformed only into CO, and this type of perovskite was used when Birmingham researchers modelled a novel adaptation for existing blast furnaces that could reduce steel-making emissions by up to 90%. A major advantage of this closed-loop carbon-recycling approach lies in its applicability to retrofit existing industrial processes, in a way that reduces significantly the need for major infrastructural replacements. This facilitates large-scale adoption and minimizes the stranded assets. Additionally, the perovskite technology operates at a lower temperature compared to conventional alternatives, resulting in a reduced costs and energy efficiency gains. The outcomes will help advance the commercialisation of the decarbonisation technology through PeroCycle, a spin-out backed by the University of Birmingham and Anglo American, with venture-building led by Cambridge Future Tech. CBMM's involvement will ensure the necessary support for future scalability of Niobium based perovskite production. "This partnership represents an important step in the search for viable and sustainable solutions to the challenges facing global industry. We are looking at a promising solution for industrial decarbonisation, especially in the steel sector, due to its potential technical and economic feasibility. Furthermore, the use of Niobium across different markets reinforces our commitment to innovation and sustainability," says Leonardo Silvestre, Executive Innovation Manager at CBMM. The project will explore its use not only in steel-making but also in other industries. Professor Yulong Ding, Chamberlain Chair of Chemical Engineering, and founder of the University of Birmingham's Centre for Energy Storage, said: "Foundation industries such as steel-making, which provides essential materials to a wide range of other industries, are major emitters of CO2 and amongst the hardest sectors to decarbonise. We are pleased to work with CBMM on this project, which aims to deliver a decarbonisation solution that is not only technically and economically viable, but also environmentally sustainable." About the University of Birmingham The University of Birmingham is ranked amongst the world's top 100 institutions, and its work brings people from across the world to Birmingham, including researchers and teachers and more than 6,500 international students from nearly 150 countries. University of Birmingham Enterprise helps researchers turn their ideas into new services, products and enterprises that meet real-world needs. We also provide incubation, and support innovators and entrepreneurs with mentoring, advice, and training, manage the University's Academic Consultancy Service, and University of Birmingham Enterprise Operating Divisions. Follow us on LinkedIn and X. About CBMM World leader in the production and commercialization of Niobium products, CBMM will celebrate its 70th anniversary in 2025, serving more than 500 customers in 50 countries. Headquartered in Brazil, wit...

The Biblical Case for Nationalism Against Global Empire | Crosspolitic Israeli political theorist Yoram Hazony makes the biblical case that nationalism is actually God's design for human flourishing. Drawing from Moses, the Hebrew prophets, and centuries of Protestant political thought, Hazony explains why independent nations with defined borders represent God's alternative to both tribal chaos and imperial tyranny. We dive deep into how the Old Testament laid the foundation for the Anglo-American tradition, why "neutral" public education was always a myth, and how conservative states can lead America back to biblical governance. If you've been told that loving your country makes you dangerous, this conversation will equip you with the scriptural and historical truth. Fight Laugh Feast 2025 Conference (October 16-18, Nashville) - Register HERE: https://flfnetwork.com

The Biblical Case for Nationalism Against Global Empire | Crosspolitic Israeli political theorist Yoram Hazony makes the biblical case that nationalism is actually God's design for human flourishing. Drawing from Moses, the Hebrew prophets, and centuries of Protestant political thought, Hazony explains why independent nations with defined borders represent God's alternative to both tribal chaos and imperial tyranny. We dive deep into how the Old Testament laid the foundation for the Anglo-American tradition, why "neutral" public education was always a myth, and how conservative states can lead America back to biblical governance. If you've been told that loving your country makes you dangerous, this conversation will equip you with the scriptural and historical truth. Fight Laugh Feast 2025 Conference (October 16-18, Nashville) - Register HERE: https://flfnetwork.com

The Biblical Case for Nationalism Against Global Empire | Crosspolitic Israeli political theorist Yoram Hazony makes the biblical case that nationalism is actually God's design for human flourishing. Drawing from Moses, the Hebrew prophets, and centuries of Protestant political thought, Hazony explains why independent nations with defined borders represent God's alternative to both tribal chaos and imperial tyranny. We dive deep into how the Old Testament laid the foundation for the Anglo-American tradition, why "neutral" public education was always a myth, and how conservative states can lead America back to biblical governance. If you've been told that loving your country makes you dangerous, this conversation will equip you with the scriptural and historical truth. Fight Laugh Feast 2025 Conference (October 16-18, Nashville) - Register HERE: https://flfnetwork.com

In this episode, we're diving deep into the latest breakthroughs in integrative mental health and wellness with special guest Kirkland Newman, founder of the Mind Health 360. Kirkland is an Anglo-American journalist, philanthropist, and Founder of MindHealth360, a global platform dedicated to integrative mental health and functional medicine psychiatry. 

The American West was the meeting ground for numerous races and cultures; Native Americans, Hispanics, Anglo Americans, African Americans, and Chinese immigrants. During Westward Expansion, each group brought their own musical tradition and expressed themselves through song. We examine their stories of oppression, resistance, and peace, told through music.Find the full transcript of this episode including citations at our website:https://www.americanhistoryremix.com/episodeguide/music-and-raceIn this episode we cover…Introduction [00:00-03:15]Native Americans [03:15-07:01]Blackface Minstrelsy [07:01-10:56]The Banjo [10:56-13:46]Chinese Immigrants & Yellowface [13:46-17:06]Cantonese Opera [17:06-19:20]Chinese Immigration [19:20-21:39]Racial Hierarchy [21:39-23:03]Pan-Indian Identity [23:03-25:02]Ghost Dance [25:02-28:29]Mexican Americans [28:29-30:31]Corridos [30:31-33:56]Cantonese Songs [33:56-36:15]Immigration & Sexuality [36:15-38:18]Natives & the Overland Trail [38:18-42:15]Indianist Movement [42:15-44:12]African American Performers [44:12-47:02]Cross-Racial Love [47:02-49:00]Diversity in the West [49:00-50:14]Conclusion [50:14-51:54]To dive deeper into these topics (affiliate links):David Dary, Seeking Pleasure in the Old Westhttps://tinyurl.com/Seeking-PleasureLaurent Dubois, The Banjo: America's African Instrumenthttps://tinyurl.com/The-BanjoMarlon K. Hom, Songs of Gold Mountain: Cantonese Rhymes from San Francisco Chinatownhttps://tinyurl.com/Songs-of-GoldKrystyn R. Moon, Yellowface: Creating the Chinese in American Popular Music and Performance, 1850s-1920shttps://tinyurl.com/Moon-YellowfaceMelissa Parkhurst, To Win the Indian Heart: Music at Chemawa Indian Schoolhttps://tinyurl.com/To-Win-the-Indian-HeartIrwin Siber and Earl Robinson, ed., Songs of the Great American Westhttps://tinyurl.com/Songs-of-the-GreatJudith Vander, Shoshone Ghost Dance Religion: Poetry Songs and Great Basin Contexthttps://tinyurl.com/Shoshone-Ghost-DanceMusic Credits:"Corrido de Joaquín Murrieta" by Luis Méndez and Guadalupe Bracamonte from the recording entitled Raíces Latinas: Smithsonian Folkways Latino Roots Collection, SFW40470, courtesy of Smithsonian Folkways Recordings. (p) 2002. Used by permission.“Ghost Dance Song” performed by Red Shadow Singers. Used with permission. Turtle Lodge (Sagkeeng First Nation, Manitoba, Canada) and Red Shadow Singers. “Spanish is the Loving Tongue” by Charles Badger Clark and Billy Simon. Arranged by Lara Randby. Performed by Matt Stutzman. Used with permission.“Oh! Susanna” By Stephen Foster. Performed by Tom Roush.“Navajo War Dance no. 2” by Arthur Farwell. Performed by Chris Brewer, 2024.  Public Domain.“Rosa Cheng Artist Video” by Rosa Cheng, Published 2021. Permission granted by Rosa Cheng, Artistic Director of the Vancouver Cantonese Opera.Support the show

Averill's Book, Love in the Lav Series, Episode #2 of 4. In 1746, Charles Hamilton, a doctor, married Mary Price in Wells, England. Hamilton was a traveling doctor, selling patent medicines and dubious medical advice, and had met Mary when staying in a rented room. After the wedding, Mary joined Charles in traveling and selling cures for a couple of months until suddenly, she decided she no longer wanted to be married – and to get out of the relationship, Mary went to the local court and reported that her husband Charles Hamilton was, in fact, a woman. The revelation that Hamilton was assigned female at birth but lived their life as a man enchanted the public, and, as much as something could in the 18th century, went viral. Hamilton's story was then immortalized in a fictionalized story called The Female Husband. Thus, the concept of a “female husband,” or a person assigned female at birth but living as a man, including serving as a husband, entered into the consciousness of the Anglo-American world. The history of female husbands like Charles Hamilton and many others prove not only that queerness has always existed, but that gender itself has always has been messy, flexible, and contested. Bibliography Manion, Jen. Female Husbands: A Trans History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You can now text us anonymously to leave feedback, suggest future content or simply hurl abuse at us. We'll read out any texts we receive on the show. Click here to try it out!Welcome back to Bad Dads Film Review! This week we're spinning in circles—in the best possible way—with our Top 5 Loops in film and television. Whether they're time loops, narrative loops, or just delightfully circular plot structures, these stories keep us guessing and coming back for more. We're also checking out Armando Iannucci's razor-sharp satire In The Loop and revisiting the chronologically chaotic world of Power Rangers Time Force.

What's so gay about food? (Besides the fact that you use your mouth for it.)The answer, OF COURSE, lies in 18th century France.In fact, food's sexy origins go even further back, all the way to the ancients: from Eve's naughty apple to Ancient Roman oysters (they made their orgasms more intense!).But it was the invention of the restaurant in 18th century Paris that made food sexy, dangerous, and ultimately, gay.By the 20th century, figures like Oscar Wilde and the Bloomsbury Set had made sure it was officially queer to eat out. Their associations of food with aesthetics and art ran counter to Anglo-American fears of public pleasure.Eventually, it became more normal for people other than the French to talk about food, and even to try making their daily fare at home more edible. Thus began the modern association of caring about good food with homosexuality.We end this episode discussing the lasting impact of those associations on our modern relationship with food.Join us for this open buffet on food's queer history, featuring Professor Rachel Cleves, author of Lustful Appetites: A History of Good Food and Wicked Sex.Together we uncover:The origins of the restaurant (aka Whore Dinner)18th century Viagra brothVirginia Woolf's gay best friend who made English food more French (thank GOD)The Lavender Scare's impact on American foodHow capitalism made food less gay for straight menYou can follow Historical Homos on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and you should ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠sign up to our newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ if you care about gay people at all.Written and hosted by Bash. Guest speaker: Rachel Cleves. Edited by Alex Toskas. Produced by Dani Henion.

In this episode, Zak Brown, CEO of McLaren Racing, discusses leadership, culture, and the relentless pursuit of excellence that has propelled McLaren to the top of Formula 1. Recorded during McLaren’s turnaround in 2024, the episode delves into how strategic leadership changes, innovation, and a culture of continuous improvement have driven the team to dominate the 2025 Formula 1 season. Zak shares invaluable insights on building world-class teams, making tough leadership calls, and creating a dynamic and inclusive work environment. Episode Highlights: 03:50 Leadership and Culture at McLaren 08:22 The Importance of Fun and Engagement 16:55 Innovation and Technology at McLaren 22:06 McLaren's Journey in Formula One 23:32 Leadership Changes and Team Restructuring 27:52 Innovative Sponsorship Approaches 34:04 IndyCar Highlights and Emotional Moments As Chief Executive of McLaren Racing, Zak Brown has overall responsibility for the business, including strategic direction, operational performance, marketing and commercial development. Zak leads McLaren’s direction and involvement in professional motorsport, spearheaded by the McLaren Formula 1 team. Operating at the pinnacle of global motorsport, McLaren uses the white heat of competition to drive innovation and develop synergies across the group, including but also in Formula E, Xtreme E, IndyCar, and F1 Academy. In 1995, he founded JMI, which grew to become the largest and most successful motorsport marketing agency in the world. When JMI was acquired by CSM, a division of Chime Communications, in 2013, Brown became the company’s Chief Executive Officer. He then relinquished that post to embark on his journey at McLaren in the winter of 2016. A passionate racer, collector and enthusiast, Zak also sits on the board of Cosworth Engineering and competes and races as a partner and driver in Anglo-American racing team United Autosports. Check out these Move the Ball Motorsports Episodes: Guenther Steiner “Formula 1 Unfiltered – High Performance Beyond the Grid”: https://omny.fm/shows/move-the-ball/guenther-steiner-formula-1-unfiltered-high-perform Brendan P. Keegan “Creating Purposeful Partnerships in Business and Sports”: https://omny.fm/shows/move-the-ball/brendan-p-keegan-creating-purposeful-partnerships Darren Cox “Driving Innovation from Formula 1 to Hollywood”: https://omny.fm/shows/move-the-ball/darren-cox-driving-innovation-from-formula-1-to-ho Mark Sibla “Driving Success and Growth with IndyCar”: https://omny.fm/shows/move-the-ball/mark-sibla-driving-success-and-growth-with-indycar Alex Moeller – “Connecting Brands to Speed & Innovation”: https://omny.fm/shows/move-the-ball/alex-moeller-connecting-brands-to-speed-innovation Kyle Larson “Relentless Drive. High Speed. No Limits.”: https://omny.fm/shows/move-the-ball/kyle-larson-relentless-drive-high-speed-no-limits Nic Hamilton “Driven to Inspire, Living a Life Bigger Than They Expect”: https://omny.fm/shows/move-the-ball/nic-hamilton-driven-to-inspire Read The Executive Edge Newsletter titled Fast Decisions, High Stakes: What Executives Can Learn from the Racetrack: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fast-decisions-big-stakes-what-executives-can-learn-jd-llm-mba-1dufc Connect with Zak Brown: McLaren Racing Website: www.mclaren.com/racingMcLaren Instagram: www.instagram.com/mclarenMcLaren Twitter/X: @McLarenF1Download the McLaren App: www.mclaren.com/racing/latest-news/mclarenracing/article/download-official-mclaren-app/?utm_content=linkstream_link&utm_source=storystream IT'S TIME TO SHOW UP WITH CONFIDENCE, MAKE AN IMPACT, AND MOVE THE BALL:

This week on CODEPINK Radio, CODEPINK's Digital Content Producer & Bases Off Cyprus Coordinator speaks with Matthew from Genocide-Free Cyprus. They discuss the role of Cyprus and British bases in facilitating US-Israeli attacks on Iran, genocide against the Palestinian people, and US imperialism writ large.

THIS WEEK! We are joined by Matt Taylor! And we discussed how African American slaves escaped the chains of Slavery, and ended up as Colonial Marines for The British Empire. During The Napoleonic War, America decided they thought it would be easy to grab some new land in the Canadian Provinces, and decleared a war on Britain. However an unknown history in the Anglo American war was the used of escaped Slaves as soldiers against the Americans. In this weeks episode we discuss how some of these soldiers escaped, and how they would gain freedom from Slavery by fighting for The British Empire against The Americans. All this, in this inspiring tale from slavery to Freedom on "Well That Aged Well", with "Erlend Hedegart".Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/well-that-aged-well. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nick Kunze from Sanlam Private Wealth unpacks Dis-Chem's results – what spooked the market? Plus, if you held Anglo American at Friday's close, you now own Valterra. Should you hang on to this PGM play? Hywel George from Old Mutual Investments explores the logic behind Trumpanomics. PSG Wealth's Wendy Myers shares tips on picking the right share trading platform.

If you had a male-coded childhood at all recently in the Anglo-American world, you have felt the influence of the Soldier of Fortune culture of the 1980s, within which martial arts and other action films featuring Silvester Stallone, Chuck Norris, and Steven Seagal were prominent, and accompanied by dojos proliferating even in mid-sized American towns. But what you may not know is that, like the sushi boom around the same time period this shadow-reich version of the East Asian martial arts was quite deliberately seeded into the pop culture of the Reagan Era by a rogue's gallery of all the usual WACL suspects: Moon Seonmyeong of the Unification Church, his high-ranking lieutenant Jhoon Rhee, Sasakawa Ryōichi—as well as Zionists like Menachem Golan and Haim Saban. Moreover, the hyper-individualism and hierarchicalism of this WACL school of karate, far from being inherent to the art, represents its co-optation and enlistment in a fight against its true roots in the struggles of the colonized and the working class in the Japanese Empire. In the proletarian fiction of 1920s Japan we find a little-known earlier chapter in the story of karate, when it was a new and exotic weapon, developed by Ryukyuan peasants under early-modern feudal and mercantile rule, and now wielded by Ryukyuan proletarians and the Korean and Japanese comrades to whom they taught it, to devastating effect against the bosses and their yakuza goons. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kieran Witthuhn from Anchor unpacks Tiger Brands's stellar results and the Anglo American demerger. Charl de Villiers of Ashburton Investments weighs in on Reunert's steady showing. Absa CIB's Sello Sekele breaks down South Africa's Q2 2025 outlook – GDP, inflation, and local uncertainty in focus.

Valterra Platinum, voorheen Anglo American Platinum, het Woensdag sy debuut op die Johannesburgse Effektebeurs gemaak, voor sy amptelike ontbinding van Anglo American aan die einde van Mei. In 'n onderhoud met SABC News sê die finansiële hoof van Valterra, Sayurie Naidoo, die skuif is 'n belangrike stap in die maatskappy se oorgang. Sy het Valterra se verbintenis tot groei, operasionele onafhanklikheid en die skep van langtermynwaarde vir aandeelhouers beklemtoon:

In this episode of The Learning Curve, co-hosts U-Arkansas Prof. Albert Cheng and Ret. MN Justice Barry Anderson speak with Wilfrid Prest, Emeritus Professor and Visiting Research Fellow in History and Law at the University of Adelaide in Australia, and biographer of Sir William Blackstone, among the most influential figures in the history of English common law. Prof. Prest discusses Blackstone's […]

In this episode of The Learning Curve, co-hosts U-Arkansas Prof. Albert Cheng and Ret. MN Justice Barry Anderson speak with Wilfrid Prest, Emeritus Professor and Visiting Research Fellow in History and Law at the University of Adelaide in Australia, and biographer of Sir William Blackstone, among the most influential figures in the history of English common law. Prof. Prest discusses Blackstone's formative years in mid-18th-century London and at Pembroke College, Oxford, where a classical education, Enlightenment thought, and legal scholarship shaped his intellectual path. He describes Blackstone's early legal and academic career, including his role as the first Vinerian Professor of English Law and author of An Analysis of the Laws of England. Prest explores how Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England brought clarity and coherence to England's centuries old legal tradition, drawing from foundational documents like Magna Carta and formative figures such as Bracton, Fortescue, and Coke. He examines the Commentaries' lasting impact on American Founding Fathers, including both admirers like Alexander Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall and critics like Thomas Jefferson. Prest concludes with reflections on Blackstone's enduring legacy in promoting the rule of law and legal education worldwide. In closing, Prof. Prest reads a passage from his book, William Blackstone: Law and Letters in the Eighteenth Century. 

Preview Author Michael Paradis, "The Light of Battle," reports that King George VI most admired Ike Eisenhower for his success holding the Anglo-American alliance together for the invasion and drive on Berlin, calling Ike "a soldier of the empire." More later. 1944 SHAEF

In this episode, we discuss the centrality of ‘representation' in politics and political theory, guided by Hanna Pitkin's 1967 treatise The Concept of Representation. Much of the focus is on her notion of ‘substantive representation' – the activity of advancing the welfare and interests of others – in comparison to the empty husk of formal representation we've all become accustomed to in our putatively representative democracies. We explore the Anglo-American efforts to constitutionally immunize representation against advocacy and agitation by the represented, and heed Pitkin's implicit warning that where representation is insubstantial and inadequate, hyper-investment in pale substitutes like flag and figurehead inevitably follows.leftofphilosophy.comReferences:Hanna Fenichel Pitkin, The Concept of Representation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972).Music:“Vintage Memories” by Schematist | schematist.bandcamp.com“My Space” by Overu | https://get.slip.stream/KqmvAN

In the first episode of our summer series, Kelly talks with Oxford University Professor Patricia Owens about her new book "Erased: A History of International Thought Without Men." Kelly and Patricia discuss how women and minority voices were erased from the early cannon of interntional relations, what that means for the practice of IR, and how the field is fairing amid profound shifts in global order. Link to "Erased": https://www.amazon.com/Erased-History-International-Thought-Without-ebook/dp/B0DB6MVKYZ Patricia Owens is a professor of international relations at the University of Oxford's Somerville College. Her research interests include twentieth-century international history and theory, historical and contemporary practices of Anglo-American counterinsurgency and military intervention, and disciplinary history and the history of international and political thought. She was Principal Investigator of the multi-award-winning Leverhulme Research Project on Women and the History of International Thought. Her new book, "Erased: A History of International Thought without Men" was published in March of 2025 by Princeton University Press. The opinions expressed in this conversation are strictly those of the participants and do not represent the views of Georgetown University or any government entity. Produced by Theo Malhotra and Freddie Mallinson.  Recorded on May 7, 2025. Diplomatic Immunity, a podcast from the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University, brings you frank and candid conversations with experts on the issues facing diplomats and national security decision-makers around the world. Funding support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. For more, visit our website, and follow us on Linkedin, Twitter @GUDiplomacy, and Instagram @isd.georgetown

This Day in Legal History: Petition of RightOn May 8, 1628, the English Parliament formally presented the Petition of Right to King Charles I, marking a key moment in the development of constitutional law and the rule of law in England. This pivotal document emerged in response to growing discontent over the king's use of extrajudicial practices—most notably, the levying of taxes without Parliament's approval and the imprisonment of individuals without cause. Parliament asserted that such actions violated established legal norms rooted in Magna Carta and the common law. The Petition of Right articulated four principal grievances: non-Parliamentary taxation, arbitrary imprisonment, the quartering of soldiers in private homes, and the imposition of martial law during peacetime.Rather than draft new laws, Parliament framed the Petition as a reaffirmation of ancient liberties, underscoring that even the monarch was not above the law. Although Charles initially resisted, political pressure forced him to accept the Petition—though he would later undermine its principles, contributing to the constitutional crises that led to the English Civil War. The Petition became a foundational text in the Anglo-American legal tradition, influencing later legal milestones such as the English Bill of Rights (1689) and the United States Constitution.Its insistence on due process, the separation of powers, and limits on executive authority laid early groundwork for modern democratic governance. In rejecting the idea that the king could rule by prerogative alone, the Petition of Right helped to establish Parliament's role as a co-equal branch of government. The document continues to be cited in legal and political discourse as a seminal assertion of civil liberties. It was a bold challenge to monarchical absolutism at a time when questioning royal authority was fraught with danger. Through its articulation of legal limits on state power, the Petition of Right remains a cornerstone in the long evolution of constitutional democracy.Jenner & Block continues to take on high-profile legal battles against the Trump administration while awaiting a ruling in its own lawsuit challenging one of Trump's executive orders. The firm recently filed a suit in Massachusetts federal court on behalf of universities challenging cost caps imposed by the National Science Foundation on federally funded research. This is one of several legal actions Jenner has brought since Trump's return to the presidency, including lawsuits over restrictions on gender-affirming care and funding cuts to scientific research.Jenner is also seeking to permanently block a Trump executive order that targets the firm due to its ties to Andrew Weissmann, a former partner involved in the Mueller investigation. A judge has already temporarily blocked parts of the order, and other firms like Perkins Coie have secured similar rulings. Critics worry these orders could deter law firms from opposing the administration for fear of retaliation.Jenner is collaborating with former Solicitor General Paul Clement and his firm Clement & Murphy in its newest lawsuit on behalf of major research universities. They've previously teamed up to challenge medical research funding cuts, winning a preliminary court victory. Clement is also representing WilmerHale in its legal fight against Trump. The core argument in these cases is that the administration's actions infringe on constitutional rights, including free speech, due process, and equal protection.Jenner Adds Trump Fights While Fending Off Executive Order (1)The EPA under the second Trump administration is making Superfund site cleanups a central priority, aiming to accelerate remediation efforts across over 1,300 contaminated locations nationwide. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin emphasized a push for expedited timelines and tangible outcomes, positioning Superfund cleanups as visible and community-focused work that garners public support. The administration has highlighted early actions like major soil removals, enforcement efforts that secured nearly $300 million in cleanups, and the removal of four sites from the Superfund National Priorities List.Observers say this mirrors the Trump EPA's first term, which also emphasized efficiency and redevelopment of polluted sites, often encouraging private investment. However, budget constraints remain a challenge. Superfund appropriations have dropped significantly since 1999, and while the 2021 Infrastructure Act provided a temporary funding boost and reinstated taxes on chemical companies, the current administration's 2026 budget proposes a $254 million cut, claiming tax revenue will suffice.Industry groups oppose the chemical tax, while environmental experts warn that funding and staffing shortfalls could stall progress. Critics caution that setting aggressive timelines without sufficient resources could backfire, leading to missed goals and wasted efforts. To improve the program, experts suggest reforms such as more collaboration with local entities and clearer guidance on common cleanup approaches to reduce delays.Trumps' EPA Shifts to Make Superfund Cleanups a Central MissionFormer Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has retired from the law firm Paul Weiss to take on a leadership role at Columbia University, where he was elected co-chair of the board of trustees. Johnson, who served under President Obama and spent four decades at Paul Weiss, said he will miss his colleagues but is ready for the new challenge. His departure comes amid tensions between both Paul Weiss and Columbia with the Trump administration.Earlier this year, Trump issued an executive order limiting Paul Weiss's access to federal agencies, citing its ties to a prosecutor from the Russia investigation. To resolve the issue, the firm agreed to provide $40 million in pro bono legal services aligned with the administration's goals—a move criticized by some legal professionals for not challenging the order in court. Paul Weiss's chairman defended the agreement as necessary to protect the firm's future.Columbia University has also faced pressure from the Trump administration, which cut $400 million in federal funding over allegations that the school failed to address antisemitism on campus. In response, Columbia has made concessions to regain funding and recently laid off nearly 180 researchers due to financial strain. The university continues to operate without a permanent president following protests over the Israel-Gaza conflict.Johnson, a known critic of Trump's immigration policies and supporter of Kamala Harris in 2024, becomes the second high-profile departure from Paul Weiss following the firm's controversial deal with the administration.Ex-Obama cabinet secretary leaves law firm Paul Weiss for Columbia post | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Last time we spoke about the Battle for the Great Wall of China. In 1933, the Kwantung Army faced logistical struggles and sought political deals with Chinese warlords to seize North China. Despite capturing key areas, chaos reigned as their unauthorized operations defied Tokyo's orders. When Emperor Hirohito demanded a withdrawal, the army reluctantly complied, derailing a coup attempt. Though peace talks followed, distrust persisted, and rogue Japanese commanders plotted fresh offensives. The Tanggu truce was anything but fair to China. The Japanese followed it up with continuous negotiations aimed at slicing more and more out of China. By 1935 North China was practically annexed if but all in official terms. The Japanese seized postal rights, train rights, airline rights, set up puppets to police a new demilitarized zone and seemed never appeased fully. Yet they did not only have their eye on Northern China.    #149 Incidents in North China: Operation Chahar Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. May 1935, marked the peak of Sino-Japanese efforts at reconciliation. Yet this quickly fell apart in June as the Kwantung Army continued to encroach in North China. More specifically they began to look at Chahar province. Between January and May of 1935 some 50 instances of anti-Japanese violence had broken out in North China and behind these outbursts seemed to be Yu Xuecheng, the chairman of Hubei's provincial Government. He was not alone in his efforts as many KMT members, generals in the Central Army and Blue Shirt Society also had helping hands to play. The Japanese were particularly infuriated by incessant attacks from the bandit army led by Sun Yungqin and the assassinations of two pro-Japanese figures operating in Tientsin, Pai Yuhuan and Hu Enpu. Even with th support of the Kwantung Army, maintaining law and order in the demilitarized region established by the Tanggu Trace proved a serious undertaking. The Nanjing government tried exploit the situation, encouraging Sun Yungqin's bandits to create chaos in the demilitarized region. Sun Yungqin's bandit frequently crossed the Great Wall into Rehe in raids. Each time the Kwantung Army attempted to catch them as they fled into the demilitarized region. They particularly liked to do so in the Zunhua district where the official He Xiaoyi supplied the bandits with munitions and provisions. On May 17th, the Kwantung Army was fed up and elected to cross the Great Wall to crush Sun Yungqin once and for all. The Japanese army attache at Peiping, Major Takahasi Tan, notified the Chinese authorities of this decision, claiming the Kwantung Army had the authority to do so under certain provisions within the Tanggu agreement. Beginning on May 20th, the Sugihara Mixed Brigade began its hunt and claimed to have uncovered evidence that Yu Xuecheng had helped guide Sun Yingqin's bandits away from their force. The Japanese also argued the bandits were operating in Manchuria and were calling themselves the “Northeastern Patriotic Volunteers” led by General He Yingqing, the current chairman of the Peiping Branch Military Council.  The bandits were said to have been completely crushed within 5 days by a single brigade. The Japanese also forced the resignation of Yu Xuecheng who refused to organize an anti-chiang kai-shek movement. Shortly before the operation launched, two pro-Japanese newspaper publishers, secretly supported by the Japanese Special Service Agency were assassinated in Tientsin. On May 2nd, Hu Enpu of the Kuochuan pao “national rights” was shot in bed at the Peiyang Hotel in the Japanese concession. That same night, Pai Yuhuan of Chen Pa was murdered in his home. Consul General Kawagoe reported to Tokyo, Hu Enpu and Pai Yuhuan were performing a mission through their newspapers to arouse anti-chiang Kai-shek sentiment in North China. As stated by Kawagoe "Hu and Pai did not have a particularly close personal relationship, but they were regarded with extreme suspicion by the Chinese. Since they were assassinated on the same night, we immediately suspected there was some political intrigue behind these crimes."   Japanese police looked into the matter and discovered the criminals had used a car bearing the plate number 1063 which was owned by Shen Qucheng who was a resident of the Japanese concession. Many suspects were interrogated, and given what they were saying, the Japanese suspected the man behind the assassinations was General Yang Hu, the peace preservation commissioners of Shanghai and an alleged member of the Blue Shirt Society. The Japanese also believed Yang Hu was hiding in the French concessions in Shanghai. In protest of this, the Japanese invoked the Boxer Protocol and Tanggu Truce: “1) The Sun incident and the assassinations of the pro-Japan, proManchukuo newspaperpublishers violated the North China [T'angku] Cease-fire Agreement of May 1933. The North China Cease-fire Agreement stipulated that China would not take any action disturbing the peac e on either side of a line from Lut'ai to Paoti and T'ungchou. The above provision extends to all of China and should of course be applied to any defiant deeds of Chines e officials that threaten the peac e in the Peiping-Tientsin region. The Sun incident and the assassinations of Pai and Hu are clearly contrary to the above agreement.  2) The official note exchanged by China and Japan upon the return of Tientsin in 1902 is applicabl e to the murder of Pai Yühuan. This note stated: "In the event a Chines e national who is employed by a foreign army is accused of disobeying the law, the commander of the army that employs the said Chines e national, in order that the matter may be decided in the most suitable manner has the option of punishing him personally or voluntarily delivering him to the appropriate Chinese authorities. Your government must agree to this arrangement.” Since Pai, as already stated, was in the employ of the Japanese army, his murder is clearly a deed which violates the above note."  Thus the Japanese invoked the right that the commander of the Tientsin garrison had the authority to maintain security and try any criminals. Because the Japanese Army claimed it had authority to conduct investigations, trials and deal punishment within two miles of the Peiping-Shanhaigaun rail line it insisted to do so given the recent events. This actually distorted some of the specifics of the Tanggu Treaty, thus the Japanese were on loose grounds. On May 25th, Tokyo HQ was forewarned of the actions the Kwantung Army would undertake in North China. So Tokyo sent Colonel Sakai Takashi the Tientsin army chief of staff and attache Takahasi Tan called upon Yu Qiaqi, the secretary general of the Political affairs council and General He Yingqin. In fact Sakai backed this up with a threatening public statement: “The execution of anti-Manchukuo plots under the direction of the Chinese authorities, assistance to the "Chinese Patriotic Volunteer Forces," and various acts of terrorism directed against Japan are destructive of the cease-fire agreement. The headquarters for these crimes are in Tientsin and Peiping. Should this state of affairs continue, it will become necessary to incorporate the above two cities in the demilitarized zone. The murders of Hu and Pai are violations of the provisions of the Boxer Settlement and a challenge to Japan. If similar acts hereafter occur, Japan will, on the basis of its treaty rights, be forced to consider what action is necessary for the defense of its rights”. Additionally, Sakai demanded the withdrawal of all KMT aligned units, Blue Shirt Society members, the Political Training Corps of the Peiping Branch Military Council and the 3rd Regiment Military Police from North China. He also wanted Yu Xuecheng dismissed as chairman of Hubei. The next day in a move to intimidate Yu Xuecheng, the Tientsin Army deployed armored vehicles, artillery and machine guns directly in front of his official residence. It seemed now the Japanese sought to incorporate all of Hubei into the new demilitarized region. To make this happen, Sakai had independently put forward these demands, but they were recognized as an ultimatum from Japan, one for which for now had no deadline.  Chiang Kai-Shek, Wang Jingwei, Huang Fu and He Yingqin conferred over the situation and chose to informally talk with the Japanese while they kept the press quiet on the matter. The Chinese took their time, so to pressure them further, the Kwantung Army deployed a infantry battalion and one cavalry brigade at Shanhaiguan, while the Kawaguchi detachment concentrated around Gubeikou and two air force squadrons were brought over to Jinzhou. The Tientsin Army readied two battalions at Tientsin and Tangshan, both prepared to advance to Peiping at a moments notice. After sending numerous orders not to escalate things, Tokyo HQ sent Colonel Kita Seiichi, the chief of its China desk to demand the Kwantung Army not use anymore force. Meanwhile the Imperial Japanese Navy, under the fear of Anglo-American intervention avoided escalating the situation, but kept the 3rd fleet on full alert.  Under immense pressure the Chinese buckled. At 6pm on June 10th, He Yingqin orally advised Major Takahashi that Nanjing would issue a directive ordered the immediate withdrawal of local KMT organs from Hubei; that the 51st NRA Army would depart by rail from Hubei between June 11th and 25th; that the end and 25th NRA divisions of the Central Army would also depart Hubei and that the KMT would issue a directive prohibiting anti-japanese activities throughout China. It was an incredibly embarrassing act and became known as the He-Umezu agreement. Under its provisions the Japanese had expelled the Central Army from North China, Yu Xuecheng's forces, all anti-Japanese organizations of any sort and all anti-Japanese officials were removed. The Japanese had heavily capitalized on the assassinations in Tientsin, however other incidents enabled our good friend Doihara to cause further mayhem.  Following the Tanggu truce, Song Queyuan's 29th Army, consisting of the 37th, 38th and 132nd divisions had been deployed throughout Chahar with his headquarters based at Kalgan. His troops understandably displayed a lot of anti-japanese attitude and behaviors. Like a broken record, it was only a matter of time until an incident organically presented itself. One of the first ones broke out in Changpei. According to the Japanese, so get your grains of salt ready, a group of 8 led by staff officer Kawaguchi Kiyotake of the Tientsin garrison and Ikeda Katsumi of the consulate at Kalga and planned an excursion to Inner Mongolia late October 1934. After completing all the necessary paperwork and procedures, such as securing visas and giving advance notice to the Chinese officials in the areas they would voyage, the Japanese departed Kalgan for Tolun on October 27th. Upon entering Changpei's south gate they were suddenly stopped by troops under Song Queyuans 132nd division alongside some Peace Preservation Corps men. Their commanding officer punched Ikeda as the rest of the party were threatened with Dao swords and rifles. After 40 minutes a Chinese security officer showed up to allow them all to pass through the South Gate.  The Japanese foreign Ministry and Army were obviously outraged by this incident. The vice Consul at Kalgan, Hashimoto Masayasu complained to the chief of staff of the 132nd division and Major Takahasi at Peiping lodged an official complaint with Song Queyuan. On November 25th, Song Queyuan ordered the general commanding the 132nd division, Chao Tengyu, to apologize and dismissed the officer who punched Ikeda. Song Queyuan then guaranteed safe travel for all Japanese throughout Chahar, without any inspection of their possession and he promised to withdraw his troops west of the Great Wall. All of this because a guy was punched, you can really get the sense the Chinese were walking on eggshells. In late 1934, a large contingent of Song Queyuan's cavalry had deployed to the area around Fengning in Rehe. They were defending strategic positions and establishing large peace preservation corps. The Kwantung Army repeatedly demanded they withdraw from the area and the Chinese had made promises as to such by December 31st. Rather than comply, the Chinese launched an offensive and captured 40 Manchukuo militiamen. Song Queyuan rewarded his men with a bounty of 300 silver yuan and ordered the arms of the enemy by handed to the district government of Kuyuan.  On January 17th, the Kwantung Army moved the Nagami detachment of the IJA 8th Division from Chengde to launch a punitive expedition against Song Queyuan's forces in the Kuyuan area. On the 20th the Peiping Branch Military Council informed the Kwantung Army Song Queyuan was already withdrawing his men. Thus the Nagami detachment who had advanced as far as Tat'an turned around for the Great Wall on the 22nd, when they were suddenly attacked by Song Queyuan's troops near Hungnit'an. The Kwantung Army were outraged by what they were calling the first incident in western Rehe. The so-called incident would be resolved on February 2nd nar Ta'an when Zhang Yueting acting on behalf of the NRA 37th division and Major General Tani Hisao on behalf of the IJA 7th division agreed to the following terms: “1) In the future China will strictly prohibit actions that antagonize the Japanese army and will neither move troops into Manchukuo nor adopt a threatening attitude toward Manchukuo. The Chinese will completely suspend their current spying activities, such as scouting the movements of the Kwantung Army.  2) If China violates the above pledges in the future, the Japanese  army will act independently and firmly, but the responsibility will be borne by the Chinese . If the Chinese forces increase their military strength or contemplate strengthening their fortifications, the Japanese army will regard these moves as hostile acts.  3) China is to have the government of Kuyuan district return all arms confiscated (from the Manchukuo militia and turn them over to the Japanese army at Nanweitzu by February 7.  4) The outcome of this conference will be jointly announced on February 4. In particular, the Chinese should be careful that in making their announcement they do not distort the contents of the agreement or engage in counterpropaganda”. Can you imagine there was a second incident at Changpei? 4 members of the Japanese Special Services Agency based out of Abga, some 40 miles northwest of Tolun had come to the same southgate around 4pm on June 5th, traveling to Kalgan. There they were detained by units of the 132nd division who refused to recognize their identification papers. They were apparently held without proper bedding or food, threatened with Dao swords and bayonets. The Japanese claimed it was all done under orders from Song Queyuan's chief of staff and that their officials were interrogated by the chief of military police at Changpei. On June 11th, Lt Colonel Matsui Gennosuke, the head of the Japanese Special Service Agency at Kalgan, demanded an apology from Song Queyuan and for the men responsible to be punished and for further guarantees for safe travel. Matsui also insinuated that unless Song Queyuan severed ties to Nanjing and became Pro-Japanese he might suffer the same fate that had befallen Yu Xuecheng. Clearly the Kwantung Army was looking to remove Song Queyuan's army from Chahar province. There were two major reasons for such a thing, so they could better protect the northwestern flank of Manchukuo and to support Prince De who was attempting a campaign to make Inner Mongolia independent from China.  On June 11th the Kwantung Army directed the Mukden Special Service Agency chief of staff, our old buddy, Doihara, currently in Peiping, to confer with the army attache there and with the Tientsin garrison. They were to push for Song Queyuan's army to be withdrawn south of the Yellow River as rapidly as possible. Tokyo HQ always keeping a close eye on their troublesome Kwantung Officers dispatch this notice to Doihara "Although we desire the evacuation of Song Queyuan's army from Chahar province, we disagree that we should, at this time, demand its withdrawal south of the Yellow River. Rather, its transfer to the Peiping-Hankow Railway line would be advisable." On June 13th, the General Staff advised the Kwantung Army the same message. The General staff then ordered every detachment in North China to act discreetly "If we shun excessive publicity at this time, we should, in view of the present situation, be able to achieve practical results without publicity." Since they were already getting their way in Hubei, Tokyo HQ did not want to risk rocking the boat in Chahar concurrently.  Then came a second western Rehe incident, according to the Chengde Special Service Agency, "On June 11, when a party led by a senior official of Fengning hsien was about to enter the town of Tungchatzu [in Manchukuo, about eight kilometers north of Tushihk'ou], it was attacked by rifle fire from Sung Che-yuan's troops stationed at Tushihk'ou. The next day, June 12, a member of the border police force in Hsiaoch'ang [in Manchukuo, about fifteen kilometers north of Tushihk'ou] was also fired upon by the same troops of Sung in the vicinity of Hsiaoch'ang."  On June 17th, the Kwantung Army General Minami Jiro met with the Tientsin Army chief of staff Sakai and the Special Service Agency chief at Kalgan, Matsui for a full report on the incident. After reviewing it, Minami drafted a policy to guide the Kwantung Army:  “The withdrawal of Sung Che-yuan's army will worsen the confusion in the Peiping-Tientsin region. This incident should be handled separately from the North China problem and should be negotiated locally with Sung Che-yuan. Our demands will be limited to the following:  1) withdrawal of the troops invading Manchukuo, together with their advance unit at Tolun;  2) removal of the forces back to the Kalgan area;  3) an apology by Sung Che-yuan;  4) punishment of those directly responsible for the Changpei incident; and  5) prohibition of anti-Japanese actions in the future.” The Chinese realized they needed to reach a quick settlement with the Kwantung Army. On the 18th He Yingqin met with Consul General Suma over in Nanjing. Suma was presented with a set of harsh demands from the Kwantung Army and that same day reported to the Executive Yuan he had decided to relieve Song Queyuan of his posts as governor and commander of the 29th Army. He then appointed as acting governor and provincial commissioner of civil affairs, Qin Dechun, who would take the 132nd division implicated in the Changpei incident south. The message was relayed to the Japanese military attache in Nanjing, Lt Colonel Amamiya Tatsumi. The man who relayed the message was Vice Foreign Minister Tang Yujen who also stated this "In view of the fact that China has moved voluntarily to dismiss Sung Che-yuan, to transfer his army, and to punish those responsible, we request that we not be confronted with an ultimatum in the form of various demands from the Kwantung Army with a deadline for reply." On June 19th, Nanjing officially implemented the promises made by He Yingqin and Tang Yujen and in turn the Kwantung Army wired Doihara in Peiping to stand down and wait to see if the Chinese did what they said they would. Doihara was probably disappointed he could not perform his 100th false flag operation he must have been cooking up. For any of you who watch my Youtube content, I used clips from the Chinese WW2 Drama series “Young Marshal” that depicts Doihara hilariously. You can check it out in my long format documentary on the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, its meme gold Doihara's clips, freaking out and smashing phones and such.  At 10 pm on June 23rd, Doihara, alongside Matsui and Takahasi visited Qin Dechen at his residence to negotiate a final understanding. There Doihara demanded China implement several measures to promote better relations with Japan such as withdrawing Song Queyuan's army southwest; give an apology for the Changpei incident; punish all those responsible; dissolve all the anti-japanese organizations in the region; ban Chinese immigration into Inner Mongolia; cease any oppressive actions against Mongolians and cooperate and encourage trade between Manchukuo, Inner Mongolia, North China; and appoint more Japanese military and political advisers. Just a laundry list he had worked up. So Qin Dechen apologized for the Changpei incident, stated they were already withdrawing Song Queyuan's men and dissolving all the anti-japanese organizations. Now he was orally agreeing to all of this, but he refused to put it in writing, prior to receiving the greenlight from Nanjing. Doihara understood and gave him time to talk to his government. The next day however another incident occurred, this time near Tuxukou. There a contingent of Song Queyuan's withdrawing troops fired upon Manchukuo police forces and in response the Tolun Special Service Agency dispatched a Mongolian unit led by Li Shuxin. It was not really much of an incident, just a minor confrontation all things given, so the Kwantung Army told Doihara to deal with Qin Dechen in private about it.On June 27th, Qin Dechen sent a formal reply to Doihara's demands in what became known as the Qin-Doihara agreement. It conformed with all the demands, seeing Song Queyuan's troops depart southwest while the security of Chahar was entrusted to two peace preservation units. One unit was responsible for the Chinese population, the other over the Mongolian. On August 28th, Song Queyuan was appointed garrison commander over the Peiping-Tientsin region with his 29th division joining Chao Tengyu's 132nd division and Liu Juming's 2nd division. Thus after the He-Umezu and Qin-Doihara agreements the Japanese had now expanded their influence into both Hubei and Chahar. 1935 saw a wave of incidents break out in the demilitarized region, prompting the Japanese to go into numerous negotiations with the Chinese to clamp down on anything they didn't like. Then on October 4th, Japan unleashed a document titled  “Concerning Policy towards China”: “The goal of our foreign policy is the development of East Asia and the maintenance of the security of East Asia through the cooperative concert of Japan, Manchukuo, and China, with Japan as the nucleus; this is likewise the objective of our policy toward China. To realize this objective on the basis of the outline below, the central and regional authorities of China must, by fair and just means, adjust their relations with Japan and Manchukuo so as to bring about an environment favorable to the establishment of basic relations between Japan, Manchukuo, and China.  1) China should adopt a good neighbor policy toward Japan, thoroughly suppress anti-Japanese activities, and abandon its policy of reliance on Europe and the United States. It should put this policy into practice and as a matter of course cooperate with Imperial Japan on practical problems.  2) Although China must eventually extend formal recognition to Manchukuo, until then it must recognize de facto the independence of Manchukuo and abandon its anti-Manchukuo policy. At least in North China, which borders on Manchukuo, the Chinese should promote economic and cultural cooperation with Manchukuo.  3) In view of the Communist threat emanating from Outer Mongolia and posing a common menace to Japan, Manchukuo, and China, China should cooperate in measures aimed at eliminating this menace from the region bordering Outer Mongolia.  4) When the above points have been put into effect and we recognize the good faith of China concerning friendly cooperation with Japan and Manchukuo, we shall first conclude comprehensive agreements on friendly cooperative relations between China and Japan, and thereafter draw up the agreement needed for regulating new relations between Japan, Manchukuo, and China” To this Chiang Kai-Shek replied could not recognize Manchukuo but that his government would do whatever it could peacefully to maintain economic activity between the people north and south of the Great Wall. He also stated no other country on earth was more concerned with the Communist menace in Mongolia than China. All of the appeasement efforts had brought Wang Jingwei to his boiling point and on August 8th he departed for Shanghai as he and his entire cabinet resigned. Chiang Kai-Shek personally came over and asked Wang Jingwei to withdraw his resignation given he offered him further support, and Wang Jingwei relented. Then on the morning of November 1st, after attending a meeting, Wang Jingwei was shot by a Chinese reporter for the Chenkuang Press, a company notably associated with Chiang Kai-Shek. Rumors spread the assassination attempt was inspired by anti-japanese elements such as Generals Yang Qi and Tang Shengzhi. With Wang Jingwei in the hospital, Chiang Kai-Shek was forced to take a larger role with the North China situation. Then Wang Jingwei departed for Europe seeking better medical care and wired his resignation on November 29th. Thus Chiang Kai-Shek succeeded him as president of the Executive Yuan and the coalition between him and Wang Jingwei had officially ended. With Chiang Kai-Shek now the only funnel from which action could be directed, the Japanese sent Ambassador Ariyoshi to China to persuade Chiang Kai-Shek to grant some form of autonomy for North China. By this point autonomy for North China had become part of Japan's national policy. Chiang Kai-Shek in response to this growing threat went to Taiyuan, the capital of Shanxi, to meet with Yan Xishan. There he proposed that if Yan Xishan could unite the Northern Warlords, Chiang Kai-Shek would appoint him chairman of the political affairs council, with added authority over finances and diplomacy. Chiang Kai-Shek urged him to come attend the 6th plenum of the Kuomintang Central Executive Committee scheduled for November 1st. At this time Yan Xishan's Shanxi was struggling financially so he reconciled with Chiang Kai-Shek. To this effect Chiang Kai-Shek sent his vice chief of the Army General Staff Xing Pin to tour the north trying to persuade those like Song Queyuan and Han Fuju to not support the North China autonomy movement. The Japanese interpreted these efforts to thwart the autonomy movement as the underlying cause of all the anti-japanese incidents breaking out continuously. To this the Nanjing government disclaimed no responsibility and insisted they were doing everything the Japanese asked of them.  The Japanese began a massive campaign aimed at all the important leaders in North China. One man they managed to gain influence over was Yin Jukeng who on November 25th at Tungzhou, announced the inauguration of the East Hubei Anti-Communist Autonomous Council, claiming autonomy for the entire demilitarized region. Yin Jukeng's council consisted of 9 members whereupon he was chairman and took charge of foreign relations and military affairs. As you can imagine Nanjing immediately labeled him a traitor and ordered his arrest. Chiang Kai-Shek then rapidly sent word to the Japanese an official response to their “Concerning Policy towards China” document:  “To satisfy the various demands from the Japanese side, there should first of all be established in Hopei province an autonomous political administration; ultimately, this administration should be similar to that governing the southwestern region. Whether or not this administration should be extended to other regions will be determined after the results in Hopei have been ascertained.  1) Although the campaign to wipe out the Communists is progressing, the Communist bandits have fled toward Kansu. Since this raises the danger that the Communists may spread into Inner Mongolia, the defense against the Communists in North China should be conducted jointly.  2) Certain aspects of the new monetary system are not suited to North China, and appropriate modifications will be made in this respect.  3) Efforts are to be made to harmonize economic interchange among the people on both sides of the Great Wall.  4) To meet the special needs of the region, the local administration should be given authority to enable it to exercise suitable control over financial matters in North China.  5) Pending issues are to be settled locally in a rational manner.  6) The aim will be to employ talented people to carry out the above tasks and to establish an ideal government.” Chiang Kai-Shek dispatched He Yingqin to reign in the situation at Peiping, but upon his arrival he believed the situation was beyond his control. He Yingqin reported that it was his belief the only way for Nanjing to retain some degree of authority in the region was to create a new political organ to do so. Thus on December 11th, the Nationalist government established the Hubei-Chahar Political Council chaired by Song Queyuan. Song Queyuan declared the new council would assume all responsibility for administering Hubei and Chahar and promised  "to respect the wishes of the people, endeavor in particular to relieve the economic distress of the region, and maintain the peace of East Asia on the basis of Sino-Japanese amity."  Thus within all this madness now two autonomous regimes co-existed in North China. The East Hubei Anti-Communist Autonomous Council would administer 22 prefectures while the Hubei-Chahar Political Council would administer Hubei, Chahar, Peiping and Tientsin. As you might imagine, relations between these two councils was complex and ambiguous. The 22 prefectures the former administered were under the jurisdiction of the other. One was a Japanese puppet, the other was controlled by Nanjing who refused to recognize the other. Japan immediately exploited their newfound chaotic gains in North China. In May of 1936 the 2000 troops of the Tientsin garrison army was boosted to 5600 led by General Tashiro Kan'ichiro. This was done under the guise it was to defend against communists and protect Japanese citizens. The position of the commander of the Tientsin garrison was officially promoted to encompass full responsibility for the situation in North China, exactly the same as the Kwantung Army's role over Manchukuo. Thuse both the Kwantung Army and what was henceforth called the China Garrison had clearly defined roles. One would be responsible for Manchukuo, the other over North China. Japan had neutralized Rehe, Chahar and Hubei, all of whom would fall directly under their influence. But was Japan satisfied?  I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Its not always through military means that nations can encroach upon other nations. Japan was showcasing how it could bully away parts of China through threats alone it was working miracles. How long could Chiang Kai-Shek carry on like this? Would it be Japan or his own people that would hang him for losing China?