Podcasts about Benedict Anderson

Lori Allen and Ajantha Subramanian continue their second series on Violent Majorities. Their previous episode featured Peter Beinart on Zionism as long-distance ethnonationalism; here they speak with Subir Sinha, who teaches at SOAS University of London, comments on Indian and European media, and is a member of a commission of inquiry exploring the 2022 unrest between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester, UK. The catalysts he identifies for the rise of Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) include the emergence of new middle classes after economic liberalization, the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11, the 2008 crisis in capitalism, and the spread of new communications technologies. The trio discuss the growth of Hindutva in the US and UK since the 1990s and its further consolidation. Social media has been key to Modi's brand of authoritarian populism, with simultaneous messaging across national borders producing a globally dispersed audience for Hindutva. Particularly useful to transnational political mobilizations has been the manufacture of wounded Hindu sentiments: a claim to victimhood that draws on the legitimizing language of religious minority rights in the US and UK. They also note more hopeful signs: Dalit and other oppressed caste politics have begun to strengthen in the diaspora; the contradictions between lived Hinduism and Hindutva have become clearer; there are some demographic and structural barriers to Hindutva's further growth in the UK and US. Subir's Recallable Book is Kunal Purohit's H-Pop:The Secretive World of Hindutva Pop Stars (Harper Collins India, 2023), which looks at the proliferation of Hindutva Pop, a genre of music that is made to go viral and whip up mob violence against religious minorities. Mentioned in this episode: Subir Sinha, “Fragile Hegemony: Modi, Social Media, and Competitive Electoral Populism in India.” International Journal of Communication 11(2017), 4158–4180. Subir Sinha, “‘Strong leaders', authoritarian populism and Indian developmentalism: The Modi moment in historical context.” Geoforum, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.02.019 Subir Sinha, “Modi's People and Populism's Imagined Communities.” Seminar, 7 5 6 – A u g u s t 2022, pp.18-23. Edward T. G. Anderson, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora: Transnational Politics and British Multiculturalism. London: Hurst & Co., 2023. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), or National Volunteer Corps, is the parent organization of the Sangh Parivar, or Hindu nationalist family of organizations. It espouses principles of Hindu unity and aims to transform India into a Hindu supremacist nation-state. Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), or World Hindu Organization, is a branch of the Sangh Parivar. Its stated aims are to engage in social service work, construct Hindu temples, and defend Hindus. On the anti-caste discrimination bill in the UK parliament, see David Mosse, Outside Caste? The Enclosure of Caste and Claims to Castelessness in India and the United Kingdom The Ganesh Puja period is a 10-day festival that honors the Hindu god Ganesha, and usually takes place in late August or early September. Diane M. Nelson, A Finger in the Wound: Body Politics in Quincentennial Guatemala. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso; Revised edition, 2016. Yohann Koshy, “What the unrest in Leicester revealed about Britain – and Modi's India.” The Guardian, 8 February 2024. Richard Manuel, Cassette Culture in North India: Popular Music and Technology in North India. University of Chicago .Press; 2nd ed. Edition,1993. Listen and Read here. 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

Lori Allen and Ajantha Subramanian continue their second series on Violent Majorities. Their previous episode featured Peter Beinart on Zionism as long-distance ethnonationalism; here they speak with Subir Sinha, who teaches at SOAS University of London, comments on Indian and European media, and is a member of a commission of inquiry exploring the 2022 unrest between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester, UK. The catalysts he identifies for the rise of Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) include the emergence of new middle classes after economic liberalization, the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11, the 2008 crisis in capitalism, and the spread of new communications technologies. The trio discuss the growth of Hindutva in the US and UK since the 1990s and its further consolidation. Social media has been key to Modi's brand of authoritarian populism, with simultaneous messaging across national borders producing a globally dispersed audience for Hindutva. Particularly useful to transnational political mobilizations has been the manufacture of wounded Hindu sentiments: a claim to victimhood that draws on the legitimizing language of religious minority rights in the US and UK. They also note more hopeful signs: Dalit and other oppressed caste politics have begun to strengthen in the diaspora; the contradictions between lived Hinduism and Hindutva have become clearer; there are some demographic and structural barriers to Hindutva's further growth in the UK and US. Subir's Recallable Book is Kunal Purohit's H-Pop:The Secretive World of Hindutva Pop Stars (Harper Collins India, 2023), which looks at the proliferation of Hindutva Pop, a genre of music that is made to go viral and whip up mob violence against religious minorities. Mentioned in this episode: Subir Sinha, “Fragile Hegemony: Modi, Social Media, and Competitive Electoral Populism in India.” International Journal of Communication 11(2017), 4158–4180. Subir Sinha, “‘Strong leaders', authoritarian populism and Indian developmentalism: The Modi moment in historical context.” Geoforum, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.02.019 Subir Sinha, “Modi's People and Populism's Imagined Communities.” Seminar, 7 5 6 – A u g u s t 2022, pp.18-23. Edward T. G. Anderson, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora: Transnational Politics and British Multiculturalism. London: Hurst & Co., 2023. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), or National Volunteer Corps, is the parent organization of the Sangh Parivar, or Hindu nationalist family of organizations. It espouses principles of Hindu unity and aims to transform India into a Hindu supremacist nation-state. Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), or World Hindu Organization, is a branch of the Sangh Parivar. Its stated aims are to engage in social service work, construct Hindu temples, and defend Hindus. On the anti-caste discrimination bill in the UK parliament, see David Mosse, Outside Caste? The Enclosure of Caste and Claims to Castelessness in India and the United Kingdom The Ganesh Puja period is a 10-day festival that honors the Hindu god Ganesha, and usually takes place in late August or early September. Diane M. Nelson, A Finger in the Wound: Body Politics in Quincentennial Guatemala. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso; Revised edition, 2016. Yohann Koshy, “What the unrest in Leicester revealed about Britain – and Modi's India.” The Guardian, 8 February 2024. Richard Manuel, Cassette Culture in North India: Popular Music and Technology in North India. University of Chicago .Press; 2nd ed. Edition,1993. Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Lori Allen and Ajantha Subramanian continue their second series on Violent Majorities. Their previous episode featured Peter Beinart on Zionism as long-distance ethnonationalism; here they speak with Subir Sinha, who teaches at SOAS University of London, comments on Indian and European media, and is a member of a commission of inquiry exploring the 2022 unrest between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester, UK. The catalysts he identifies for the rise of Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) include the emergence of new middle classes after economic liberalization, the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11, the 2008 crisis in capitalism, and the spread of new communications technologies. The trio discuss the growth of Hindutva in the US and UK since the 1990s and its further consolidation. Social media has been key to Modi's brand of authoritarian populism, with simultaneous messaging across national borders producing a globally dispersed audience for Hindutva. Particularly useful to transnational political mobilizations has been the manufacture of wounded Hindu sentiments: a claim to victimhood that draws on the legitimizing language of religious minority rights in the US and UK. They also note more hopeful signs: Dalit and other oppressed caste politics have begun to strengthen in the diaspora; the contradictions between lived Hinduism and Hindutva have become clearer; there are some demographic and structural barriers to Hindutva's further growth in the UK and US. Subir's Recallable Book is Kunal Purohit's H-Pop:The Secretive World of Hindutva Pop Stars (Harper Collins India, 2023), which looks at the proliferation of Hindutva Pop, a genre of music that is made to go viral and whip up mob violence against religious minorities. Mentioned in this episode: Subir Sinha, “Fragile Hegemony: Modi, Social Media, and Competitive Electoral Populism in India.” International Journal of Communication 11(2017), 4158–4180. Subir Sinha, “‘Strong leaders', authoritarian populism and Indian developmentalism: The Modi moment in historical context.” Geoforum, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.02.019 Subir Sinha, “Modi's People and Populism's Imagined Communities.” Seminar, 7 5 6 – A u g u s t 2022, pp.18-23. Edward T. G. Anderson, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora: Transnational Politics and British Multiculturalism. London: Hurst & Co., 2023. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), or National Volunteer Corps, is the parent organization of the Sangh Parivar, or Hindu nationalist family of organizations. It espouses principles of Hindu unity and aims to transform India into a Hindu supremacist nation-state. Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), or World Hindu Organization, is a branch of the Sangh Parivar. Its stated aims are to engage in social service work, construct Hindu temples, and defend Hindus. On the anti-caste discrimination bill in the UK parliament, see David Mosse, Outside Caste? The Enclosure of Caste and Claims to Castelessness in India and the United Kingdom The Ganesh Puja period is a 10-day festival that honors the Hindu god Ganesha, and usually takes place in late August or early September. Diane M. Nelson, A Finger in the Wound: Body Politics in Quincentennial Guatemala. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso; Revised edition, 2016. Yohann Koshy, “What the unrest in Leicester revealed about Britain – and Modi's India.” The Guardian, 8 February 2024. Richard Manuel, Cassette Culture in North India: Popular Music and Technology in North India. University of Chicago .Press; 2nd ed. Edition,1993. Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Lori Allen and Ajantha Subramanian continue their second series on Violent Majorities. Their previous episode featured Peter Beinart on Zionism as long-distance ethnonationalism; here they speak with Subir Sinha, who teaches at SOAS University of London, comments on Indian and European media, and is a member of a commission of inquiry exploring the 2022 unrest between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester, UK. The catalysts he identifies for the rise of Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) include the emergence of new middle classes after economic liberalization, the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11, the 2008 crisis in capitalism, and the spread of new communications technologies. The trio discuss the growth of Hindutva in the US and UK since the 1990s and its further consolidation. Social media has been key to Modi's brand of authoritarian populism, with simultaneous messaging across national borders producing a globally dispersed audience for Hindutva. Particularly useful to transnational political mobilizations has been the manufacture of wounded Hindu sentiments: a claim to victimhood that draws on the legitimizing language of religious minority rights in the US and UK. They also note more hopeful signs: Dalit and other oppressed caste politics have begun to strengthen in the diaspora; the contradictions between lived Hinduism and Hindutva have become clearer; there are some demographic and structural barriers to Hindutva's further growth in the UK and US. Subir's Recallable Book is Kunal Purohit's H-Pop:The Secretive World of Hindutva Pop Stars (Harper Collins India, 2023), which looks at the proliferation of Hindutva Pop, a genre of music that is made to go viral and whip up mob violence against religious minorities. Mentioned in this episode: Subir Sinha, “Fragile Hegemony: Modi, Social Media, and Competitive Electoral Populism in India.” International Journal of Communication 11(2017), 4158–4180. Subir Sinha, “‘Strong leaders', authoritarian populism and Indian developmentalism: The Modi moment in historical context.” Geoforum, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.02.019 Subir Sinha, “Modi's People and Populism's Imagined Communities.” Seminar, 7 5 6 – A u g u s t 2022, pp.18-23. Edward T. G. Anderson, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora: Transnational Politics and British Multiculturalism. London: Hurst & Co., 2023. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), or National Volunteer Corps, is the parent organization of the Sangh Parivar, or Hindu nationalist family of organizations. It espouses principles of Hindu unity and aims to transform India into a Hindu supremacist nation-state. Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), or World Hindu Organization, is a branch of the Sangh Parivar. Its stated aims are to engage in social service work, construct Hindu temples, and defend Hindus. On the anti-caste discrimination bill in the UK parliament, see David Mosse, Outside Caste? The Enclosure of Caste and Claims to Castelessness in India and the United Kingdom The Ganesh Puja period is a 10-day festival that honors the Hindu god Ganesha, and usually takes place in late August or early September. Diane M. Nelson, A Finger in the Wound: Body Politics in Quincentennial Guatemala. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso; Revised edition, 2016. Yohann Koshy, “What the unrest in Leicester revealed about Britain – and Modi's India.” The Guardian, 8 February 2024. Richard Manuel, Cassette Culture in North India: Popular Music and Technology in North India. University of Chicago .Press; 2nd ed. Edition,1993. Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Lori Allen and Ajantha Subramanian continue their second series on Violent Majorities. Their previous episode featured Peter Beinart on Zionism as long-distance ethnonationalism; here they speak with Subir Sinha, who teaches at SOAS University of London, comments on Indian and European media, and is a member of a commission of inquiry exploring the 2022 unrest between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester, UK. The catalysts he identifies for the rise of Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) include the emergence of new middle classes after economic liberalization, the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11, the 2008 crisis in capitalism, and the spread of new communications technologies. The trio discuss the growth of Hindutva in the US and UK since the 1990s and its further consolidation. Social media has been key to Modi's brand of authoritarian populism, with simultaneous messaging across national borders producing a globally dispersed audience for Hindutva. Particularly useful to transnational political mobilizations has been the manufacture of wounded Hindu sentiments: a claim to victimhood that draws on the legitimizing language of religious minority rights in the US and UK. They also note more hopeful signs: Dalit and other oppressed caste politics have begun to strengthen in the diaspora; the contradictions between lived Hinduism and Hindutva have become clearer; there are some demographic and structural barriers to Hindutva's further growth in the UK and US. Subir's Recallable Book is Kunal Purohit's H-Pop:The Secretive World of Hindutva Pop Stars (Harper Collins India, 2023), which looks at the proliferation of Hindutva Pop, a genre of music that is made to go viral and whip up mob violence against religious minorities. Mentioned in this episode: Subir Sinha, “Fragile Hegemony: Modi, Social Media, and Competitive Electoral Populism in India.” International Journal of Communication 11(2017), 4158–4180. Subir Sinha, “‘Strong leaders', authoritarian populism and Indian developmentalism: The Modi moment in historical context.” Geoforum, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.02.019 Subir Sinha, “Modi's People and Populism's Imagined Communities.” Seminar, 7 5 6 – A u g u s t 2022, pp.18-23. Edward T. G. Anderson, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora: Transnational Politics and British Multiculturalism. London: Hurst & Co., 2023. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), or National Volunteer Corps, is the parent organization of the Sangh Parivar, or Hindu nationalist family of organizations. It espouses principles of Hindu unity and aims to transform India into a Hindu supremacist nation-state. Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), or World Hindu Organization, is a branch of the Sangh Parivar. Its stated aims are to engage in social service work, construct Hindu temples, and defend Hindus. On the anti-caste discrimination bill in the UK parliament, see David Mosse, Outside Caste? The Enclosure of Caste and Claims to Castelessness in India and the United Kingdom The Ganesh Puja period is a 10-day festival that honors the Hindu god Ganesha, and usually takes place in late August or early September. Diane M. Nelson, A Finger in the Wound: Body Politics in Quincentennial Guatemala. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso; Revised edition, 2016. Yohann Koshy, “What the unrest in Leicester revealed about Britain – and Modi's India.” The Guardian, 8 February 2024. Richard Manuel, Cassette Culture in North India: Popular Music and Technology in North India. University of Chicago .Press; 2nd ed. Edition,1993. Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

Lori Allen and Ajantha Subramanian continue their second series on Violent Majorities. Their previous episode featured Peter Beinart on Zionism as long-distance ethnonationalism; here they speak with Subir Sinha, who teaches at SOAS University of London, comments on Indian and European media, and is a member of a commission of inquiry exploring the 2022 unrest between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester, UK. The catalysts he identifies for the rise of Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) include the emergence of new middle classes after economic liberalization, the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11, the 2008 crisis in capitalism, and the spread of new communications technologies. The trio discuss the growth of Hindutva in the US and UK since the 1990s and its further consolidation. Social media has been key to Modi's brand of authoritarian populism, with simultaneous messaging across national borders producing a globally dispersed audience for Hindutva. Particularly useful to transnational political mobilizations has been the manufacture of wounded Hindu sentiments: a claim to victimhood that draws on the legitimizing language of religious minority rights in the US and UK. They also note more hopeful signs: Dalit and other oppressed caste politics have begun to strengthen in the diaspora; the contradictions between lived Hinduism and Hindutva have become clearer; there are some demographic and structural barriers to Hindutva's further growth in the UK and US. Subir's Recallable Book is Kunal Purohit's H-Pop:The Secretive World of Hindutva Pop Stars (Harper Collins India, 2023), which looks at the proliferation of Hindutva Pop, a genre of music that is made to go viral and whip up mob violence against religious minorities. Mentioned in this episode: Subir Sinha, “Fragile Hegemony: Modi, Social Media, and Competitive Electoral Populism in India.” International Journal of Communication 11(2017), 4158–4180. Subir Sinha, “‘Strong leaders', authoritarian populism and Indian developmentalism: The Modi moment in historical context.” Geoforum, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2021.02.019 Subir Sinha, “Modi's People and Populism's Imagined Communities.” Seminar, 7 5 6 – A u g u s t 2022, pp.18-23. Edward T. G. Anderson, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora: Transnational Politics and British Multiculturalism. London: Hurst & Co., 2023. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), or National Volunteer Corps, is the parent organization of the Sangh Parivar, or Hindu nationalist family of organizations. It espouses principles of Hindu unity and aims to transform India into a Hindu supremacist nation-state. Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), or World Hindu Organization, is a branch of the Sangh Parivar. Its stated aims are to engage in social service work, construct Hindu temples, and defend Hindus. On the anti-caste discrimination bill in the UK parliament, see David Mosse, Outside Caste? The Enclosure of Caste and Claims to Castelessness in India and the United Kingdom The Ganesh Puja period is a 10-day festival that honors the Hindu god Ganesha, and usually takes place in late August or early September. Diane M. Nelson, A Finger in the Wound: Body Politics in Quincentennial Guatemala. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso; Revised edition, 2016. Yohann Koshy, “What the unrest in Leicester revealed about Britain – and Modi's India.” The Guardian, 8 February 2024. Richard Manuel, Cassette Culture in North India: Popular Music and Technology in North India. University of Chicago .Press; 2nd ed. Edition,1993. Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/indian-religions

From your weather app's borders to the "ancient traditions" invented last century, nationalism shapes our world in ways so subtle we rarely notice them. Join us for an eye-opening exploration of how modern nations make their power invisible (yup, not looking at people waving flags at sports events...)  — and learn practical ways to spot these patterns in your daily life.In this episode, we unpack:The shocking youth of nationalism (hint: it's younger than photography)How your routines reinforce national boundariesWhy museums turn ancient artefacts into "national treasures"The dark connection between everyday nationalism and fascismPractical tools to spot nationalist framing in daily lifeHow to appreciate culture without nationalist baggagePerfect for critical thinkers, activists, and anyone interested in understanding how invisible structures shape our world—and what to do about it.Key Resources:"Imagined Communities" by Benedict Anderson"Banal Nationalism" by Michael Billig_____________________________________________________________________READY FOR YOUR SCENIC ROUTE?Visit jenniferwalter.me — your cozy corner of the internet where recovering perfectionists come to breathe, dream, and embrace a softer way of living – while creating real change in their communities. Keep the conversation going: Instagram TikTok Threads DAILY DOSE OF CHILLTap into your inner wisdom and let it guide you.Need a gentle nudge in the right direction? The Scenic Route Affirmation Card Deck Deck is your online permission slip to trust your inner compass. Grab yours and let's see what wisdom awaits you today:

In 1966 Benedict Anderson published 'The Languages of Indonesian Politics', a seminal paper exploring the development of Indonesian as a new language for talking about national politics. In that paper Anderson underlined the contrast between the formal/official style of Indonesian news reports and the colloquial, playful speech style of ordinary Jakartans as depicted through comics. Nearly six decades on, how do we understand the 'languages' of Indonesian politics? How are figures of politics constituted through language?  Associate Professor in Indonesian Studies at The University of Sydney, Dwi Noverini Djenar, expands on these issues. She has worked on the stylistics of adolescent literature, focusing on the production and circulation of styles and their relationship to sociolinguistic change. Her current research focuses on language and relations among social actors in public spheres, particularly in broadcast settings. Novi is co-author of Style and Intersubjectivity in Youth Interaction (2018) and co-editor of Signs of Deference, Signs of Demeanour: Interlocutor Reference and Self-Other Relations across Southeast Asian Communities (NUS Press, 2023). 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

In 1966 Benedict Anderson published 'The Languages of Indonesian Politics', a seminal paper exploring the development of Indonesian as a new language for talking about national politics. In that paper Anderson underlined the contrast between the formal/official style of Indonesian news reports and the colloquial, playful speech style of ordinary Jakartans as depicted through comics. Nearly six decades on, how do we understand the 'languages' of Indonesian politics? How are figures of politics constituted through language?  Associate Professor in Indonesian Studies at The University of Sydney, Dwi Noverini Djenar, expands on these issues. She has worked on the stylistics of adolescent literature, focusing on the production and circulation of styles and their relationship to sociolinguistic change. Her current research focuses on language and relations among social actors in public spheres, particularly in broadcast settings. Novi is co-author of Style and Intersubjectivity in Youth Interaction (2018) and co-editor of Signs of Deference, Signs of Demeanour: Interlocutor Reference and Self-Other Relations across Southeast Asian Communities (NUS Press, 2023). Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/southeast-asian-studies

In 1966 Benedict Anderson published 'The Languages of Indonesian Politics', a seminal paper exploring the development of Indonesian as a new language for talking about national politics. In that paper Anderson underlined the contrast between the formal/official style of Indonesian news reports and the colloquial, playful speech style of ordinary Jakartans as depicted through comics. Nearly six decades on, how do we understand the 'languages' of Indonesian politics? How are figures of politics constituted through language?  Associate Professor in Indonesian Studies at The University of Sydney, Dwi Noverini Djenar, expands on these issues. She has worked on the stylistics of adolescent literature, focusing on the production and circulation of styles and their relationship to sociolinguistic change. Her current research focuses on language and relations among social actors in public spheres, particularly in broadcast settings. Novi is co-author of Style and Intersubjectivity in Youth Interaction (2018) and co-editor of Signs of Deference, Signs of Demeanour: Interlocutor Reference and Self-Other Relations across Southeast Asian Communities (NUS Press, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

In 1966 Benedict Anderson published 'The Languages of Indonesian Politics', a seminal paper exploring the development of Indonesian as a new language for talking about national politics. In that paper Anderson underlined the contrast between the formal/official style of Indonesian news reports and the colloquial, playful speech style of ordinary Jakartans as depicted through comics. Nearly six decades on, how do we understand the 'languages' of Indonesian politics? How are figures of politics constituted through language?  Associate Professor in Indonesian Studies at The University of Sydney, Dwi Noverini Djenar, expands on these issues. She has worked on the stylistics of adolescent literature, focusing on the production and circulation of styles and their relationship to sociolinguistic change. Her current research focuses on language and relations among social actors in public spheres, particularly in broadcast settings. Novi is co-author of Style and Intersubjectivity in Youth Interaction (2018) and co-editor of Signs of Deference, Signs of Demeanour: Interlocutor Reference and Self-Other Relations across Southeast Asian Communities (NUS Press, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

In 1966 Benedict Anderson published 'The Languages of Indonesian Politics', a seminal paper exploring the development of Indonesian as a new language for talking about national politics. In that paper Anderson underlined the contrast between the formal/official style of Indonesian news reports and the colloquial, playful speech style of ordinary Jakartans as depicted through comics. Nearly six decades on, how do we understand the 'languages' of Indonesian politics? How are figures of politics constituted through language?  Associate Professor in Indonesian Studies at The University of Sydney, Dwi Noverini Djenar, expands on these issues. She has worked on the stylistics of adolescent literature, focusing on the production and circulation of styles and their relationship to sociolinguistic change. Her current research focuses on language and relations among social actors in public spheres, particularly in broadcast settings. Novi is co-author of Style and Intersubjectivity in Youth Interaction (2018) and co-editor of Signs of Deference, Signs of Demeanour: Interlocutor Reference and Self-Other Relations across Southeast Asian Communities (NUS Press, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/language

In 1966 Benedict Anderson published 'The Languages of Indonesian Politics', a seminal paper exploring the development of Indonesian as a new language for talking about national politics. In that paper Anderson underlined the contrast between the formal/official style of Indonesian news reports and the colloquial, playful speech style of ordinary Jakartans as depicted through comics. Nearly six decades on, how do we understand the 'languages' of Indonesian politics? How are figures of politics constituted through language?  Associate Professor in Indonesian Studies at The University of Sydney, Dwi Noverini Djenar, expands on these issues. She has worked on the stylistics of adolescent literature, focusing on the production and circulation of styles and their relationship to sociolinguistic change. Her current research focuses on language and relations among social actors in public spheres, particularly in broadcast settings. Novi is co-author of Style and Intersubjectivity in Youth Interaction (2018) and co-editor of Signs of Deference, Signs of Demeanour: Interlocutor Reference and Self-Other Relations across Southeast Asian Communities (NUS Press, 2023).

Ad Verbrugge en Jelle van Baardewijk vanuit de nieuwe kelderstudio over de oorlog in Oekraïne en conflict in algemenere zin. Bronnen en links bij deze uitzending: - Heraclitus: https://www.loebclassics.com/view/heracleitus_philospher-universe/1931/pb_LCL150.485.xml?readMode=recto - Het gesprek van Jelle met Pancras Pouw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr3IyvCgokI - 'The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order', Samuel P. Huntington: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Clash-of-Civilizations-and-the-Remaking-of-World-Order/Samuel-P-Huntington/9781451628975 - 'De-gezagscrisis', Ad Verbrugge: https://www.boom.nl/filosofie/100-14068_De-gezagscrisis - Het gesprek van Ad met Nicolai Petro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KIVk4WJgR4 - 'Imagined Communities:Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism', Benedict Anderson: https://www.versobooks.com/products/1126-imagined-communities

This week on The Five Minute Advocate, Julie Macken deep dives into Irish sociologist Benedict Anderson's most famous theories – that nations are imagined political communities. This idea reminds us to take the role of imagination in nation building seriously, because it is what makes this country what it is, for better or worse. So, in this edition Julie plays with the tool of imagination and applies it to the 2024 federal budget.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When he travels, he's a man of reflection. When he creates, he's a man of action. Utsav Mamoria joins Amit Varma in episode 376 of The Seen and the Unseen to talk about his philosophy towards travel, creating and living. (FOR FULL LINKED SHOW NOTES, GO TO SEENUNSEEN.IN.) Also check out 1. Utsav Mamoria on Twitter, LinkedIn and Instagram. 2. Postcards From Nowhere -- Utsav Mamoria's podcast. 3. The 6% Club.. 4. Episodes of The Seen and the Unseen on the creator ecosystem with Roshan Abbas, Varun Duggirala, Neelesh Misra, Snehal Pradhan, Chuck Gopal, Nishant Jain, Deepak Shenoy, Abhijit Bhaduri and Gaurav Chintamani.. 5. The Universe of Chuck Gopal -- Episode 258 of The Seen and the Unseen. 6. Getting Meta. -- Chuck Gopal's podcast. 7. The legendary Simblified. 8. Sabbaticalling -- Episode 85 of Simblified (w Utsav Mamoria). 9. The Untravel Show -- Abhishek.Vaid's YouTube show. 10. Chuck Gopal interviews Utsav Mamoria. 12. Horizon -- Barry Lopez. 13. Imaginary Cities -- Darran Anderson. 14. Invisible Cities -- Italo Calvino. 15. The Hiking Episode -- Episode 35 of Everything is Everything. 16. I Play to Play -- Amit Varma. 17. Unboxing Bengaluru -- Malini Goyal and Prashanth Prakash. 18. Lords of the Deccan -- Anirudh Kanisetti. 19. Anirudh Kanisetti's podcasts. 20. Are You Just One Version of Yourself? -- Amit Varma. 21. Don't Get Into a Box -- Amit Varma. 22. Shoveling Smoke -- William Mazzarella. 23. Swapna Liddle and the Many Shades of Delhi — Episode 367 of The Seen and the Unseen. 24. From Cairo to Delhi With Max Rodenbeck — Episode 281 of The Seen and the Unseen. 25. The Stanford Prison Experiment. 26. Imagined Communities — Benedict Anderson. 27. Indian Society: The Last 30 Years — Episode 137 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Santosh Desai). 28. Santosh Desai is Watching You — Episode 356 of The Seen and the Unseen. 29. Dhadak Dhadak -- Song from Bunty and Babli. 30. The Prem Panicker Files — Episode 217 of The Seen and the Unseen. 31. The Language of Food -- Dan Jurafsky. 32. Bihar Review -- Kumar Anand's twitter account on Bihar. 33. Interior design for 10 crore kids. 34. Amitava Kumar Finds His Kashmiri Rain -- Episode 364 of The Seen and the Unseen. 35. Amadeus -- Miloš Forman. 36. Arctic Dreams -- Barry Lopez. 37. The Art of Travel -- Alain De Botton. 38. The School of Life. 39. Robert Macfarlane and Pico Iyer on Amazon. 40. Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell. 41. Marginlands -- Arati Kumar-Rao. 42. Wanderers, Kings, Merchants: The Story of India through Its Languages — Peggy Mohan. 43. Understanding India Through Its Languages — Episode 232 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Peggy Mohan). 44. Tarana Husain Khan, Sadaf Hussain and Krish Ashok on Amazon. 45. The Language of Cities -- Deyan Sudjic. 46. Italo Calvino on Amazon. 47. When Breath Becomes Air -- Paul Kalanithi. 48. Coke Studio Pakistan. 49. Kabir, Kabir Cafe and Songs of Kabir. 50. The soundtracks of Qala, Udaan and Lootera. 51. Ud Jayega Hans Akela -- Kumar Gandharva. 52. Spotlight -- Tom McCarthy. 53. Grave of the Fireflies -- Isao Takahata. 54. My Neighbour Totoro -- Hayao Miyazaki. 55. Woman in the Dunes -- Hiroshi Teshigahara. 56. Departures -- Yōjirō Takita. 57. Abbas Kiarostami, Mohsen Makhmalbaf, Majid Majidi, Tahmineh Milani and Yasujirō Ozu. Amit's newsletter is explosively active again. Subscribe right away to The India Uncut Newsletter! It's free! Amit Varma and Ajay Shah have launched a new video podcast. Check out Everything is Everything on YouTube. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. Episode art: ‘Travel' by Simahina.

FC St. Pauli is a 2nd Bundesliga team from Hamburg. That's one thing. It is also "Germany's original cult club," an "antifascist pioneer," the "club of punk and techno, or a "swashbuckling left wing club." The history behind these labels begin in the late 1980s, when punks occupied houses around St. Pauli's stadium and antiracists found out that football grounds didn't just belong to Neonazis. It continues today, in a club that has  spoken out against the overcommercialization of football,  or as an ally to refugees, and in a fan culture that defines and defends its antifascist ties between neighboring Bremen and faraway Tel Aviv, Israel.The Fanladen St Pauli connects the then and now. It's a fan-run and, very uniquely, social-worker led project with deep ties of accountability and advocacy to the club, its fanculture and the public, and deep roots in the community. Julian and Paul from the Fanladen offer the lens of activist fans and knowledgable social workers to discuss what works at FC St. Pauli, some history, but also the dangers of the internationalization and commercialization of St. Pauli's rebellious image. This is also the first TAoF episode that dropped sociologist Benedict Anderson's name - and it wasn't me who dropped it!HELPFUL LINKS:Highlights, with English commentary, from GAK - Sturm (2-3) on 11/2Fanladen/Fan Project St. Pauli, website in EnglishCharles Vinas and Natxo Parra, St. Pauli: Another Football is Possible (Pluto Press, 2020) - review by Jacobin MagazineThe Guardian (2018), "FC St Pauli: how it became the football team of punk and techno"Die Sterne - Wenn Dir St. Pauli auf den Geist fällt (This music video was filmed at the Millerntor stadium, pre-renovation)St. Pauli enters the field to AC/DC's “Hells Bells” in the Hamburg derbySt. Pauli - goal and goal musicNina Glick Schiller, "Long Distance Nationalism" (on Benedict Anderson's term)Please leave a quick voicemail with any feedback, corrections, suggestions - or just greetings - HERE. Or comment via Twitter, Instagram, Bluesky or Facebook. f you enjoy this podcast and think that what I do fills a gap in soccer coverage that others would be interested in as well, please Recommend The Assistant Professor of Football. Spreading the word, through word of mouth, truly does help. Leave some rating stars at the podcast platform of your choice. There are so many sports podcasts out there, and only ratings make this project visible; only then can people who look for a different kind of take on European soccer actually find me. Artwork for The Assistant Professor of Football is by Saige LindInstrumental music for this podcast, including the introduction track, is by the artist Ketsa and used under a Creative Commons license through Free Music Archive: https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Ketsa/

The arcane numbering system is gone, but Sean and Varn have (surprise!) a new miniseries. Inspired by current events - such as the Russo-Ukrainian War, Israel's ongoing atrocities in Gaza, and the turn towards post-neoliberal economic nationalism - we're going to explore all manner of Marxist and non-Marxist theories on the nation state to help get our heads around the current mess the world is in and hopefully chart a pathway out.How did the nation-state rise in the early modern world? what role has nationalism played in capitalist development? What are the historical legacies of Lenin and Stalin's nationalities policies? Rhetoric aside, what is the relationship (if any) between national liberation movements and the communist project?This is an extended preview. For access to the entire episode, become a patron today at www.patreon.com/theantifada. To see the video recording of this episode and get all of C. Derick Varn's amazing content, subscribe at www.patreon.com/varnvlogFor this first episode we mention various theorists - Harun Yilnaz, Ze'ev Sternhell, Benedict Anderson, Benjamin Studebaker, Eric Hobsbawm - and also look at this essay: https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/atc/3587.html

Guest: Desun Oka Historian Desun Oka beams aboard to talk about the intersection of nationalism and Star Trek. The United Federation of Planets is often likened to the United States of America, but in space. In what ways is the Federation like a modern nation state? In what ways is it not? And how might Star Trek reflect, examine, and critique what nationalism is all about? "Imagined Communities" by Benedict Anderson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imagined_Communities "Ancient Earth" from PBS NOVA—featuring Mike! https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/ancient-earth-birth-of-the-sky/ Follow us on Twitter! Strange New Worlds: https://twitter.com/scienceoftrek Mike: https://twitter.com/miquai

Alec and Nick reconvene to discuss concepts of “tradition” and “futurity” as they relate to music. Picking up on our ceaseless cultural pull toward both the past and future, the conversation focuses on how contemporary's music's impulse to represent history and postulate a future for itself has developed its own kind of suspended, tense aesthetic condition. The conversation touches on Benedict Anderson's “Imagined Communities,” Bang on Can's Longform Festival, Accelerationism vs. “trad” culture, neorationalist philosophy, ethical and/or relativist music appreciation, Sylvere Lotringer, The Beats, Post-Internet Art, the problems of using collapse as a vision of the future, the dubious quest for authenticity—and music as a special annex for the quandaries of what's behind us and what's to come. 

What does Eurovision have to do with the Coronation? In this episode swap, the team at Who do we think we are? is talking about what we learn about “Global Britain” and its imagined community by looking at how migrants understand major cultural events.Elena Zambelli explains what social scientists mean when they talk about the imagined community. Laura Clancy, sociologist of the royal family, joins us to talk about the missing voices in conversations about the future of the British monarchy. Co-hosts Nando Sigona and Michaela Benson reflect on what British citizens living abroad, EU citizens and others who have made the UK their homes told them about how they understand Britain and their place within it following Brexit. What does hearing from them about the monarchy, the Commonwealth Games and Eurovision make visible about the new borders of political membership and symbolic boundaries of belonging?In this episode we cover:The imagined communityThe monarchy and the myth of the British nationEurovision, the Commonwealth Games and Royal EventsActive listening questions:What imagined community, or imagined communities, do you feel that you belong to?  Are there public events during which you do or could celebrate your belonging to this or these communities? Which ones? Who do you think is excluded from this imagined community and how? And what does this tell us about the symbolic boundaries of this community?Find more about:What EU citizens in the UK and British citizens in the EU think about the monarchy in Elena and Catherine's article in The Sociological Review MagazineThe concept of imagined community in Benedict Anderson's Imagined Communities and the critique offered by Partha Chatterjee's The Nation and its FragmentsLaura's sociology of the royal family in her book Running the family firm and the Surviving Society podcast miniseries The Global Power of the British MonarchyOur podcast picks for this episode are:Academic Aunties on “Harry and Meghan”The Allusionist on EurovisionConversations with IRiS on Political DemographyFollow Who do we think we are? on all major podcasting platforms or through their RSS Feed, and follow the podcast on Twitter, Instagram or Facebook.Get all the latest updates from the MIGZEN research project on Twitter and Instagram.

What does Eurovision have to do with the Coronation? We're talking about what we learn about ‘Global Britain' and its imagined community from looking at how migrants understand major cultural events. Elena Zambelli explains what social scientists mean when they talk about the imagined community. Laura Clancy, sociologist of the royal family, joins us to talk about the missing voices in conversations about the future of the British monarchy. Co-hosts Nando Sigona and Michaela Benson reflect on what British citizens living abroad, EU citizens and others who have made the UK their homes told them about how they understand Britain and their place within it following Brexit. And consider what hearing from them about the monarchy, the Commonwealth Games and Eurovision makes visible about the new borders of political membership and symbolic boundaries of belonging.  You can access the full transcripts for each episode over on our website Who do we think we are?   In this episode we cover … 1               The imagined community 2               The monarchy and the myth of the British nation 3               Eurovision, the Commonwealth Games and Royal Events   Active listening questions What imagined community, or imagined communities, do you feel that you belong to?   Are there public events during which you do or could celebrate your belonging to this or these communities? Which ones?  Who do you think is excluded from this imagined community and how? And what does this tell us about the symbolic boundaries of this community?   Find more about …  What EU citizens in the UK and British citizens in the EU think about the monarchy in Elena and Catherine's article in the Sociological Review Magazine   The concept of imagined community in Benedict Anderson's Imagined Communities and the critique offered by Partha Chatterjee's The Nation and its Fragments   Laura's sociology of the royal family in her book Running the family firm and the Surviving Society podcast miniseries The Global Power of the British Monarchy   Our podcast picks for this episode are:   Academic Aunties on ‘Harry and Meghan' The Allusionist on Eurovision Coversations with IRiS on Political Demography   Call to action Follow the podcast on all major podcasting platforms or through our RSS Feed.  Get all the latest updates from the MIGZEN research project  on Twitter and Instagram Follow Who do we think we are? on Twitter, Instagram or Facebook.

Djene Bajalan and C Derick Varn discuss Benedict Anderson's seminal work on nationalism, Imagined Communities. https://www.versobooks.com/books/2259-imagined-communities   Support VarnVlog https://www.youtube.com/c/CDerickVarnVlog https://www.patreon.com/varnvlog   About TIR Thank you for supporting the show! Remember to like and subscribe on YouTube. Also, consider supporting us on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/join/BitterLakePresents   Check out our official merch store at https://www.thisisrevolutionpodcast.com/   Also follow us on... https://podcasts.apple.com/.../this-is.../id1524576360 www.youtube.com/thisisrevolutionpodcast www.twitch.tv/thisisrevolutionpodcast www.twitch.tv/leftflankvets https://www.facebook.com/Thisisrevolutionpodcast/ Instagram: @thisisrevolutionoakland   Follow the TIR Crüe on Twitter: @TIRShowOakland @djenebajalan @DrKuba2 @probert06 @StefanBertramL @MarcusHereMeow

Hablamos de las naciones como "comunidades imaginadas" y el deseo de pertenencia, el Mundial de Qatar, la épica nacional protagonizada por la selección marroquí y el pasado de la Federación Hispano-marroquí de Fútbol en los años cincuenta. Notas del Podcast: -Libro de apertura: "Comunidades imaginadas: Reflexiones sobre el origen y la difusión del nacionalismo" (Benedict Anderson, 1983) -La historia del Atlético de Tetuán bajo el Protectorado español (1933-1956): http://lafutbolteca.com/club-atletico-de-tetuan/ -La historia de Larbi Ben Barek, "La perla negra": https://indiosrojiblancos.foroactivo.com/t1745p15-larbi-ben-barek-la-perla-negra-1948-1954 -Película egipcia "Cairo 678": https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1764141/ -Canción de la Selección marroquí de fútbol: "Dima Maghreb" (Maher Zain) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ky30uTtmcQ&ab_channel=AwakeningMusic Seguidnos en IG: https://www.instagram.com/la_guardiamora/ Estamos en video en Patreon para suscriptores: https://www.patreon.com/LaGuardiaMora401/

Bernie Sanders és Jeremy Corbyn kampányainak bukásával egyértelmű: a baloldali populizmus stratégiája kifulladt. Vendégünk ezen a héten Pap Szilárd, a Mérce.hu szerkesztője, aki évek óta követi a nemzetközi baloldal populista kísérleteit és jelentős résztvevője volt a hazai vitáknak is e fogalom körül.Mit adtak nekünk a rómaiak? Talán kevesen válaszolnánk: a populizmust. Pedig-pedig! Milyen történelmi és társadalmi kontextusban jelent meg a baloldali populista stratégia? Milyen belső és külső hatások okozták a populista stratégia bukását? Miért csúsztak félre a baloldali populizmusról szóló Magyarországi viták? Többek között ezekre a kérdésekre kerestük a választ Pap Szilárddal antropológiai, történelmi és mozgalmi szempontokon keresztül.Várjuk visszajelzéseiteket a belepesikuszob@gmail.com címen vagy a Facebookon: https://www.facebook.com/kuszobpodcast, és Instagramon: @belepesi_kuszobAz adásban említett tartalmak:Pap Szilárd István -Populista fantiáziáinkon túl Ernesto Laclau - A populista ész Chantall Mouffe - For a Left Populism Chantall Mouffe - Csak a populizmus mentheti meg a demokráciát Eugen Weber - Peasants into Frenchmen Rogers Brubaker - Nationalist Politics and Everyday Ethnicity in a Transylvanian Town Don Kalb - Conversations with a Polish populist Anne Applebaum - Twilight of Democracy George Hoare - Moral Minoritarianism from the Ashes of Left Populism Kiss Viktor - Lekéstük a populizmus vonatát Benjamin Fife és Taylor Hines - "Nem érzem át" - a baloldali populizmus viszontagásgai Szelényi Iván & Konrád György - Az értelmiség útja az osztályhatalomhoz Gagyi Ágnes - Az antipopulizmus mint a rendszerváltás szimbolikus eleme Anton Jäger - We Bet the House on Left Populism - and Lost Guy Debord - A spektákulum társadalmaEmlített személyek, szervezetek: Hugo Chavez, Democratic Socialist of America (DSA), Momentum (Labour), Syriza, Benedict Anderson, Ernst GellnerEz itt a Partizán Podcast csatornája.A Partizán Podcast Facebook oldalát itt találod:https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100087436092000A Partizán oldalát és a videóit itt tudod megnézni:Youtube-on: https://www.youtube.com/c/Partiz%C3%A1nm%C3%A9diaFacebookon: https://facebook.com/partizanpolitika/Iratkozz fel a Partizán hírlevelére:https://csapat.partizanmedia.hu/forms/partizan-feliratkozasTámogasd te is a Partizán munkáját!https://csapat.partizanmedia.hu/fundraising/partizan/Extra tartalmak, vágatlan videók:https://www.patreon.com/partizanpolitika

Piše: Leonora Flis Bere: Igor Velše Knjiga Blaža Kosovela Zakaj ZDA nimajo ministrstva za kulturo temelji na avtorjevi disertaciji Rojstvo postmodernizma iz duha Amerike. Znanstveni temelji monografije so očitni. Knjiga je natančen sociološki, zgodovinski in kulturološko-antropološki pregled ne le razvoja ZDA, temveč tega, čemur pravimo civilizacija nasploh. Kosovel začne svojo analizo v antičnem Rimu in nas prek najpomembnejših postaj v evropski zgodovini popelje v ZDA. Kot avtor že v uvodu pove, so ZDA resnično zanimiv primerek države, ki svojo kulturo izvaža po vsem svetu, ob tem pa nima ministrstva za kulturo. ZDA niso zgrajene po enakih načelih kot evropske države, predvsem gre v njih za logiko ekonomske svobode in svetosti zasebne lastnine. Prvi del knjige ima naslov Rim: cultura, civis in religio, drugi del z naslovom Evropa: moderna družba, civilizacija in kultura se osredotoča na staro celino, tretji del pa, kot že rečeno, v precep vzame nastanek in razvoj Amerike in ima naslov ZDA: Nova civilizacija. Kosovel z akademsko dikcijo (knjiga vsebuje veliko citatov in sprotnih opomb) ustvari kompleksno sliko razlike med staro celino in ZDA, pri tem se opira na velika imena, kot so John Locke, Norbert Elias, Benedict Anderson, Zygmunt Bauman, Hannah Arendt, Michel Foucault in drugi. Kot pravi Hannah Arendt, se je »koncept kulture najprej pojavil sredi prvenstveno poljedelskega ljudstva in umetniške konotacije, ki so bile morebiti povezane s to kulturo, so zadevale tesno povezavo latinskih ljudi z naravo«. Od nekdaj je kultura je označevala tudi skrb za spomenike in za ohranjanje dediščine. Stari Grki pa so raje kot o kulturi govorili o umetnosti. Polis je kraj (mesto), kjer je umetnost mogoča; starogrški svet je bil svet slavne sedanjosti, pravi Kosovel, in ne dediščine preteklosti. Pravi koncept kulture nastane z namenom oblikovanja privatnega prostora, tako v smislu zemlje v zasebni lasti kot tudi lastne duše. Kultura, kot jo poznamo na evropski celini, je torej najprej stvar privatnosti in ne splošne javnosti. Kosovel se ustavi tudi pri renesančnem oblikovanju individuuma, ki ni le abstrakten filozofski koncept, ampak drugačno vedenje v medosebnih odnosih in v razumevanju samega sebe. V renesansi se slog zahodnega sveta oblikuje na dvorih, začne se tudi tekma v kulturnem prestižu, tekma v tem, kdo pozna in lahko vabi boljše umetnike in kulturne ustvarjalce. V knjigi Zakaj ZDA nimajo ministrstva za kulturo beremo: »Rafiniranje in kultiviranje je odmikanje od vsega, kar je razumljeno kot naravno, v svet umetno ustvarjenega, posredovanega, svet, ki je postavljen kot višji in zato tudi boljši in pomembnejši.« Šele z novim vekom se razumevanje kulture zasnuje tako, da se kulturo razume kot nekaj, kar se lahko prenese tudi na množice, da ni nujno zgolj domena elit. Narod je torej mogoče kultivirati ali civilizirati, eno od osnovnih orodij za dosega tega cilja je seveda izobraževanje. Kultura je bila za Evropo od samega začetka pojem za preoblikovanje ali kultiviranje ljudi na določenem ozemlju države, pojasnjuje Kosovel, kultura je bila način homogenizacije prebivalstva. Če v Evropi veljajo tudi pravila dedne aristokracije, v ZDA ni bilo tako. Dedne aristokracije tam ni, vse od samega formiranja države pa vlada načelo oblikovanja nove čistosti, privilegiranosti bele rase. Ameriška družba je zgrajena na fundamentalno drugačnih temeljih kot evropska in zato kulture pravzaprav ni potrebovala. Vzpostavljanje ideje nove čistosti seveda prinese s seboj ropanje, genocid, zasužnjevanje lokalnega prebivalstva in suženjske delovne sile iz Afrike. Amerika je utemeljena na rasni hierarhiji in belem supremacizmu. Tako Kosovel pojasnjuje temelje, na katerih so se oblikovale ZDA (skozi migracije, kolonizacijo, segregacijo in tako dalje). Institucija kulture v ZDA umanjka, saj je poudarek na političnih institucijah, ki favorizirajo pridobivanje nove lastnine, in na idealih, kot sta svoboda govora in svoboda zavesti. Namesto kulture, piše Kosovel, obstajajo ameriške sanje«. Ameriškega naroda ne ustvarjajo humanistični intelektualci, temveč inženirji in znanstveniki. Kljub temu se je konec 19. stoletja tudi v ZDA oblikovala visoka kultura, ki je namenjena elitam, denar zanjo pa priskrbijo bogati kultivirani posamezniki. Tudi vzpostavljanje kulturnih institucij (knjižnic, muzejev ...) poteka mimo oziroma neodvisno od javnih ustanov. Administracija, torej vladna sekcija ZDA, pa je vendarle pograbila tisto manj zahtevno, množično kulturo, ki jo ZDA oblikujejo, to je predvsem kultura potrošništva, ki so jo ZDA izvozile praktično povsod po svetu. Kultura je v ZDA postala še ena oblika ekonomije, prostor konzumacije. Izvažanju množične kulture smo priča vsak dan, amerikanizacija je preplavila svet. Blaž Kosovel dobro in prepričljivo utemeljuje svojo tezo, ki jo je izpostavil v naslovu knjige, tako da je natančno preučil oblikovanje ZDA in ga primerjal z oblikovanjem evropskih nacionalnih držav. Za Evropo je »kultura tisto mesto, ki legitimira oblikovanje narodov s tem, da oblikuje skupno zgodovino,« ugotavlja. Ameriški narod pa se je oblikoval predvsem kot ideja za prihodnost. Kredo, na katerem je utemeljena Amerika, je sekularizirana oblika protestantizma; ZDA ne potrebujejo ničesar drugega kot institucije, ki omogočajo prosti trg, ekonomsko svobodo; kultura, ki bi zasedala polje javnega, je torej nepotrebna. Kosovelovo delo Zakaj ZDA nimajo ministrstva za kulturo je izčrpno, ne sicer najlažje branje, ki prinaša pronicljive vpoglede in analize.

In this episode, I explain Benedict Anderson's notion of Imagined Communities. If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy

In this episode, I cover the second half of Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities." If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy

In this episode, I cover the first half of Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities." If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy

India Policy Watch #1: Futility Of Fighting Lies Insights on burning policy issues in India— RSJI have been following the case of Mohammed Zubair, the co-founder of the fact-checking site Alt News with interest. He was granted interim bail by the Supreme Court a couple of weeks back. You can read more about the story here. I border on free speech absolutism, so my opinion on this case, as with many other similar cases in India, is simple. No one should be jailed for any speech unless they are violating Mill’s harm principle. In his essay On Liberty, Mill wrote:“That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind is warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.”But free speech is not the only reason I have brought up the case of Mohammed Zubair here. The case illustrates a point I have made before in this newsletter: while countering lies with fact checks is a noble, worthwhile endeavour, it means nothing in an environment where people are intoxicated with half-truths and grand illusions about a ‘real’ past or an ‘imagined’ future.A few years back, I came across this wonderful essay ‘Monopolize the Pretty Lies’ by Bryan Caplan. While I understood it back then, reading it again now is insightful. Caplan writes:What then is the primary purpose of censorship?  It’s not to suppress the truth – which has little mass appeal anyway.  The primary purpose of censorship is to monopolize the pretty lies.  Only the powers-that-be can freely make absurdly self-aggrandizing claims. Human beings like to say – and think – whatever superficially sounds good.  Strict censorship allows rulers to exploit this deep mental flaw.  If no one else can make absurd lies, a trite slogan like, “Let’s unite to fight for a fantastic future!” carries great force.  Truthful critics would have to make crowd-displeasing objections like, “Maybe competition will bring us a brighter future than unity,” “Who exactly are we fighting?,” or “Precisely how fantastic of a future are we talking about?”  A rather flaccid bid for power!  Existing rulers tremble far more when rebels bellow, “Join us to fight for a fantastic future!”This is why I think this case won’t go anywhere. It will fizzle out here because fact-checkers don’t really matter. What will matter is if there is a counter-narrative based on dubious claims of an equally fantastic future. It explains why AAP is seen as a credible threat by the BJP.Caplan ends his essay with a rather pessimistic view of free speech:Doesn’t this imply that free speech is overrated?  Yes; I’ve said so before.  While I’d like to believe that free speech leads naturally to the triumph of truth, I see little sign of this.  Instead, politics looks to me like a Great Liars’ War.  Viable politicians defy literal truth in virtually every sentence.  They defy it with hyperbole.  They defy it with overconfidence.  They defy it with wishful thinking.  Dictators try to make One Big Political Lie mandatory.  Free speech lets a Thousand Political Lies Bloom.Yes, freedom of speech lets me make these dour observations without fear. I’m grateful for that.  Yet outside my Bubble, dour observations fall on deaf ears.  Psychologically normal humans crave pretty lies, so the Great Liars’ War never ends.I guess once you’ve gotten into the chakravyuha of the Mahabharata of lies, there’s no way of getting out. You will only find an avalanche of prettier lies from all sides engulfing you in future. India Policy Watch #2: Nature Of Representation Insights on burning policy issues in India— RSJDroupadi Murmu, the NDA presidential nominee, was elected as the 15th President of India a couple of weeks back. Murmu, a tribal leader from Mayurbhanj, Odisha, had earlier served as the governor of Jharkhand. That a woman from a historically marginalised section of the society now occupies the highest constitutional post is a moment to celebrate in the 75th year of Indian independence. It shows a kind of deepening of democracy. This is because we associate democracy with representation. It was no surprise therefore that a lot of opinion pieces reflected this sentiment while talking about her. Here’s Aditi Narayani Paswan writing for the Indian Express:“Droupadi Murmu is not just a source of inspiration for us; her life and struggle, determination and success in the face of great odds represent the hope and promise of New India.Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Indian democracy has become more representative and inclusive. The BJP represents the New India of prosperity, equality and socio-economic mobility, reflecting the true embodiment of samajik samarasta (social harmony). A tribal woman succeeding a Dalit to the highest constitutional post of the nation is a remarkable testimony to the deepening roots of Indian democracy.”And here’s a piece in Outlook:“What is really significant for us to understand here is that Murmu’s victory is not merely the victory of a specific party to power. Rather its implications can be drawn deep down to the very philosophy of what India as an independent nation has been striving to practically achieve. Whether or not her victory can bring goals of that philosophy to fruition is a matter of time to tell. But at the moment, from the point of view of a modern, multicultural, multi-ethnic nation-state, Murmu’s victory is the victory of representation.”Origin StorySince we are all talking about the victory of representation, I thought it would be useful to go deeper into the idea itself. What does representation mean in a democracy? How useful is it? Does an increasing emphasis on identity in society mean a greater opportunity for democracies to be truly representative? Is there such a thing as too much representation? To understand this, we will go back to the modern conception of the state and, therefore, to Hobbes. There are good reasons to go back to ancient history and the Roman republic or the Roman empire while talking about representation. But the political theory of the time concerned itself with the question of who was fit to rule us from among the people who should be ruling us. It didn’t answer the question of how we find who was fit to rule us. The process didn’t matter much then. So, we start with Hobbes again. This is a familiar territory for this newsletter so forgive me for going over it again. For Hobbes, human life in the state of nature is ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short’. We would be a ‘fractious multitude’ forever at war with each other for scarce resources because there would be no powerful force to keep us in order. The solution, Hobbes wrote, was for people to come together to form a pact, let’s call it the ‘commonwealth’, where they voluntarily give up some of their freedoms to a powerful entity called the ‘sovereign’ in exchange for protection against the violence that’s inevitable in the state of nature. So that’s how the State worked. There were the multitudes, a notion of the commonwealth, and then there was the sovereign. The sovereign was all-powerful but ruled because of the legitimacy of the commonwealth. If the sovereign itself became brutish, the multitudes might dismantle the commonwealth and look for another. Hobbes didn’t care much about how to search for the sovereign. It could be through a parliament, or it could be a monarch; it didn’t matter so long as it had absolute power to maintain order which was in turn voluntarily offered to them by the people. The enlightenment thinkers who followed Hobbes concerned themselves with two big ideas. One was individual liberty and how it should be protected and championed in the face of a powerful sovereign. The other was the separation of the ‘church’ from the State or how to ensure the sovereign doesn’t bow down to another power in the name of God. The revolutions and political reforms in the late 18th century Europe and North America were a result of the excesses of the sovereign and the propagation of these ideas within those societies. The primacy of individual liberty, the weakening of monarchy and the separation of the church led to the evolution of the modern, representative democracy where the people chose who would lead them. The people would be sovereign through the mode of representation. A system of checks and balances between the legislature, executive and judiciary would limit the concentration of power in any one person. This became the democratic model to emulate. The Problem Of RepresentationThe problem of representation wasn’t too difficult to solve in the early days of democracy. There was no universal suffrage, people lived in villages over generations, their representatives knew their issues well, and the people chose someone who presented the best option to address their concerns. There was very little information asymmetry. This model started fraying with increasing industrialisation and deepening of capitalism leading to greater social and geographic mobility. Cities with diverse populations, new professions, break down of the feudal structure in the countryside and universal suffrage followed. This meant it was difficult for any representative to know their people as well as before. Even the people couldn’t keep pace with all the information around them. Like Walter Lippman would write, there was a world outside, and there was a picture of it inside our heads. We make our decisions based on this picture which is a second-hand view of the world because we cannot see all of the world. Because of this, we search for an authentic messenger who can explain the real world to us. The elites use the media to present themselves as the authentic messengers and shape public opinion. It is this elite then who influence representation for the public. Once this model got established, we saw the elites dominate representation in democracies for most of the 20th century. This wheel turned in the last decade when the excesses of the financial system, the concentration of the benefits of globalisation, the proliferation of media and greater disparity in opportunities led to a populist backlash against the elites.The Three NarrativesThere are now three competing narratives on representation today. The first is the old Burkean point on the role of a representative of people. His speech to the electors of Bristol in 1774 is a classic on the role of a representative:“Certainly, gentlemen, it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”This is the model of an independent representative with a mind of his own. They work with autonomy using their judgment to do what they think is best for their people.The second narrative is about the representative being either an expert or who will rely on experts for finding the best answers to the concerns of the public. This narrative strengthens when a nation is in crisis because of a war, economic failure or an emergency (health or environment, for instance). These don’t last long, and an expert eventually falls out of favour unless they reinvent themselves. The last narrative is that of a representative who is like you and me, the proverbial US politician who you could have a chat with over a beer. This is the literal interpretation of representation where fealty to someone is drawn because of how closely they resemble us. In a world where every expertise can be questioned, where independent thinking is viewed with suspicion, and tribal loyalty is the highest virtue, this literal view of representation is the strongest. Of course, this isn’t to say that these narratives of representation cannot come together in the shape of a single person who could satisfy all of them. But that looks increasingly rare around the world these days. What’s easier is for a representative to fashion themselves in closer affiliation to a particular identity among the people and use that to come to power. Over-indexing on any one of these narratives and choosing representatives on that basis is bad for democracy. It weakens the state. It is something we must keep in mind while celebrating representation.  Matsyanyaaya: A New East Asian TransitionBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Pranay KotasthaneThis week’s news was dominated by the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. If you weren’t sleeping under a rock, you would have already read many views, claims, blames, and counter-claims around this event. Here’s another one, but from an Indian realist perspective.The dominant narrative sees this visit as another episode of the ongoing US-China great power rivalry. In this narrative, Taiwan by itself, is secondary. All that matters is to place the blame either on China or the US for the escalations. One framing is that this visit was unnecessary, provocative, and irresponsible. The argument goes that the US has worsened the security situation of China’s neighbours by inviting the latter’s aggression. The opposite framing suggests that the blame rests solely on China’s expansionist tendencies over the last five years. China’s response of activating a military response ahead of the upcoming 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party only shows what this event is really about.Both frames of the dominant narrative are missing a crucial element: the choices of the Taiwanese people. The great power rivalry framing often ignores that other nation-states also have the agency to make their sovereign choices, even if doing so sometimes involves playing one great power against another. Ukraine’s case is similar. Some people blame NATO’s expansion on Russia’s borders, while others point out that an invasion has no justification (I share this view). But we forget that most Ukrainians themselves want to move away from Russia and get closer to the West. Any final analysis needs to take this factor into account. My colleague Nitin Pai made a critical argument in early March: ““NATO/EU shouldn’t have expanded” is an insult to the agency of countries that have willingly exercised their choice to join. Accepting their sovereign decisions is also realism. Pretty silly to call yourself a ‘realist’ while pretending sovereign states don’t exist/lack agency.”So is the case with Taiwan. Some analysts are stuck in the old times, believing that Taiwan is China’s “internal issue”. They haven’t been paying enough attention to Taiwan’s domestic polity. The Taiwanese “nation”—the imagined community in Benedict Anderson’s conception— has been carefully constructed over the last few years. Democracy, freedom, and deep connections with the broader world are key foundations of Taiwanese nationalism. This kind of nationalism is antithetical to the mainland’s nationalism. The two consecutive electoral victories of the ruling party—Tsai Ing-wen’s DPP—is a sign that this Taiwanese identity has taken shape. The DPP defeated the grand old Guomindang, a party that has been soft on China. This is what Taiwan’s foreign minister, Joseph Wu said in a BBC interview a couple of days ago:"We want to maintain the status quo, which is that Taiwan has no jurisdiction over mainland China and the People's Republic of China (CCP) has no jurisdiction over Taiwan. That is the reality… On the index of freedom Taiwan is ranked number one, on economic freedom Taiwan is also at the top. Taiwanese people enjoy democracy, freedom and the value of human rights, that put Taiwan in the democratic world…. We have the will and the capability. We need other countries to provide Taiwan with defensive articles, but defending Taiwan is our responsibility, we are not asking other countries to sacrifice their lives to protect Taiwan."Read the lines again. They are definitely not about a small internal issue or a minor historical, ideological tussle. What About Pelosi’s VisitHaving understood the categorical shift in Taiwan’s politics, we can better understand Ms Pelosi’s visit. The Taiwanese government knew what they were getting into. Taiwan orchestrated the visit precisely to clarify to the world that its differences with China are irreconcilable. Even the Guomindang came out in support of the visit. Having been under the threat of a mainland invasion for over 73 years, the Taiwanese know China’s intentions and actions better than most others.The visit, by itself, was just symbolic. It didn’t involve a leader from the Biden administration. Moreover, both Pelosi and the Biden administration made it clear that they are not reversing the “One China” principle. It was China that raised the stakes. China could’ve opted to let it pass by with a strong statement alone. But it chose to ratchet tensions, hoping that this tried-and-tested strategy would stare down Taiwan.But that was not to be. Taiwan and Pelosi called China’s bluff. And when that happened, China began conducting massive military drills, fired missiles and withdrew from important dialogue forums with the US. All this in response to just a symbolic visit by a legislators’ group! Just like the unsportsmanlike kid who walks away with his bat, ball and wickets after being adjudged out. (I know I’m breaking my injunction against anthropomorphising international relations.)How Should We in India Process This?Thus far, we have opted for our favourite position of taking a stance by not taking a stance. Foreign ministers of the US, Australia, and Japan jointly condemned China’s launch of missiles. The fourth Quad member was conspicuous by its absence.From an Indian perspective, Taiwan standing up to China’s expansionism is encouraging. India is familiar with China’s tantrums over visits by foreign diplomats. On every occasion a US Ambassador to India visits Arunachal Pradesh, the Chinese government gets riled up. Pelosi’s visit should be seen in the same context. China’s unreasonable demands and the disproportionate escalation when the demands aren’t heeded, deserve strong criticism short of any change in the “One China” formulation. At the same time, India should close the long-pending free-trade agreement with Taiwan. Its strategic value far outweighs the benefits of haggling over import duties.These words from Joseph Wu serve as a useful reminder to India and Indians:“Look at their[China’s] behaviour over Hong Kong, or claiming the East China Sea and the South China Sea. It is the typical expansionism of an authoritarian state.. Countries in this region need to watch out for what China is trying to do. Taiwan is not going to be the last piece in Chinese dream of expansionism.”Want to find out more about India and Taiwan? Start with this Puliyabaazi episode we recorded with Sana Hashmi, an Indian scholar of East Asian international relations (it’s in Hinglish). Earlier this year, Sana also anchored a comprehensive policy report analysing the India-Taiwan partnership for the Taiwan Asia Exchange Foundation. The report has twenty chapters on various facets of the relationship. I have co-written a chapter on semiconductors, while my colleague Shambhavi has a chapter on bilateral cooperation to tackle future pandemics. Finally, my colleagues have analysed a few cross-strait scenarios from an Indian national interest perspective in an excellent Takshashila Intelligence Estimate. Course Advertisement: Admissions for the Sept 2022 cohort of Takshashila’s Graduate Certificate in Public Policy programme are now open! Visit this link to apply.HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Blog] If you are interested in the semiconductor angle in the Taiwan-PRC tensions, we have a post on it in our High-tech Geopolitics newsletter. [Book] Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China by Ezra Vogel is necessary reading to understand China better. [Tweet thread] Common mistakes we make in pronouncing Chinese names. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit publicpolicy.substack.com

India Policy Watch: The Road Of FireInsights on burning policy issues in India- RSJThe Union Defence Minister along with the chiefs of the three armed services on Tuesday announced the ‘Agnipath’ scheme for recruitment into the Indian military. You can read more about the scheme here. I have summarised the key features below:The soldiers under this scheme (referred to as ‘Agniveers’) will be enrolled for a duration of four years in a conscription or tour of duty (ToD) like model that’s prevalent in other countries. They will be paid between INR 30,000 - 40,000 per month during their tenure apart from risk or hardship allowance as applicable. 30 per cent of their salary will be deducted as a voluntary contribution into a corpus called ‘SevaNidhi’ with a matching contribution from the government. Roughly put, the soldiers will get this SevaNidhi package of about INR 11.7 Lacs plus the interest accumulated on this amount at the end of their four years of service. Few other post-retirement benefits are thrown in, including a life insurance cover and access to a bank loan of INR 18.2 Lacs against the SevaNidhi package.About 25 per cent of Agniveers will be absorbed into the regular cadre after four years. The rest will receive an Agniveer Skill certificate, the SevaNidhi corpus and some preferential treatment in getting into the Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) and maybe even state police forces. The Agniveers who leave at the end of four years, however, will not get the usual entitlements of gratuity and pension. This is huge. Over a period of couple of decades, this could mean only about 25 per cent of the forces will have the pension benefits that are available to all today. The enrollment under this scheme will be on an all-India and an all-class basis. This will be, by itself, a distinct rank in the armed forces with its own insignia. The likely implications of this are quite significant. The recruitment of soldiers today, especially in the army, is based on state-wise quotas and on the retirement of soldiers from various regiments that are class based. Class here should be read as an euphemism for caste or community. Drawing Agniveers on an all-class basis will mean withering away from the traditional structure of regiments. It could also mean a larger representation of states where unemployment rates are high because there might not be state-wise quotas anymore. This could further alter the composition mix of the armed forces.The government also positioned this as a move that will infuse youth and vitality (or ‘josh’ and ‘jazba’ as mentioned in various media reports) into the armed forces. The whole thing including the names Agnipath and Agniveer sounds like a campaign for an early 1990s Nana Patekar film. You could soon shoehorn Agni Pariksha (for the recruitment tests), Krantiveer (best Agniveer cadet), Yugpurush (lifetime achievement award for Agniveers), Angaar, Tiranga, Prahaar and so on. You get the picture. We are in this territory now. Anyway, the average age of the armed forces which is 32 now will come down by about five years. The younger workforce will be more technology-savvy that will be more attuned to the changing nature of modern warfare. Also, the 75 per cent of Agniveers who will go back into civil society will serve as a disciplined and nationalistic labour pool to draw from for organisations. There will be Agniveers in every village and taluk who will improve the moral fibre of our society. We will have no riots, no littering, no traffic violations and no crime. The retired Agniveers will change us. Because they will put the nation first. Always. Like Arnab. Well, that’s the official line anyway. BacklashUnfortunately, the response to the scheme hasn’t been what the government was expecting. There have been protests, arson and general lawlessness by unemployed youth that seems to be spreading across the country at the moment. A large section of retired armed forces officials too have questioned both the scale and speed of a change like this. The issues agitating them have some basis:There have been very few recruitment rallies during the two years of the pandemic. About 60,000 soldiers retire every year and this gap is filled up during the regular recruitment drives. It is safe to assume there's a 1.5 Lac gap that’s opened up since 2020. The expectation among aspirants was this will get filled up in the next year or so. That apart, there are those in the middle of their recruitment process who are unclear about their status now. Roughly put, there could be more than a crore of youngsters under the age of 21 who were waiting for these recruitment drives to restart. What they have now instead is about 46,000 open positions for the current year with a 25 per cent probability of a long-term career in armed services with full benefits. If you work the numbers, it also suggests a reduction in armed forces count by about 1.5 - 2 Lacs (about 10-15 per cent of the workforce) over the next four years. I’m not sure if that’s also a stated intent of this scheme but it will be a collateral result unless the Agniveer recruitment numbers are ramped up significantly in the following years.There is an inherent contradiction in acknowledging a modern military requires advanced warfare systems, technical know-how and expertise that takes years to build and having only 25 percent of personnel working on longer tenure commissions. Will the constant churn come in the way of managing these systems? Will there be institutionalised knowledge management that will be able to handle this scenario? Also, the eventual dismantling of the class-based system that this move seems to portend will need to be thought through. It is fundamental to how the army operates today.The other question is about the prospects of the 75 per cent who will be released every four years. This is a number that will keep rising over a period of time. All the romanticisation of the armed forces and its discipline aside, these will be youngsters without a college degree and with limited technical skills. How useful will they be to the wider world? Not much if you go by the current record of hiring of retired defence personnel. They will have to study further and acquire specific skills to be employable. To expect CAPF or the state police force to absorb them is a bit optimistic. Also, there are aspirants for those jobs too with their own patronage system who will scuttle these moves. Lastly, for all the josh and jazba that are likely to come free because of this move, it will be useful to understand the repercussions of having a workforce that knows only one in four among them will qualify for the longer commission. What behaviour will this engender in them? How objective will the criteria for selection be? And if the 75 per cent who are released struggle to get jobs and earn their livelihoods, the feedback loop to the future cohorts will be immediate. The situation will turn more fraught at the end of every four-year cycle. The comparison with other countries that have a ToD model is useful but it is important to appreciate we are a US$ 2000 per capita economy with over 40 per cent of the employable labour pool either without a job or underemployed. In other countries, those who want to continue to be in the armed forces almost self-select themselves. These arguments, for and against aside, this is a good example to understand the complexities of policymaking, especially in defence, in India. A Difficult ProblemLet’s begin with the single most important policy objective for armed forces now in India. This is quite stark and apparent - it needs to modernise its defence infrastructure and increase its capacity in areas of modern warfare like the air force and navy. Given the threat perception on its borders, this is an already delayed exercise. You can read a detailed ORF report on India’s platform modernisation deficit here for more. TL;DR: yes, we do have a modernisation challenge on hand. And it is quite bad.Now the key question is what’s coming in the way of modernisation? There are multiple answers to this but on the top of that list is a lack of funds. The defence budget has broadly remained around 2.2 per cent of the GDP over the last decade. India has struggled to contain its fiscal deficit and it has limited ability to allocate more to its defence budget. As we have written on umpteen occasions, the Indian state is spread wide and thin. It does way too many things badly. Therefore, it cannot find money to do things it must. More importantly, pension benefits (24 per cent) and wages (28 per cent) take up over half of its budget. These numbers, especially pension outlays, will continue to grow in the coming years as the full impact of OROP (one rank one pension) plays out. The OROP that came into effect in late 2015 is a known and acknowledged policy mistake that is quite simply unsustainable. But it is almost impossible to walk back on that now. So, the search for circumventing that burden is one of the factors that has led to this scheme. A bad policy decision has a long-term downstream impact and this is a classic case of that playing out. Even if the Agnipath scheme is implemented as it stands today, the easing up of the pension burden will take decades to play out. The need for modernisation of the armed forces is as of yesterday. But the government is hoping through a combination of a 10-15 per cent reduction in the strength of the military and a long-term solution to control the burgeoning pension bill would have given it some room to ramp up on modernisation without increasing defence outlay. There are various estimates of the net present value of the expenditure on a single soldier who joins the armed forces today. At fairly conservative estimates of discount rates, wages and future pension benefits, Pranay estimates this to be about INR 1 crore. In my view, that is the absolute floor for that value and it might be around INR 2 crores if one were to take a bit more realistic assumptions. So, a 1.5 - 2 Lac workforce reduction could mean a significant availability of funds to modernise the defence platforms over time.  Growth, Growth, GrowthThat’s likely the thinking that’s gone behind the scheme. Everything else including the messaging on josh and jazba or having retired Agniveers in every village is to make it palatable to the public. It is difficult to acknowledge openly to people that the economy cannot support the defence requirements of India when you have made nationalism and nation-first important planks of your political strategy. This communication plan could have worked except it had to contend with the other real problem of the Indian economy at the moment. Lack of jobs. For reasons that could take up another post, the Indian economy isn’t generating enough jobs for its large youthful population. Roughly, India needs to create between 15-20 million non-farm jobs every year to keep pace with those entering the labour force. The labour participation rate has remained in the 40-45 per cent range for a long time. New job creation data can be contentious but it is difficult to argue that India is creating anything more than 3-4 million jobs every year. The quality of many of these new jobs isn’t great. The merry-go-round of employees switching jobs and getting big hikes in the IT/ITES sector shouldn’t blind us to the reality in the broader economy. There aren’t enough jobs. The two prerequisites for job creation, an 8-9 per cent GDP growth and skew towards sectors like construction, infrastructure or labour-intensive exports aren’t being met. The reason the job crisis hasn’t snowballed into a larger political and social issue is the immense faith in the PM among the youth. There’s a strong belief among them that India is on its way to becoming a superpower. The regular dose of nationalism and jingoism that’s amplified by the media helps continue this narrative. A related issue here that accounts for the violent protests is the lure of government jobs. The public sector jobs at the junior levels have become more remunerative than similar roles in the private sector in the last decade. As much as people love quoting the salaries of the CMDs of PSU Banks or the senior IAS officers and comparing them to the compensation of private-sector CEOs, the reality is that at mid to junior levels the government jobs are better paying. You can dig deeper into the wage bills of listed PSUs and compare them with their private counterparts for evidence. The other supposed benefits of a government job like job security, work-life balance and a possibility of rent-seeking (though low in defence jobs) make the package very attractive. This has meant a dramatic reversion in trend of people hankering for public sector jobs that had waned in the first couple of decades of liberalisation. So, a reduction in the number of such jobs or cutting down their benefits as the Agnipath scheme is likely to be isn't going to be accepted despite the great popularity of the PM and the ruling party among this segment. Their expectation, in contrast, is for the number of government jobs to go up.Considering the constraints, it is difficult to see what else the government could have done here. The need to reduce wage and pension costs to fund modernisation is real. And given the fiscally conservative instinct of this government, it won’t deficit fund the modernisation programme. As is its wont, it has chosen to put a bold announcement with emphasis on other benefits while trying to solve its key problems under cover. There’s this myth that a big bang approach to reform is the only model that works in India. That’s wrong. A lot of what has looked like big reforms in India have actually had a long runway that’s often invisible to people. A more comprehensive reading of the history of ‘91 reforms makes this clear. So, the usual template has been followed so far: minimal consultation, no plans to test it out at a smaller scale and instant big bang implementation. The results are unsurprising. I am guessing we will see a similar script play out for the next few months. There will be rollbacks (a few have been already announced), some concessions that will tinker around years of service or percentage releases, and a few sops thrown in, to temper the anger. If I were to give more credit than is due to this government’s planning chops, I might even say it possibly did this on purpose. Release a more extreme form of scheme, brace for impact and then roll back to the position that you always wanted in the first place. It is one way to game public opinion to your favoured outcome. Of course, a more impactful solution to this is to acknowledge the mistake that OROP is and shift the pension of defence forces onto a voluntary, defined contribution scheme like the NPS which has been implemented since 2004 for all new recruits joining government services, except defence. That is the only sustainable solution to this problem. But dispassionate policy making in defence sector in India is difficult. All kinds of emotions about izzat, vardi, naam and nishaan get mixed up. Nana Patekar gets in the way of clear-headed thinking.  * (with apologies and acknowledgement to Harivansh Rai ‘Bachchan’)Addendum— Pranay KotasthaneFor a researcher working on the public finance of defence, the Agnipath scheme is an important milestone. Over the long term, it has the potential to substantially reduce the pension burden. And as RSJ writes, the scheme will have no impact on the allocations for modernisation in the short term. Nevertheless, this scheme is important for the single reason that just as today’s deficits are tomorrow’s taxes, today’s reforms become tomorrow’s savings. Many commentators suggest that India’s defence expenditure problem can be solved merely by increasing defence expenditure to 3 per cent of GDP, from the current allocation of 2.04 per cent. That’s hardly the case. Projecting current growth rates of defence spending components over the next ten years suggests that even if the government were to agree to a 3 per cent spending, pension spending will grow rapidly enough to allow only an incremental increase in the fiscal space for capital outlay.Keeping the public finance angle aside, I took away two lessons in politics.One, the political narrative that can be used to sell a policy solution sometimes matters more than the solution itself.In an article for the Times of India in March, I listed four alternatives before the government to manage personnel costs. The three solutions that were dropped tried to address the pension problem directly. It wasn’t possible to project these solutions as achieving any other objective. In contrast, the solution that was picked up, i.e. Agnipath, was the only one that allowed the government to skirt the fiscal motivations for this reform. The government went in with this stated objective: “attracting young talent from the society who are more in tune with contemporary technological trends and plough back skilled, disciplined and motivated manpower into the society.”  No mention of the fiscal angle. At all.This strategy itself had mixed results in the early days. Politically, it allowed the government to make statements such as these: “We never see the Armed Forces through the perspectives of savings. Whatever we need to spend, the government is willing to spend. Our aim is to defend the country’s borders. Whatever needs to be spent, will be spent.” — Mr Rajnath Singh, Union Defence MinisterHowever, not acknowledging the real reason why these reforms were mooted, created an impression that the government has needlessly and suddenly foisted another disruptive scheme on unsuspecting masses.Two, the government failed to align cognitive maps of important stakeholders, yet again. Pension reforms are wicked problems everywhere in the world because there are strong endowment effects of a large, organised collective at play. Some of you might recall that a couple of years ago, nearly 800,000 French people protested and disrupted key services across the country in opposition to the proposed pension reform. That reform merely aimed to consolidate 42 different pension schemes, with variations in retirement age and benefits, into a universal points-based system. Even so, the government had an excellent, indigenous pension reform example at hand. As we’ve written many times before, the civil services pension reform of 2004 was a rare example of introducing a scheme to reduce the pension burden without protests. Despite this example, the government chose to opt for an Agnipath scheme that made some applicants suddenly ineligible for selection. The resulting protests and violence eventually made the government relax the age criteria this time. The government mandarins would surely have anticipated these consequences. To smoothen the transition, the government could’ve done regular recruitment along with the Agnipath recruitment this year. Over the subsequent three-four years, it could have increased the intake for the latter and tapered down the intake in the regular induction in a phase-wise manner. But it chose a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel. Global Policy Watch: Social Media’s Rule of Three Global policy issues relevant to India— Pranay KotasthaneSocial media continues to confound us all. By now, we all have read a number of hypotheses on how social media rewards “evil”. In the initial days, social media’s tendency to push us into echo chambers was oft-cited as the mechanism that made people more extreme in their views. Then came the view that the evil lay in the “likes”, “retweets”, and “share” features, which promoted an asymmetric virality. Thereafter came the notion that it was the economic models that were to blame. Advertisement-led services and Big Tech monopolies were the real problems, we were told. And over the last four years or so, it’s the algorithms and recommendation engines of social media companies that have been the target. Despite these arguments, we still don’t have a conclusive answer. Several studies have refuted many of the assertions made above. And so, let’s take a step back from specific social media apps, and instead ask: what are the meta-mechanisms that make all forms of social media a powerful instrument? I can think of three interrelated mechanisms. All three mechanisms are connected to sociological and cognitive behaviours in the Information Age.One, Social Media expands our Reference NetworksReference Networks is a term used by psychologists to mean “people whose beliefs and behaviour matter for our behaviour”. A really small part of our behaviour is independent of others’ actions and beliefs. Most of our behaviour is interdependent, i.e. it depends on what people in our reference network say or do. For most of human history, geographic proximity largely determined our reference network. For instance, our on-road driving behaviour is shaped by people who are around us and whom we consider ‘like us’. TV, radio, books, and newspapers have played a major role in creating new horizontal comradeship (or what Benedict Anderson called ‘imagined communities’), but these media did not supplant the importance of geographically proximate reference networks. Social media, by contrast, expands our reference networks like never before. People across the world can now influence our perceptions instantly and repeatedly. And by this reference network expansion, I do not imply the ‘echo chambers’ trope. Courtesy of social media, our reference network in fact now includes many more people who think unlike us. Sociologist Zeynep Tufecki explains this mechanism using a beautiful metaphor:“While algorithms will often feed people some of what they already want to hear, research shows that we probably encounter a wider variety of opinions online than we do offline, or than we did before the advent of digital tools.Rather, the problem is that when we encounter opposing views in the age and context of social media, it’s not like reading them in a newspaper while sitting alone. It’s like hearing them from the opposing team while sitting with our fellow fans in a football stadium. Online, we’re connected with our communities, and we seek approval from our like-minded peers. We bond with our team by yelling at the fans of the other one. In sociology terms, we strengthen our feeling of “in-group” belonging by increasing our distance from and tension with the “out-group”—us versus them. Our cognitive universe isn’t an echo chamber, but our social one is. This is why the various projects for fact-checking claims in the news, while valuable, don’t convince people. Belonging is stronger than facts.” [MIT Technology Review, August 2018]Expressed another way, every issue becomes global by default because our reference networks are also global. Two, Social Media expands the Overton WindowRepeating what I had written about this particular mechanism in edition #130. The Overton Window framework suggests that for any political issue, there's a range of socially acceptable positions that's narrower than the range of all possible positions. These socially acceptable ideas are seen as being inside the Overton Window — they are mainstream and uncontroversial. On the other hand, policy positions outside it are viewed as shocking, upsetting, and electorally harmful. The key insight of this framework is that, with social pressure, the Overton Window can shift over time; today's radicals may become tomorrow's moderates. In the Information Age, something even more striking has happened. The Overton Window on practically every issue has been stretched such that nearly all possible positions on an issue have become socially acceptable. With that happening, the older institutions, which earlier exuded authority, are shredding legitimacy with every decision they make.With the old gatekeepers no longer wielding the same power as earlier, the range of opinions on any issue can be extremely broad. And combined with the fact that each of those views attracts a new reference network, the Overton Window of social acceptability gets stretched.Three, Disproportional Rewards for Extreme ContentMany analysts say that this mechanism is a result of skewed algorithms and the incentives arising out of an advertisement-based model. While that’s partly true, there’s a deeper reason: information overload. Persuasion is a key power in the information age. Persuading someone requires attracting someone’s attention. And since attention is a scarce commodity in a crowded information environment, the only way to attract it is to come up with something surprising and shocking. Consider this analogous example. If I were to write “Lng Yrs g, W Md Tryst WTh Dstny”, you would immediately identify that I’m talking about Nehru’s iconic 1947 speech, despite me dropping all vowels. From an information theory perspective, vowels carry “less” information content because they occur more frequently. In contrast, consonants contain “more” information because the probability of their occurrence is low.In a similar manner, a news feed post which reads “There was a bomb blast in Kabul”, carries less information, because this has quite unfortunately become a regular occurrence over the last few years. In contrast, a shocking opinion or news like “Russian information ops influenced the 2016 election results” surprises us, and hence carries more information. Over time, not only does the Overton Window expand, it becomes broader at the two poles. My proposition is that many real-life events attributed to social media (positive or negative) can be explained by a combination of these three mechanisms. Consider the work done by an online group DRASTIC (Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating COVID-19) in mid-2021. Their work alone changed the conversation on the Wuhan lab origin theory (RSJ wrote about it here). In this case, the expanded reference network allowed a band of interested folks to build on each other’s work. The Overton Window expansion meant that the group could put forward an idea that seemed preposterous at that time. And a skew towards surprises meant that their idea didn’t just die away in a closed in-group, but instead sailed across the globe.HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Article] Janan Ganesh has a cracking column in FT, which discusses a favourite topic of ours: economic growth. Sample these lines from the column: “The looming recession will be painful. But it will also drive a certain kind of post-materialist humbug from polite discourse. Growth will be harder to dismiss as a bean counter’s tawdry obsession when there is so little of the stuff to go round.”[Article] Zeynep Tufekci’s analysis of “how social media took us from Tahrir Square to Donald Trump”.[Post] Gurwinder from The Prism has this terrific insight: ideologies are memetic superbugs. His words: “The most successful ideology in the West today, wokeism, has succeeded because it’s perfectly configured, not to establish social justice, but to establish more copies of itself. It’s a memetic superbug evolved for contagion rather than truth or compassion, and if contaminating others requires it to delude the senses, twist the truth, and darken the heart, then so be it.”[Tweet] The always-insightful Bryan Caplan’s take on intersecting echo chambers lights a bulb. He says: “If you want to combat error, critique your in-group. You speak their language and they trust you, so you might persuade someone. If you want to raise your status, critique your out-group. They won't listen, but your in-group will love it.” The latter tendency dominates the former by a big margin, I guess. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit publicpolicy.substack.com

While nationalism has mainly been recognized – and researched – as one of the most influential ideologies of modern times, its connection with morality and sexual norms started to receive attention relatively recently. In Europe, this phenomenon has taken root at different paces and scales, marking the continent's political cultures and multiple identities. How is a national discourse constructed? How does it intersect with human life's social, private and political dimensions? Focusing on the Western Balkans experience, Chiara Maria Murgia (IDM) discusses these with Elissa Helms, Associate Professor at the Central European University. **please note the unfortunate cut at 16.50 mins: "...women who survived the genocide by the ICTY, over 8,000 men were killed..."-> The ICTY ruled that the events in Srebrenica were a genocide. Of course, the ICTY was not among the perpetrators. It was Bosnian Serb forces under the command of Ratko Mladic who carried out the killings.More Information: Srebrenica Genocide: No Room For Denial | International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (icty.org) **Our guest recommendation: Maja Bajević's performance, Dressed Up, 1999 Jasmila Žbanić's movies: Grbavica, 2006; For Those Who Can Tell No Tales, 2013; Quo Vadis, Aida? 2020 References mentioned in the program: Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 1983 Dubravka Zarkov, The Body of War: Media, Ethnicity, and Gender in the Break-up of Yugoslavia, 2007 Elissa Helms, Innocence and Victimhood: Gender, Nation, and Women's Activism in Postwar Bosnia-Herzegovina, 2013 Guest: Dr Elissa Helms, Associate Professor at the Central European University. Host: Chiara Maria Murgia, Project Assistant at IDM Production and editing: Emma Hontebeyrie, Research Associate at IDM See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week we get into Security Theatre — and what a timely topic it is! We go over what we learned from Book 3, Episode 6 with Mercedes Eng who walked us through the carceral logics of the Wizarding World. And we review Book 4, Episode 2 about the nation state and the way Benedict Anderson theorized nations as “imagined communities” that are imagined as limited, sovereign, and in need of protection. Then we play a game Cloaks or Hoax! A goofy opportunity for Hannah to make Marcelle laugh before deciding which security measures from the Ministry are performative and which ones might actually keep people safe. Followed by a breakdown of Security Theatre as understood by Bruce Schneier in his 2003 book Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World. This episode is a great listen for those of you trying to make sense of the "safety measures" put into place after 9/11 that we still encounter two decades later (not to mention how those persist in stark contrast to the rapidly lifted mask mandates).As a reminder, we need your help to reach 1000 Patreon supporters before Hannah's birthday on May 25th! Reaching 1000 supporters would be a financial game-changer for us and we're promising you a LIVE Witch, Please Q&A if we reach the goal — we're only about 70 supporters away! You can become a Patreon Supporter at any tier for more perks and bonus content. If becoming a paying subscriber isn't in the cards right now, no stress! Tell a friend about the show or leave us a review on Apple Podcasts — everything helps keep our boat afloat. And be sure to follow us on Instagram or Twitter @ohwitchplease to stay connected. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week we get into Security Theatre — and what a timely topic it is! We go over what we learned from Book 3, Episode 6 with Mercedes Eng who walked us through the carceral logics of the Wizarding World. And we review Book 4, Episode 2 about the nation state and the way Benedict Anderson theorized nations as “imagined communities” that are imagined as limited, sovereign, and in need of protection. Then we play a game Cloaks or Hoax! A goofy opportunity for Hannah to make Marcelle laugh before deciding which security measures from the Ministry are performative and which ones might actually keep people safe. Followed by a breakdown of Security Theatre as understood by Bruce Schneier in his 2003 book Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World. This episode is a great listen for those of you trying to make sense of the "safety measures" put into place after 9/11 that we still encounter two decades later (not to mention how those persist in stark contrast to the rapidly lifted mask mandates).As a reminder, we need your help to reach 1000 Patreon supporters before Hannah's birthday on May 25th! Reaching 1000 supporters would be a financial game-changer for us and we're promising you a LIVE Witch, Please Q&A if we reach the goal — we're only about 70 supporters away! You can become a Patreon Supporter at any tier for more perks and bonus content. If becoming a paying subscriber isn't in the cards right now, no stress! Tell a friend about the show or leave us a review on Apple Podcasts — everything helps keep our boat afloat. And be sure to follow us on Instagram or Twitter @ohwitchplease to stay connected. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We roam over London, New York, Paris, Bilbao, Preston, and the Scottish Highlands, in a discussion of what cities and landscapes tell us about workers and the wealthy, how anarchism assists urban planning, imperial landscapes in pop culture, Boris Johnson's oligarch-pleasing Garden Bridge project, the Labour Councillor who bollarded himself out of a pint, how the National Gallery tried to discourage tourists, and more.     Plus, photography: Stalin vs Henri Cartier-Bresson.    Tim Waterman is Associate Professor of Landscape Theory at the Bartlett School of Architecture at UCL. His latest book is The Landscape of Utopia: Writings on Everyday Life, Taste, Democracy, and Design.   Our Patreon   Second Row Socialists on Twitter   Comradio on Twitter   Alternative Left Entertainment   ALE on Twitter   Tim Waterman on Twitter   Tim's website   The Landscape of Utopia by Tim Waterman (2022)   Nincompoopolis: The Follies of Boris Johnson by Douglas Murphy (2017)   Comradio ep 53 - Unsensible World of Soccer   Anarchy in Action by Colin Ward (2017)   The Child in the City by Colin Ward (1978). Full text   The World Bollard Association on Twitter   Imagined Communities by Benedict Anderson (2016)   How we built community wealth in Preston   Ukraine official Twitter account on Coke and Pepsi   People's Republic of Walmart : How the World's Biggest Corporations are Laying the Foundation for Socialism by Leigh Philips, Michal Rozworski (2019)   Developing Socialism: The Photographic Condition of Architecture in Romania, 1958–1970 - Juliana Maxim (2011)   Photographer profile: Henri Cartier-Bresson

Hello Interactors,The 80s band Tears for Fears released a new album recently. Their biggest hit, Everybody Wants to Rule the World has new meaning this week. What is it about empire building sociopaths in the West and the East that makes everybody want them to stop trying to rule the world?As interactors, you’re special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You’re also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let’s go…CHRONICLING THE TRUTH OF THE RUSRurik, a Norse Viking prince, made his way south from present day Denmark, to establish a ruling government in Novgorod in what is now Russia. He was invited by Slavik and Finn-Ugrik people to apply his governing skills to their feuding tribes.Rurik then extended his presence further south to a city called Kiev in 850. It took another 1000 years for Kiev to be pronounced Kyiv in Ukrainian. In Russian it’s still pronounced Kiev. This outpost became the center of what became the Kievan Rus; a loose collection of Slavic, Baltic, and Finnic peoples of Eastern and Northern Europe. The city was well positioned on a visible bank on a northern edge of the Dnieper River. Its convenient and defensible position allowed Rurik to reign over what became the Rurik Dynasty.The people of modern-day Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus all stake claim to this origin story.Rurik was replaced in 882 by his kinsman Oleg. It was Oleg that declared Kiev to be the capital of the Kievan Rus. Given the nexus of trading activity in Kiev it became a contested region. Oleg led many wars against semi-nomadic tribes from the south and the east.One hundred years later one of those leaders from the east, the Byzantine ruler Basil II, came asking for money. Then leader Vladimir of Kiev agreed so long as he could marry his sister. Basil II gave his sister over on the condition Vladimir, a pagan, convert to Orthodox Christianity. He not only agreed, but insisted everyone in the region convert as well. He baptized the people of Rus in 988 and just like that Christianity was spread throughout the region.This Rus-Byzantine religio-political arrangement was no doubt influenced by the Roman Catholic Church who sought influence over this important Eurasian borderland. By 1054 there came an East-West schism in the church. Eastern Orthodox churches in Constantinople and those in Rome each viewed the other as drifting from the ‘true church’. They split between Orthodox Catholics of the East and Roman Catholics of the West. Though they both continued to largely share the same beliefs and practices.There is no central Orthodox Church in Ukraine any longer. It has since splintered into a variety of denominations along with a myriad of other religions. It’s estimated 75% of Ukrainians believe in a Christian God. But another East-West schism has emerged this week as Putin and Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill seek to pull Ukraine back from the allure of the West. They both seek a centralized Russian Orthodox Church under Kirill and a central government under Putin. A forced religio-political unification of the people of Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine under a single language, religion, and government. Echoes of Oleg and Rurik and historic east-west tensions – Vladimir of Kiev meets Vladimir Putin.In 1113 a document called The Primary Chronicle was written from which this history is documented. The first sentence reads, “These are the narratives of bygone years regarding the origin of the land of Rus’, the first princes of Kiev, and from what source the land of Rus’ had its beginning.” Seventy-four years later came another source of regional history, the Hypatian Chronicles, and with it the first printed occurrence of the word Oukraina – Ukraine.The etymology of this word is debated to this day. The most popular interpretation comes from a Slavic word for ‘borderland’ or ‘frontier region’ but others argue it’s more possessive as in ‘territory’. Perspectives are as variable as their lineages.A Dutch map from 1645 shows the word Okraina in the middle of wilderness. Wild indeed. By this time in history this region was known to be wild with wars fought over its land, riches, and strategic position between Europe and Asia. From the days of Rurik to today territories in western Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova have cyclically been claimed by Germany, Astro-Hungary, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine. These boundaries have been contested, drawn, and redrawn since the invention of maps.Maps played a significant role in attempts to ‘permanently’ define the boundaries of territories, and so did the proliferation of books that defined their historic narratives. The Gutenberg press, invented in the late 1400s, offered those with power and money to write and disseminate narratives coincident with territorial boundary maps that fit their view of the world and of history. This was the world’s first use of mass-media to control a particular geo-religio-political narrative and competing counter-narratives concerning regional communities. Many of which were communities of the imagination.NATIONALISM; JUST IMAGINEImagined Communities is the title of a book by a Cornell political scientist, Benedict Anderson. He addresses the still vague notion of ‘nationalism’ – a squishy idea with a powerful force. He argues for a definition that transcends historical attempts to define it by self-interested ideologues. The word ‘nationalism’ was not widely used until the 19th century. It has since become a term we insist on ascribing to every human just as we do gender, race, or ethnicityThe Scottish political theorist Tom Nairn wrote, “’Nationalism’ is the pathology of modern developmental history, as inescapable as ‘neurosis’ in the individual…and largely incurable.’”Anderson proposes this definition of nation: “an imagined political community – and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign.” By imagined he means even the most sparsely populated nation will include enough people that one will ever be able to know, meet, or even hear their fellow residents. And yet, everyone claims to be able to imagine who they are. The British-Czech social anthropologist, Ernest Gellner succinctly writes, “‘Nationalism is not the awakening of nations to self-consciousness: it invents nations where they do not exist.’”Imagined communities became sovereign nations during ‘The Enlightenment’. Faced with historical dominion by religions while simultaneously discovering the multitude of religions in the world, even the most devote elite came alive with dreams of their own imagined free nations – accepting they must also fall under the guise of a given God. Hence the existence of the United States – one nation under God.A God that some interpret as encouraging, excusing, or mysteriously ignoring communal inequalities and exploits in the name of national identity and comradeship that runs as deep as it does wide. As Anderson surmises, “Ultimately it is this fraternity that makes it possible, over the past two centuries, for so many millions of people, not so much to kill, as willingly to die for such limited imaginings.”One of the unifying elements of these imagined communities is language. In the 18th and 19th century the people of the northern Balkans witnessed the invention of a number of literary languages. In the 18th century the Ukrainian language was ‘tolerated’ by the more dominant Russian speaking population as a folk language spoken by yokels in Ukraine – or “Little Russia” as it was called.But in 1798 Ivan Kotlarevsky, a Ukrainian writer, wrote a poem in Ukrainian about life in Ukraine. It became very popular. Six years later, in 1804, the Kharkov University was founded and became the literary hub of Ukraine. In 1819 the first publication of Ukrainian grammar was printed. Russian grammar was defined just 17 years prior.By 1830 more Ukrainian writers were published in their native language. This is the date that established the language as a bonding element of Ukrainian nationalism. In 1846 the first nationalist organization was founded. And not by a politician with a sovereign agenda, but by a historian.Language invention was happening in many places during this time. In 1820 Finland, for example, an interest in Finnish tradition and culture emerged and was written in Latin and Swedish. This created a groundswell of nationalism by writers, teachers, pastors, and attorneys. They stitched their collective past stories and dialects and published dictionaries and grammar guides. They forge a more confident and self-determined government and national identity defined by their borders and their language.These writers, lexicographers, folklorists, and composers were not acting solely out of national pride, but to feed a burgeoning print market. And who were they selling to? Affluent and powerful families. Only half of the most advanced states in Europe were able to read in 1840. Over ninety percent of Russians could not read.But it wasn’t just the old ruling classes and nobility that were becoming literate. A rising middle class was emerging. Former plebes and appendices amassed wealth and become professionals in a growing worldwide commercial and industrial economy. And with it a growing number of wealthy upper class – the nouveau bourgeoises.As the number of capitalist and wealthy land owners increased through the rise of the industrial age, so did the number of languages they spoke. Latin was displaced by local dialects. This enhanced the bond between commercial and political elite separated by distant cities but united by their language, national identity, and status. Status is what they shared with those in other nations that may not speak their language. Whether it was across a border or an ocean, they knew they were dealing with another well-educated, wealthy man beaming with national pride just like them.And with this growth in wealth and status came increased investment, bureaucracy, and debt in budding nation states. Infrastructure, civil and social services, and militaries were needed. Between 1830 and 1850, Russia’s expenditures grew 44 percent, 75 percent in America, and over 90 percent in Netherlands. All amidst the proliferation of print media in a local vernacular aimed to strengthen the bonds of a growing population of literate masses; imagined communities forged together in a shared belief of an illusory nation, identity, and an expected entrenched in-group allegiance to an irregularly shaped border drawn on a map by someone invested in securing it.TRUST EMPATHYThe national borders of Ukraine were absorbed into the larger Soviet Union in 1944. The Dnieper River forms a natural east-west boundary that also divides ethnicities. Putin has strategically captured those cities in Ukraine that already have sizable ethnic Russian populations. These cities have a long history of bouncing back and forth between more ‘western’ or ‘eastern’ ruling nation states.My brief version of this rich and complex history cannot be reduced to east versus west, good versus evil, or Russian versus Ukraine. And yet that’s what mass media does every single day. Our brains seek efficiency, our short attention spans lead us to crave easy answers – a team to root for, a nation to blame, a person to hate. An imagined community which to affiliate.Whether it’s The Primary Chronicle of the early Rus, the dissemination of Gutenberg pressed books, invented languages, or mass-media pumping out sound bites they all share a common goal. They propagate propaganda from a group of selected, elected, or protected imperialists and (usually) capitalists invested in perpetuating, protecting, and expanding imagined nations. They speak, act, and plot on behalf of a group of diverse collections of people; portions of whom believe they share something in common, a common identity, an imagined community. Nationalists.But another portion of whom see these imaginary nations as vacuous, illusory, and increasingly weakened by a growing global cyber-connected mass of humanity. They are introduced to, awakened by, ‘woke’ to the widespread voices of the historically squelched, discarded, sidelined, and suffering. Individual lives directly impacted by powerful, greedy, and imperialistic power brokers.The three most dominant modern-day authors of nationalism, select sorcerers of imagined communities, and cunning cartographers of calculated cartesian colonies are China, Russia, and the United States.Their influence can come in three flavors:Formal geo-politics by academics, intellectuals, and think tanks. One example is The Pentagon’s New Map of 2004.Practical geo-politics by politicians. For example, Bush’s ‘War on Terror’ or Obama’s ‘world without weapons’ – a drone policy that targeted and killed innocent people in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia.Popular geo-politics by filmmakers, artists, and musicians. These geo-political messages target ordinary people in books as inert as Readers Digest or as overt as James Bond books and films. Not to mention the more obvious Captain America.These catalysts of nationalism contain messages that create unhealthy biases in ways that only neuroscience can detect. Neuroscientist Emile Bruneau dedicated his academic and professional career to achieving peace in the world by understanding the negative effects of bias, often fed by governments through media, can have on behavior.As an undergrad he worked as a counselor in Ireland with a non-profit that brought troubled youth riddled with the historic tensions of their Protestant and Catholic upbringing. After a week of successful trust building between these kids, the staff were patting themselves on their altruistic backs for a job well done.And then, unexpectedly, a fight broke out between two boys. The next thing they knew all 129 kids were wailing on each other. He left that experience convinced he and his fellow counselors had somehow made their condition worse. He sought neuroscience to help him uncover the biological evidence behind what he experienced.What Bruneau’s novel research techniques have revealed are three aspects of our intuition that we should evaluate with care, caution, and suspicion: trust, empathy, and dehumanization.Trust: For the first time those Irish kids trusted each other despite their differences. But the instance that trust was broken betrayal set in and with it violence toward the perpetrator. The greater the trust, the greater the fall at the first sign of betrayal. Altruism isn’t always true nor is it always permanent.Empathy: Having empathy is a prized virtue especially in intergroup conflict. Western media has clued into this. Muslim terrorists are portrayed as violent and selfish sociopaths who lack even an ounce of empathy for others. And yet the first woman Palestinian suicide bomber, Wafa Idris, was one of the most caring, sensitive, and selfless members of her community. She even trained as a volunteer medic. Bruneau discovered the measure of one’s empathy is not a predictor of violent behavior. But what is a consistently strong predictor is the gap between empathy for your own in-group relative to the empathy for the out-group.Dehumanization: The sure fire way to reduce empathy for an out-group is to dehumanize them. History is ripe with nation states bombarding their imagined communities with images and words depicting their enemies as animals. As the British colonized Ireland they portrayed the Irish as monkeys. The Germans portrayed Jews as rats. The US pulled, and continue to pull, from a veritable zoo of animals to portray Japanese, Germans, Iranians, Mexicans…the list is embarrassingly long.When the U.S. was negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran Mike Huckabee was quoted as saying, “I think we underestimate the radical nature of these animals who run Iran.” The accompanying graphic, presumably from Fox News, included an illustration of a sewer drain over Iran with insects streaming from it.Bruneau used this occasion to conduct an online experiment. He presented Americans with a picture of the evolution of humans from the hunched chimpanzee to upright homo sapiens. Beneath it were three sliders; one for Americans, Europeans, and Iranians. He then asked them to slide the slider to the appropriate stage in evolution from animal to human for each group. Iranians fell 13 points shy of the reportedly 100% human Americans and Europeans.He conducted similar experiments while people’s brains were being scanned by an MRI machine. When people were shown imagery of out-groups or people in social classes lower than their own, like the homeless, the same region of the brain was activated for those people as for animals.But here’s the good news. Bruneau said he can find small sets people where these effects are minimized. They’re people whose occupations lead them to have empathy for out-groups. For example, Israeli peace activists brainwaves match those of Palestinians. They’re indistinguishable.Bruneau discovered that just five minutes of explaining what happens in our brains is enough for people to shift their behavior toward empathy for members of an out-group. If you reveal the fact that bias exists in all of us, we’re motivated to overcome it.As we continue to be inundated with words and images by academics, intellectuals, think tanks, politicians, pundits, broadcasters, artists, cartoonists, mapmakers and other creators of mass-media, be mindful of how they portray Russians, Belarusians, and Ukrainians. Know that Russian, Ukrainian, American, and European political and commercial institutions have a vested interest in preserving their imagined communities.Those representing the interest of the geo-political states of Russia, China, and the United States will, as always, be using dehumanizing tactics as a way to reduce empathy for members of out-groups while boosting empathy for their own in-groups. It’s this gap, Emile Bruneau warns, that we need to mind.I feel pressure every day to take a side in this war, but I’m trying to resist. Putin must be stopped, that much I know. But if I must choose, I choose ordinary people and other members of our animal world. I choose empathy for the Russian mother whose son is being forced to commit crimes against humanity; empathy for the Jews throughout Ukraine who have experienced extermination attempts at the hands of both Russian and Ukrainian hate groups over the years; empathy for those fighting for their lives in Ukraine, seeking asylum in other lands, and the brave souls who continue to share real images and stories from a living hell brought on by yet another sociopathic imperialist.I am suspicious of attempts by governments and corporations that ask me to trust them, to side with them, given centuries of betrayal. Yet I need government and companies to live a safe and comfortable life. And I need them to act on behalf of the living world and not imagined communities. I seek empathy for all creatures who feel depressed, suppressed, or oppressed by their political and commercial institutions, contained by their imaginary borders, and routinely manipulated through dehumanizing mass media propaganda that only serves to widen humanity’s collective empathy gaps.It is believed that the Slavic people seeking peace in their land said to Rurik, 'Our land is great and rich, but there’s no order in it'. Those words have never been more true. Though, I suspect a Viking ruler lacked empathy for out-groups. But, then again, it was Christians who painted horns on the helmets of Norse sailors to dehumanize them as the devil. Subscribe at interplace.io

Andrej Grubačić is a former teacher at the University of Rojava, founding Chair of Anthropology and Social Change at the California Institute of Integral Studies, author of books such as Don't Mourn, Balkanize!, co-authored Wobblies and Zapatistas with Staughton Lynd and most recently the co-author of Living At The Edges of Capitalism: Adventures In Exile and Mutual Aid with Dennis O'Hearn. Andrej is also the editor of the Journal of World-Systems Research as well as the Kairos imprint at PM Press. For the hour we speak about anarchism, the Yugoslav experiment, exile, World-Systems Analysis, Rojava, his friend David Graeber and other topics. Transcript PDF (Unimposed) – pending Zine (Impopsed PDF) – pending A couple of Grubačić pieces found online referenced: Anarchism, Or The Revolutionary Movement of the Twenty-First Century (Graeber & Grubačić) Don't Mourn, Balkanize! is on The Anarchist Library as a PDF Some further reading suggestions include (more references in upcoming transcript): Daniel Guérin (French, Gay, Libertarian socialist): Balkan Federalism on wikipedia The Living Theatre anarchistic theater group out of NYC (Movement of the Free Spirit by Raoul Vaneigem, out of print but still on AK Press website) The Age of Globalization (pdf) by Benedict Anderson, the updated edition of Under Three Flags: Anarchism and the Anti-Colonial Imagination. Published by Verso, but seems out of print Sho Konishi, Anarchist Modernity: Cooperatism and Japanese-Russian Intellectual Relations in Modern Japan Ilham Khuri-Makdisi, The Eastern Mediterranean and the Making of Global Radicalism, 1860-1914 Marx's correspondence with Vera Zasulich shows his development towards Libertarianism near the end of his life: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/zasulich/index.htm Jason W. Moore (Capitalist World Ecology proposition): ECOLOGY, CAPITAL, AND THE NATURE OF OUR TIMES: ACCUMULATION & CRISIS IN THE CAPITALIST WORLD-ECOLOGY Announcement Anti-Repression in Asheville As a follow up to the episode we did about protests against the homeless sweeps by the city of Asheville, the Asheville Police appears to be serving arrest warrants to people for charges like felony dumping and aiding & abetting felony dumping in relation to the Aston Park protests on Christmas, when the Asheville police arrested multiple journalists from the Asheville Blade as well as others present in the park prior to cufew. If you think this is bullshit and want to help, consider a donation to the Blue Ridge ABC bail & legal defense fund via their venmo, @BlueRidgeABC. You can also send funds to any of The Final Straw's accounts, found at TFSR.WTF/Support, and mention ABC Bail in the comments.

We discuss Benedict Anderson's 1983 work "Imagined Communities" specifically focusing on the origins of national consciousness.

Shownotes: This week, Matt and Cameron take up positions as Sergeants of the Guard in Aleksandr Puskin's historical novella, The Captain's Daughter. We'll be talking about the real history of the Pugachev Uprising, the place of violence in Pushkin's era, and - naturally - about imagined communities. So grab your grapeshot, find your local pretender to the throne, and tune in! Major themes: Is it really fatalist?, My boy Pugachev, Benedict Anderson will never leave us alone 03:45 - It's “Farmer's Daughter” by Rodney Atkins, if anyone's wondering. 34:07 - “Alexandr Pushkin's The Captain's Daughter: A Poetics of Violence” by Alexander Groce 38:01 - Plotting History: The Russian Historical Novel in the Imperial Age by Dan Ungurianu 38: 47 - “Between Nation and Empire: Aleksandr Pushkin's The Captain's Daughter” by Irina Anisimova 46:38 - Close, but no dice. It's The History of Pugachev 53: 45 - “Grinev the Trickster: Reading the Paradoxes of Pushkin's The Captain's Daughter” by Polina Rikoun The music used in this episode was “soviet march,” by Toasted Tomatoes. You can find more of their work on Bandcamp and Youtube. Follow us on Instagram, check out our website, if you're so inclined, check out our Patreon!

What keeps a nation together? For political scientist Benedict Anderson, it was the idea of the 'imagined community'. Although people from different backgrounds in a country might not know one another, they could imagine themselves as part of the same larger story. Peter Pomerantsev looks at how we can survive as a society when the idea of the 'imagined community' is under strain. Is it too late to find any commonality? Or are there other ways of imagining the future of the nation? Producer Ant Adeane Editor Jasper Corbett

Join Harry and Philip as they conclude their discussion of myth and politics, re-examining the relationship between belief and material reality, and evaluating the prospects for a global social narrative. What is the relationship between material conditions and myth or belief in myth? Is a global myth or universal human social identity possible? What principal lesson can we learn about democracy from a discussion of political myths? Next week we'll be covering a new topic, so stay tuned! -- https://www.spectacles.news/birds-eye-myth-and-materialism-prospects-for-global-myth/ (To comment on this episode or sign up for our newsletter, click here.)https://spectacles-insight.captivate.fm/listen (To listen to written articles from Spectacles read aloud, click here.)Further ReadingImagined Communities, by Benedict Anderson. "Anarchy is what States Make of It," by Alexander Wendt. "https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-in-his-own-words-english (Emmanuel Macron in his own words (English)," by The Economist.) Readings from previous episodes in this series of Bird's Eye. Table of Contents00:00:00 - Intro & Housekeeping 00:00:37 - Celebrities sing Imagine by John Lennon 00:01:51 - Why the hell would we ever play that? 00:02:59 - Today's topic 00:03:21 - Main Questions 00:00:33 - What is the relationship between myth and reality? 00:04:16 - Is a global, rather than national, myth possible? 00:04:42 - What is liberal democracy's greatest challenge regarding myth? 00:06:22 - Series Recap and Refresher 00:06:32 - Ep. 2: Myth & American Politics 00:08:04 - Ep. 3: QAnon & The Future of American Myth — 00:12:09 - Post-truth politics 00:19:15 - Ep. 1: The Basics of Myth & Politics 00:20:04 - Global Myth 00:20:22 - The history of non-national myths 00:22:34 - The history of super-national myths: Christianity 00:24:14 - The history of the growing scale of myth: Germany 00:29:25 - Contemporary proofs for global myth: UN 00:31:29 - Contemporary proofs for global myth: EU 00:34:10 - The challenges of European myth-making 00:37:27 - Contemporary failings of global myth: NATO 00:42:51 - Alien invasion? Independence Day style global team-up? 00:43:56 - The constant in-group/out-group dynamic: Christianity, Germany, EU 00:47:35 - The shortcomings of global human myths, human rights 00:50:05 - The role of assimilation 00:51:28 - The force/cohesion dynamic in Christian Europe & Islamic empires 00:55:18 - Myth as a key to free society 00:57:14 - The Central Democratic Challenge with Myth 00:58:08 - The promise of neither force nor cohesion 01:00:00 - Liberalism's sneaky coercion 01:01:28 - Why Liberal Democracy cannot escape myth 01:07:15 - Signing Off

Matsyanyaaya #1: What Does Pakistan’s Cadmean Victory in Afghanistan Mean for IndiaBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Pranay Kotasthane(This is a draft of my article which appeared first in Times of India’s Tuesday, August 23rd edition.)Taliban's takeover of Kabul is forcing India to reassess its aims and objectives concerning Afghanistan. Of primary interest is the impact of this development on Pakistan. On this question, two views have come to light over the last few days.The first view cautions against the increase in terrorism from Pakistan. The recommendation arising from this view is that India needs to coalesce anti-Pakistan factions in Afghanistan. The counter-view focuses on the inevitability of a split between the Taliban and Pakistan. The assumption being that once the Taliban assumes political control over Afghanistan, it is bound to take some stances that will go against the interests of its sponsor. The recommendation arising from this view is that India should sit back. It should let things unfold because Pakistan's victory is a Cadmean one — it comes with massive costs for Pakistan's economy, society, and politics.Which of these two divergent views is likely to play out?  To understand what the Taliban's victory means for Pakistan — and hence India — it is useful to model Pakistan as two geopolitical entities, not one. The first entity is a seemingly normal Pakistani state, presumably concerned first and foremost with the peace and prosperity of its citizens. The second entity is what my colleague Nitin Pai has named the Pakistani military-jihadi complex (MJC). Comprising the military, militant, radical Islamist and political-economic nodes, the MJC pursues domestic and foreign policies to ensure its survival and dominance. For the MJC, positioning and defeating the existential enemy — India — is key to ensure its hold over the other Pakistan.Taliban's takeover of Afghanistan will be perceived differently by these two Pakistani entities. The non-MJC Pakistan would be worried about the Taliban's march to power. It would fear the spillover of terrorism inside its borders, orchestrated by groups such as the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan. Politically, a powerful Taliban would pose the threat of breathing new life in the Durand Line question. On the economic front, the prospect of a dependent Taliban government further draining Pakistan's dwindling resources would be another cause of concern. In short, if this entity were in charge of Pakistan's foreign policy, it wouldn't have doggedly invested in the Taliban.That's quite clearly not the case. Taliban's takeover, on the other hand, is a strategic victory for the MJC. Over the last two decades, it has played a risky game sheltering and guiding the Taliban's actions while also supporting the US in its Afghanistan campaign. When things went wrong, the MJC was able to pass the blame to the other, weaker Pakistan. Recently, it played a role in steering the Afghan Taliban to sign the Doha agreement. It worked over the last two decades to reduce the Indian economic and political footprint in Afghanistan. Given the efforts it has put in, the MJC is sure to perceive the Taliban's comeback as an indisputable victory. This success would bolster the MJC's strategy of long-term commitment to terrorist groups. More importantly, it consolidates its relative dominance over the other Pakistan.  How does this affect India?As the MJC's domestic position strengthens, its anti-India aims will grow stronger. There is a possibility of the MJC moving its terror outfits to Loya Paktika in eastern Afghanistan, a hotbed of anti-India activities in the past. This scenario would allow the MJC to use terrorism against India while claiming it has no control over these elements.Many commentators have argued that the world in 2021 will not let off perpetrators of terrorism easily. But they seem to forget that the return of the Taliban illustrates that the opposite is true. As long as terrorism is portrayed as an instrument of a domestic insurgency, the world will continue to look away. For instance, the Taliban continued terrorist attacks inside Afghanistan even as it was negotiating with the US at Doha. And yet, the US, UK, Russia, and China chose to bring the group back in power.  Second, to see the MJC threat from the issue of terrorism alone is to miss the bigger picture. By demonstrating the success of its policies in Afghanistan, the MJC would be energised to use other methods of asymmetric warfare against India. More than the means, the Taliban's victory is the reaffirmation of its objectives.    What should India do?First and foremost, India must prepare for a reduced economic and diplomatic footprint in Afghanistan. Given the positive role India has played there over the last two decades, a sunk cost fallacy might drive India to make overtures to the Taliban. Such a policy is unlikely to pay dividends. The MJC will ensure that India's presence is severely restricted. In Afghanistan, it would be better to wait for the tide to change.  Second, India would need to raise its guard on the Pakistan border. With the perceived threat of Indian presence close to Balochistan going away, the MJC is likely to be more adventurous in using conventional and non-conventional warfare against India. Domestically, it means returning Jammu & Kashmir to near-normalcy becomes all the more urgent. More the discontent there, the easier it would be for the MJC to exploit the situation.  Third, strengthen the partnership with the US. The MJC has always been dependent on external benefactors for its survival. While China is playing that role today, it alone is insufficient to bear the burden. The MJC will be desperate to get the US to finance its ambitions based on its credentials to influence outcomes in Afghanistan. Hence, it's vital that India's relationship with the US must remain stronger than the relationship that MJC has with the US. Finally, amidst the current focus on US failures in Afghanistan, it shouldn't be forgotten that both India and the US need each other to confront the bigger strategic challenge: China.Regardless of the turn that Taliban-Pakistan relations take, an ideological victory for the MJC is bound to have repercussions in India. India must prepare to face the renewed challenge. (This is a draft of my article which appeared first in Times of India’s Tuesday, August 23rd edition.)India Policy Watch: Our Past, Our FutureInsights on burning policy issues in India- RSJA topic we often like to explore here is the history of thought. We cover a fair amount of western philosophy and we have tried gamely to include Indic thought while writing about current issues. In fact, a recurring section on international relations in this newsletter is called ‘matsyanyaya’. I’m no expert but I suspect writing here has helped me with a point of view on the Indian state and its relation to the history of Indian thought. Broadly, I have made three points on this over multiple editions:A nation is an imagined community and any newly independent State had to work on constructing this imagination. This meant they had to make three moves. One, they had to have a modern conception of themselves which was distinct from their past. Two, to make this ‘modernity’ acceptable, they had to present this conception as a ‘reawakening’ of their community. This gave them a link to their past. This past was a living truth for the members of this community and it couldn’t simply be erased. Three, historians were then called in to rewrite the past which served this narrative. This is the classic Benedict Anderson recipe and India is a fine example of using it in 1947. (Edition # 62)The Indian state formed post-independence was based on a radical act of forgetting the past. The Indian constitution wasn’t merely a legal framework to run the state. It was also a tool for social revolution. Society wasn’t trusted to reform itself with the speed that was necessary for India to modernise. It had to be induced from the outside by the state. (Edition #28)The hope was the liberal state would change the society before it could catch up. This hasn’t turned out to be true. Now the society looks likely to change the state in its image. And what’s the society like today? Like Hazari Prasad Dwivedi, once put it: ‘jab dil bhara ho aur dimaag khali hai’. Its heart is full of emotional torment but its mind is devoid of imagination. The society has somewhat vague notions of its ancient glory and civilisational sense of superiority because of it. But it’s not sure of what to make of it in today’s world. (Edition # 118 and Edition #128)So, I was happy to pick up Pavan K. Varma’s new book The Great Hindu Civilisation: Achievement, Neglect, Bias and the Way Forwardwhich as the name suggests covers these grounds. Varma is a former civil servant and a prolific writer whose works I have found tremendously engaging. Over the years he has written on a wide range of subjects - the great Indian epics, Ghalib and Gulzar, the Indian middle class, Kamasutra, Krishna and Draupadi. His last book was a well-researched biography of Adi Shankaracharya that also doubled up as a short introduction to various schools of Hindu philosophy with a special emphasis on Vedanta. Suppressing A Great CivilisationIn The Great Hindu Civilisation (‘TGHC’), Varma makes three arguments based on his deep understanding of ancient Indian texts and his scholarship on Indian history:Argument 1: India is a civilisational state. The achievements of ancient India in philosophy, metaphysics, arts, statecraft and science are unparalleled. These have been lost to us. We must reclaim their wisdom and apply it to our lives. Varma writes:Above all, it is my premise that this Hindu civilisation has few parallels in terms of the cerebral energy invested in it…. It was sustained by the unrelenting application of mind, in every field—metaphysics, philosophy, art, creativity, polity, society, science and economics. Nothing in it was random or happenstance. … When people are ruptured from their heritage, they are essentially rootless, not always lacking proficiency in their specific area of work, but essentially deracinated, mimic people, inured to another’s culture more than their own. Hindu civilisation was based on moulik soch or original thought, where each aspect of creativity was studied, examined, interrogated, discussed and experimented upon in the search for excellence. But when this great legacy was summarily devalued and looked upon as a liability to modernity, it left an entire people adrift from their cultural moorings, lacking authenticity and becoming a derivative people.Argument 2: Marxist historians, western Hinduphobic intellectuals, deracinated Indians and a self-serving Indian elite have long played a charade that there’s hardly anything real as a Hindu civilisation. This has given us a distorted picture of our past, about the impact of Islamic invaders and British colonialism on our culture and has prevented any honest inquiry into the real achievements of our civilisation. A false fear of Hindu aggrandisement is repeatedly stoked up at any such pursuit. The usual cast of deracinated suspects is named - Macaulay, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Amartya Sen, Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib, Wendy Doniger and, of course, Nehru. Though Varma cushions the jabs on Nehru a bit by blaming it on his associates or his naiveté. As he argues:Marxist historians devalue the civilisational tag of ancient India by analysing it exclusively in class and economic terms. Certainly, this is also one way of studying the past, but the problem is twofold. Firstly, this approach excludes all other dimensions, and insists that this is the only way to evaluate history. Secondly, the tools used are highly derivative, an almost complete transplant of Marx’s outdated, uninformed and stereotypical analytical framework in the Indian context.There is, of course, a basic irony in Hinduism’s derogation by some ‘liberals’. One would have thought that liberal opinion would be appreciative of a religion that relies less on dogma and more on debate. It would make a virtue of the fact that Hinduism enables diversity to thrive when many other faiths are prescriptive and rely on diktat. However, instead of lauding this eclecticism, they conclude that Hinduism is only about diversity ad infinitum.  Argument 3: Since the Hindu society has been systematically denied its real history, reactionary and lumpen elements have appropriated the task of peddling their version of history. This is the price to pay for distorting history instead of facing up to the truth. If we have to counter the thugs who have political and state patronage today, we have to make the ordinary Indians truly aware of their real Hindu heritage. This knowledge of the liberal, encompassing nature of Hindu philosophy is the best antidote to any fundamentalist ideology. He writes:The prescriptive element that the new, so-called evangelists of Hinduism are bringing in is anathema for most Hindus. Hinduism has always been a way of life. Hindus don’t like to be told what to do and what not to do, what to eat and what to drink, what to wear and how to behave, what to watch and what to read, who to meet and who not to, how to practise their religion and how to be good Hindus.The real danger is that we are witnessing the emergence of a lumpen leadership that believes that it has a monopoly to interpret Hinduism and Hindu civilisation. Since time immemorial, Hindus have faced many travails and setbacks but have survived them by drawing upon the great strengths of their culture: tradition and faith. Even in the greatest adversity, Hinduism have never allowed its core cerebration and idealism to be compromised. So What?My reaction while reading the book ranged from vigorous nods of approval to what is colloquially referred to as ‘abey yaar’. I will elaborate further here.Firstly, I agree with Varma about India being a civilisational state and Hinduism or sanatanadharma being a common cultural thread that runs through the length and breadth of this land. This is a lived experience for all of us and Varma quotes many examples of common rituals and practices that have been around for centuries to back this assertion. Denying this is an exercise in futility and serves no useful purpose except alienating a large section of Indians. Secondly, I’m happy to concede Varma’s contention that ancient Hindu civilisation was the pinnacle of human achievement during its time. “There was a holistic interconnectedness that informed it, and this unified vision permeated all aspects of its highly complex intellectual construct.”   Fair enough. A bit over the top but that’s fine. My question is what do we do with such an ancient but highly complex intellectual construct now? Almost every text Varma refers to was written hundreds of years before CE. Many of these are metatexts unmoored from their context or what formed the basis for such scholarship. One could read the hymns of Rig Veda on the conception of the universe today but what does that do to our understanding of science. To merely say it is similar to what quantum physics postulates today has limited meaning. It is the equivalent of saying Da Vinci designed all sorts of futuristic machines so let’s study him for scientific insights today. Even Arthashastra can be read to appreciate the philosophy of statecraft and economics of ancient India but beyond a concept or two that might be relevant today, what purpose will it serve? The problem here is there has been no reinterpretation or updates on these texts over two thousand years. I come from a town that houses one of the four mathas (seats) of Shankaracharya. I always wondered what stopped the scholars of the matha to do more to make their knowledge accessible. Resources? Scholarship? Interest? My personal experience suggests even they do not know what to do with this knowledge in the modern world. To draw a parallel, the reason a few texts of Greek philosophers are still taught selectively in western universities is because many philosophers of the renaissance and enlightenment used them to build further on their thoughts on ethics, politics and the state . Nobody reads their views on science, for instance, anymore. That’s because later philosophers falsified it. Similarly, there’s an unbroken chain of thinking from Adam Smith to a Piketty or a Sowell (choose your poison) today. So, it makes sense to selectively read Smith to get a basic understanding of how economic thought has evolved and then apply it further today. This is missing with the great ancient texts that hold Varma in raptures. How will reading texts of Aryabhatta and Bhaskara help mathematics students of today? Knowing about them could be useful to impress others about our great mathematical tradition but what beyond that? Will our rank on PISA change because of it? I suspect not. I will be keen to hear from readers on this.Varma also goes overboard at places and loses objectivity. Natya Shastra was probably a great achievement as a treatise on arts and theatre. But to imagine that western thought on aesthetics began from a series of articles on ‘The Pleasures of the Imagination’, a 1712 piece by Joseph Addison in the Spectator, as he writes, is to ignore the entire history of ancient Greek playwrights or even Shakespeare whose plays were running in London almost a hundred years before Addison’s articles. Here Varma possibly betrays the same flaws he accuses the likes of Doniger or Romila Thapar through the book. Anyway, I find no convincing answer from Varma on how a deeper understanding of these texts will help us today. Some kind of pride and a sense of identity is alluded to as the benefits through the book but I failed to appreciate its material manifestation.Thirdly, Varma talks about caste and patriarchy in Hindu civilisation but almost in passing. There are possibly 15 pages (if that) on this topic across the book. Even in them, Varma talks about the usual tropes first. That the original Hindu texts were suffused with liberal doctrine, how Shankara came across a Chandala in Kashi and placed him at par with the Brahmin or the usual list of women of ancient India - Gargi, Maitreyi or even the fictional Draupadi - to suggest how open Hinduism in its original version was. Only after this does Varma go on for a few pages on how things went bad over time. Finally, he writes:However, in spite of such high-minded protestations, there is no denying that the working of caste in actual social practice was a pervasive evil. It was—and is—an indelible blot on the civilisational legacy of India; it kept large parts of the populace institutionally cut-off from the many achievements of Hindu India, and also unleashed inhuman suffering for no other reason than the accident of birth.Yet, in spite of such unforgiveable failings, the overall achievements of this period of our history are truly remarkable, and are crying out for a much delayed recognition. What we need to realise is that across the length and breadth of Bharatvarsha, there evolved, over millennia, a civilisation that showed a profound application of mind to every aspect of organised as well as abstract human behaviour. It demonstrated the capacity of great and courageous divergent thinking, refusing to restrict itself to simplistic certitudes, and a willingness to wade deep into concepts and constructs that challenged conventional thought. Varma thinks of caste as an unforgivable failing. Is it a mere failing? Or, is it, as it has been often argued, the inevitable outcome of our civilisational construct? Who can tell? If after all these centuries, the one pervasive cultural reality that has prevailed in our society is caste, how should we think about it? The same argument holds for patriarchy and the place of women in our society. The reclaiming of the wisdom of the texts that Varma advocates - can it be done without facing up to the ‘material’ reality of caste and patriarchy that will accompany it? At abstract, Varma may be right. But the act of reclaiming won’t restrict itself to the realm of the abstract. I will come back to this at the end of the piece. Fourthly, is Varma the first scholar to question the version of our history that has been fed to us by the colonialist academia? Is he the first to lament the state of the culturally unmoored Indian elite and educated class who need to be brought home to the glory of our ancient civilisation? If not, what happened to previous such attempts? This is an area that has held my interest for a few years. And I’d like to highlight two 20th century intellectuals who spent their lifetime studying ancient Indian texts, translating them and looking to find their relevance in the modern context - Shri Aurobindo and Hazari Prasad Dwivedi. These are no ordinary names. They were first-rate intellectuals with rare felicity in both western and eastern philosophies. Varma quotes Aurobindo a few times in the book. So, what did they conclude? I’m going to stick my neck out and make some broad generalisation here. Aurobindo started this pursuit with an aim to find the modern relevance of our ancient texts and to spread it far and wide. What did he end up with? A very personal journey into the self that was mystical and detached from the material. Anything else couldn’t be transferred. That’s what he concluded. Dwivedi translated some of the great works of our past and wrote on our literary history in Hindi. But, in the end, he had to contend with the reality of the present. If we were such a great civilisation, why is our present the way it is? And he wasn’t content blaming the colonial rule or our lack of appreciation of our past. There was something else that was missing. Now you could persuade me to believe it was the ‘foreign’ invaders for over thousand years that’s responsible for our present. Maybe it is true. But that rupture is a reality and that discontinuity is so large that any attempt to bridge it through a modern reinterpretation of ancient texts can only be an academic ‘feel good’ exercise. Not a way forward to the future. Separately, it is worth pointing out here another area where I think Varma had a weak argument. How did Hinduism survive the Islamic or Turkish onslaught and the Mughal hegemony while other countries like Indonesia or Malaysia turned Muslim under the sword. This is a question that’s often asked in many debates of this kind. Varma’s answer is below:The Bhakti movement was Hinduism’s response to the violent and proselytising Islamic invasion. In this sense, it was as much about renewal as it was about self-preservation. If Hinduism had not shown the suppleness and energy to reinvent itself, and had remained brittle and fossilised as in earlier structures without the mass support enabled by the Bhakti movement, it may have suffered the same fate that befell it (and Buddhism) in Indonesia with the advent of Islam.   There are two problems with this thesis. One, the Bhakti movement in many areas of India predate the Islamic conquest of those areas. Between the 10th-12th centuries, large parts of West, South and East India where the Bhakti movement gained strength were still under Hindu (or Jain) kings. Two, what do a cursory look at the Bhakti movement and its output reveal? Women and those from the bottom of the social pyramid often led the way. Their songs spoke of their desire to be one with God without an intermediary in between. Those who opposed them were mostly upper-caste Hindu men. The Bhakti movement was indeed a rupture in Indian cultural history. But, to me, it appears it was more an internal response of the most exploited section of Hinduism to its entrenched caste establishment. Not to Islam. Fifthly, Varma is sincere in his defence of real Hinduism against what he calls the “illiterate bigotry of the self-anointed new ‘protectors’ of Hinduism.” He writes:Knowledge is a great enabler. Anyone who has studied Hinduism, or acquired even a basic familiarity about its lofty eclecticism and deep cerebration, would laugh out of the room those who seek to conflate this great faith only with violence and exclusion. Varma almost thinks the ‘lumpenisation’ of Hinduism (as he calls it) is a phenomenon in the abstract that has arisen because people don’t know real Hinduism. It might be true but empirical evidence goes against it. Any ‘nationalist’ exercise of reclaiming the past after the advent of modern nation-states runs the risk of ‘instrumentalising’ this past for political gains in the present. This holds true everywhere - in pre-WW2 Germany or Japan, in current-day Turkey and in communist China. For instance, there’s nothing that the Party in China learns from Confucius or some ancient Han dynasty view of the Middle Kingdom that it sincerely wants to apply today. It is a mere ‘instrument’ to homogenise its people, perpetuate the party supremacy or use it for diplomatic parleys with other nations. Varma believes one can ‘thread the needle’ by taking the great and the good from the past while avoiding the instrumental use of it which manifests in form of bigotry and minority persecution. But it is a difficult task. So here’s the thing. How should I think of Nehru, Ambedkar and other ‘liberals’? Those who decided to use the Constitution to rid India of the ‘deadwood of the past’. One way to think of them is as intellectuals who appreciated the glory of our ancient past but realised any kind of reclaiming of that past in the modern conception of the state will bring along with it all the baggage and the ‘deadwood’. They feared the good of that past will be buried soon under the ‘unforgivable failings’ that accompany it. So, they let it be. And decided to begin afresh. Varma is in a different reality today. He sees the hijacking of Hinduism, as he would put it, in front of his eyes. The ‘instrumental’ use of religion for narrow purposes by those who don’t understand it at all. Yet, he hopes it is possible to thread the needle between the good and the bad of the past. The likes of Nehru feared this would happen and tried to avoid it. Varma finds it around him and yet wants to go down that path. Maybe because he’s a good man and an optimist. Having read him over the years, I’d like to believe so. A Framework a Week: How to Analyse an AnalysisTools for thinking public policy— Pranay KotasthaneIf I were given the power to change one subject in school syllabi, I would introduce analytical thinking. In the Information Age, we are exposed to several opinions on any given topic. Impactful analogies and powerful metaphors can change our thinking about a topic. Sometimes, our views end up being a regurgitation of the last good opinion piece we’ve come across. Hence, wouldn’t it be great if we have a framework to analyse opinions, whether in the form of papers, articles, or books? That’s where Analytical Thinking comes in. To systematically think about how we think can help us deeply reflect on an opinion instead of being swayed by the fast brain into outrage or vehement agreement. Last week, I revisited this eightfold path for analysing the logic of a book/article/paper in the book The Thinker's Guide to Analytic Thinking by Linda Elder and Richard Paul. The framework forces us to reflect on eight dimensions:The main purpose of this article is ____. (Here you are trying to state, as accurately as possible, the author’s intent in writing the article. What was the author trying to accomplish?)The key question that the author is addressing is ____. (Your goal is to figure out the key question that was in the mind of the author when he/she wrote the article. What was the key question addressed in the article?)The most important information in this article is ____. (You want to identify the key information the author used, or presupposed, in the article to support his/her main arguments. Here you are looking for facts, experiences, and/or data the author is using to support his/her conclusions.)The main inferences in this article are ___ (You want to identify the most important conclusions the author comes to and presents in the article).The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are) __. By these concepts the author means __. (To identify these ideas, ask yourself: What are the most important ideas that you would have to know to understand the author’s line of reasoning? Then briefly elaborate what the author means by these ideas.)The main assumption(s) underlying the author’s thinking is (are) _ (Ask yourself: What is the author taking for granted that might be questioned? The assumptions are generalizations that the author does not think he/she has to defend in the context of writing the article, and they are usually unstated. This is where the author’s thinking logically begins.)If we accept this line of reasoning (completely or partially), the implications are ___. (What consequences are likely to follow if people take the author’s line of reasoning seriously? Here you are to pursue the logical implications of the author’s position. You should include implications that the author states, and also those that the author does not state.) If we fail to accept this line of reasoning, the implications are __. (What consequences are likely to follow if people ignore the author’s reasoning?)The main point(s) of view presented in this article is (are) _. (The main question you are trying to answer here is: What is the author looking at, and how is he/she seeing it? For example, in this mini-guide we are looking at “analysis” and seeing it “as requiring one to understand” and routinely apply the elements of reasoning when thinking through problems, issues, subjects, etc.).[Elder, Linda; Paul, Richard. The Thinker's Guide to Analytic Thinking (Kindle Locations 353-365). Foundation for Critical Thinking. Kindle Edition]The framework is intense but is super helpful in analysing topics you want to master. It shares similarities with the Indian debating tradition called the purva paksha — representing your opponent’s view faithfully before criticising it. Matsyanyaaya #2: US Credibility and India’s OptionsBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Pranay KotasthaneThe humanitarian crisis triggered by a botched US withdrawal has sparked an old debate on reliability in international relations. In several countries which count themselves as US partners, the question being posed is: will the US prove to be a fickle partner, like it did in Afghanistan?For a long time, I have wondered if using terms such as reliability or reputation is a case of category error. Trust, reliability, all-weather friendship apply to human relationships. Transplanting these ideas to an amoral domain such as international relations does not make sense, is what I believed. The current debate surrounding US credibility helped me update my priors. First up, if you want to read the literature on reliability and reputation in international relations, Paul Poast has a typically useful Twitter thread compiling important works on this topic. Out of these articles, Don Casler’s post stands out in its clarity. He writes in Duck of Minerva:“One major issue in discourse about credibility is that policy and media elites often conflate a group of interrelated but distinct concepts: credibility, reputation, and resolve.Credibility is the perceived likelihood that an actor will follow through on her threats or promises. Reputation is a belief about an actor’s persistent characteristics or tendencies based on her past behavior. Resolve is the willingness to stand firm and pay costs in the face of pressure to back down.In theory, an actor’s reputation for resolve — along with her capabilities and interests — contributes to her credibility by shaping observers’ estimates whether she is likely to follow through on her commitments.However, reputation and credibility are ultimately beliefs held by others. If we want to predict how foreign governments will react to U.S. foreign policy decisions, then we need to understand their theories about how the world works.” The last line is important from the Indian perspective. The sense of being wronged by the west is a continuing strand in India’s conception of the world. Specifically, the US’ anti-India stance in the 1971 war continues to cast a long shadow over India-US relations. The cohort that already holds these views will use the US withdrawal to reaffirm its scepticism.Even so, I would argue that this perceived lack of US credibility is not the most important determinant of India-US relations for three reasons:One, the younger cohort of millennials and post-millennials perceive the US differently. Their imagination about the US is shaped by the India-US civil nuclear deal, a decline in US-Pakistan bonhomie, and perhaps most importantly, the deep connections between the markets and societies in the two countries. Two, a common strategic adversary — China — reduces the salience of the reputation question. In an amoral setting, interests trump reputational concerns. When facing a powerful common adversary, you don’t get to pick or change your partners. Seen this way, China’s aggressive and arrogant approach further cements the India-US relationship. Perhaps, this would be a good time for the Quad to make a few major announcements on trade and technology to douse the reputation question. Three, the US backing of the Pakistani military-jihadi complex is less of a problem than it was a decade ago. The US administration’s statements on Kashmir and Balakot airstrikes are vastly different from what the older cohort of policymakers in India is used to. The US would do well to continue this strategy instead of empowering the military-jihadi complex with the false hope that it would make the Taliban behave. So, what do you think? In a world with just two options, should India choose a less reliable, more powerful partner or a more reliable, less powerful partner? HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Video] Pavan K. Varma talks about his book The Great Hindu Civilisation at HLF with Advaita Kala. I might have been a tad unfair about some arguments of Varma. So, it is best to read the book or listen to him directly.[Podcast] Ghazala Wahab was on Puliyabaazi discussing Indian Islam and its variants. In times when Hindu-Muslim bayaanbaazi is far more prevalent, we believe conversations such as these can help dismantle false notions the two communities hold. [Survey] Takshashila has put out India’s Global Outlook Survey. The survey is an effort to bridge the knowledge gap around how Indian policymakers, the strategic affairs community and ordinary citizens view India’s role in the world. Do take the survey. Get on the email list at publicpolicy.substack.com

What exactly is going on between India and China? When cooperation would lead to a win-win game, why is there conflict? Kanti Bajpai joins Amit Varma in episode 234 of The Seen and the Unseen to share his Four Ps framework for understanding this conflict. Also discussed: academia, public intellectuals, how one learns, and why writing and teaching make you a better thinker Also check out: 1. India Versus China : Why They Are Not Friends -- Kanti Bajpai. 2. Roots of Terrorism -- Kanti Bajpai. 3. Kanti Bajpai on Amazon. 4. The China Dude Is in the House -- Episode 231 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Manoj Kewalramani). 5. The Dragon and the Elephant — Episode 181 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Hamsini Hariharan & Shibani Mehta). 6. What Does China Want? — Episode 143 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Manoj Kewalramani). 7. Understanding Terrorism -- Amit Varma's 2007 review of Alan Krueger's What Makes a Terorrist.8. Soft Power: The Means To Success In World Politics -- Joseph Nye. 9. The Future of Power -- Joseph Nye. 10. Roam Research. 11. Why India and China Are Not Friends -- Kanti Bajpai on The Grand Tamasha podcast, hosted by Milan Vaishnav. 12. A Cricket Tragic Celebrates the Game -- Episode 201 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Ramachandra Guha). 13. The Hedgehog And The Fox -- Isaiah Berlin. 14. Kishore Mahbubani on Amazon. 15. Imagined Communities -- Benedict Anderson. 16. Memories and Things -- Episode 195 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Aanchal Malhotra). 17. The Mahatma and the Poet — The Tagore-Gandhi debates. 18. From Heaven Lake -- Vikram Seth. 19. Finding India in China -- Anurag Viswanath. 20. Strangers across the Border -- Reshma Patil. Please subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! And check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing.

Early 20th century Southeast Asia was arguably home to the once of the most vibrant and diverse caldrons of revolutionary ferment in world history. Revolts against Western imperialism and traditional socio-economic structures developed into a range of utopian experiments. In Republicanism, Communism, Islam: Cosmopolitan Origins of Revolution in Southeast Asia (Cornell UP, 2021), John T. Sidel argues that in order to understand these revolutions we must denationalize, internationalize, and transnationalism our analysis. Multiple forms of cosmopolitanism produced the Filipino revolt against Spanish rule, the Indonesian struggle from independence from the Dutch, and the Vietnamese fight against the French empire and for a Marxist utopia. Sidel highlights Southeast Asia's often surprising global connections. Professor Sidel received his BA and MA from Yale University and his PhD from Cornell University and was fortunate enough to have been mentored by both James C. Scott and Benedict Anderson. He is the author of Capital, Coercion, and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines (Stanford University Press, 1999), Riots, Pogroms, Jihad: Religious Violence in Indonesia (Cornell University Press, 2006), and The Islamist Threat in Southeast Asia: A Reassessment (East-West Center, 2007). He has also co-authored Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century: Colonial Legacies, Postcolonial Trajectories and Thinking and Working Politically in Development: Coalitions for Change in the Philippines. Dr. Sidel was previously at the School of Oriental and African Studies but since 2004 has held the Sir Patrick Gillam Chair in International and Comparative Politics in the Departments of Government and International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Michael G. Vann is a professor of world history at California State University, Sacramento. A specialist in imperialism and the Cold War in Southeast Asia, he is the author of The Great Hanoi Rat Hunt: Empires, Disease, and Modernity in French Colonial Vietnam (Oxford University Press, 2018). When he's not reading or talking about new books with smart people, Mike can be found surfing in Santa Cruz, California. Follow Mike on Twitter: @MichaelGVann. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/southeast-asian-studies

Early 20th century Southeast Asia was arguably home to the once of the most vibrant and diverse caldrons of revolutionary ferment in world history. Revolts against Western imperialism and traditional socio-economic structures developed into a range of utopian experiments. In Republicanism, Communism, Islam: Cosmopolitan Origins of Revolution in Southeast Asia (Cornell UP, 2021), John T. Sidel argues that in order to understand these revolutions we must denationalize, internationalize, and transnationalism our analysis. Multiple forms of cosmopolitanism produced the Filipino revolt against Spanish rule, the Indonesian struggle from independence from the Dutch, and the Vietnamese fight against the French empire and for a Marxist utopia. Sidel highlights Southeast Asia's often surprising global connections. Professor Sidel received his BA and MA from Yale University and his PhD from Cornell University and was fortunate enough to have been mentored by both James C. Scott and Benedict Anderson. He is the author of Capital, Coercion, and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines (Stanford University Press, 1999), Riots, Pogroms, Jihad: Religious Violence in Indonesia (Cornell University Press, 2006), and The Islamist Threat in Southeast Asia: A Reassessment (East-West Center, 2007). He has also co-authored Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century: Colonial Legacies, Postcolonial Trajectories and Thinking and Working Politically in Development: Coalitions for Change in the Philippines. Dr. Sidel was previously at the School of Oriental and African Studies but since 2004 has held the Sir Patrick Gillam Chair in International and Comparative Politics in the Departments of Government and International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Michael G. Vann is a professor of world history at California State University, Sacramento. A specialist in imperialism and the Cold War in Southeast Asia, he is the author of The Great Hanoi Rat Hunt: Empires, Disease, and Modernity in French Colonial Vietnam (Oxford University Press, 2018). When he's not reading or talking about new books with smart people, Mike can be found surfing in Santa Cruz, California. Follow Mike on Twitter: @MichaelGVann. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/islamic-studies

Early 20th century Southeast Asia was arguably home to the once of the most vibrant and diverse caldrons of revolutionary ferment in world history. Revolts against Western imperialism and traditional socio-economic structures developed into a range of utopian experiments. In Republicanism, Communism, Islam: Cosmopolitan Origins of Revolution in Southeast Asia (Cornell UP, 2021), John T. Sidel argues that in order to understand these revolutions we must denationalize, internationalize, and transnationalism our analysis. Multiple forms of cosmopolitanism produced the Filipino revolt against Spanish rule, the Indonesian struggle from independence from the Dutch, and the Vietnamese fight against the French empire and for a Marxist utopia. Sidel highlights Southeast Asia's often surprising global connections. Professor Sidel received his BA and MA from Yale University and his PhD from Cornell University and was fortunate enough to have been mentored by both James C. Scott and Benedict Anderson. He is the author of Capital, Coercion, and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines (Stanford University Press, 1999), Riots, Pogroms, Jihad: Religious Violence in Indonesia (Cornell University Press, 2006), and The Islamist Threat in Southeast Asia: A Reassessment (East-West Center, 2007). He has also co-authored Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century: Colonial Legacies, Postcolonial Trajectories and Thinking and Working Politically in Development: Coalitions for Change in the Philippines. Dr. Sidel was previously at the School of Oriental and African Studies but since 2004 has held the Sir Patrick Gillam Chair in International and Comparative Politics in the Departments of Government and International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Michael G. Vann is a professor of world history at California State University, Sacramento. A specialist in imperialism and the Cold War in Southeast Asia, he is the author of The Great Hanoi Rat Hunt: Empires, Disease, and Modernity in French Colonial Vietnam (Oxford University Press, 2018). When he's not reading or talking about new books with smart people, Mike can be found surfing in Santa Cruz, California. Follow Mike on Twitter: @MichaelGVann. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Imagine this... imagined communities! In this episode, Hannah and Marcelle talk all about the Triwizard Tournament and the Goblet of Fire's relationship to nation states and nationalism.If you've read this book and thought, "Huh... why are they all rooting for Ireland?" you may finally find yourself with some answers. And if you've just celebrated Canada Day or the Fourth of July or you're just thinking about borders and patriotism (as one does), you won't be disappointed – Hannah and Marcelle talk all about the formation of communities (imagined or not) in and outside of the Harry Potter world through a thorough overview of scholar Benedict Anderson's work and some light bullying of him as well, (of course).Note: In this episode we refer to Uganda as the only African nation mentioned in the series, but we talk about Egypt a bit earlier on! Our mistake!Be sure to follow Witch, Please on Twitter and Instagram @ohwitchplease and let us know what you think of the episode through a review on Apple Podcasts. As always, you can join our Patreon for exclusive content including bonus interviews, Q&As, Watch Alongs and more — our tiers range from $2-$13! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Given the recently instigated social distancing rules in Canberra, this week we bring you a special “online” episode! For the safety of everyone, and especially in line with our own efforts to flatten the curve, we recorded this panel from the comfort of our own homes using the increasingly popular online video conferencing tool: Zoom. For this reason, the audio quality will be a little different to our usual studio sound. This was our first experiment with this kind of podcast recording, and we look forward to exploring new possibilities and avenues for connecting with each other, other anthropologists, and anyone who is keen to talk strange with us in the future. For now, though, Jodie [1:30] starts off this episode by discussing how Covid-19 is changing the ideas of what nationhood and identity mean in this new, largely online, world. Drawing on Benedict Anderson's work on ‘Imagined Communities', she asks us about our own experiences, and how things have changed or not over these past few weeks. What do you think? Next, Simon [6:30] reflects on the concept of freedom (and unfreedom) and how it has been tied to being human, especially in relation to the physical distancing measures put in place during Covid-19 pandemic by numerous governments around the world. Quoting Rousseau that “man is born free but he is everywhere in chains”, Simon questions how people see their freedom now, and, more importantly, what does freedom mean in the Covid-19 crisis? Then, Julia [12:22] tells us about her recent work in palliative care and asks us to reflect on how the crisis has caused us to think more deeply about death and our relationship with it in our daily lives. How have our conversations changed around death and “moving on”? Alex shares that his family is quite open about death, possibly because they are a secret family of zombies? Simon discusses the findings of a study by Jong and Colleagues in 2015, which suggests that people who are agnostic are the most afraid of death. Has the Covid-19 crisis changed your thinking about mortality in any way? Finally, Alex [17:23] ends our panel this week by turning our attention from the on the ground personal experiences during Covid-19, to a more macro issue: capitalism. Specifically, the criticisms of capitalism he has seen online throughout the coronavirus pandemic. He has been grappling with the notion that something so large, and pervasive, can be a detriment to our own reflexivity and self reflection. Julia uses Australia as an example, which currently has a conservative government but is also participating in more ‘socialist' activities, such as seeking to provide financial aid to those who need it and enacting protocols of physical distancing for the 'good of all'. Simon suggests that certain aspects of capitalism, like the “Free Market”, have been somewhat challenged in the current state of affairs that come with a pandemic. Links and citations for this episode can be found at our website thefamiliarstrange.com Let us know what you thought about this episode and any of the questions we asked on Twitter @TFSTweets or on Facebook in our group The Familiar Strange Chats. Our Patreon can be found at https://www.patreon.com/thefamiliarstrange This anthropology podcast is supported by the Australian Anthropological Society, the ANU's College of Asia and the Pacific and College of Arts and Social Sciences, and the Australian Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, and is produced in collaboration with the American Anthropological Association. Music by Pete Dabro: dabro1.bandcamp.com Shownotes by Matthew Phung and Deanna Catto Podcast edited by Jodie-Lee Trembath and Matthew Phung

In this episode, we talk to Ana Andjelic, a Strategy Executive and Doctor of Sociology working on business strategy, marketing, and organizational transformation. Ana has worked with top global advertising agencies and has also worked on the brand-side as a chief marketing executive. In the context of the collaborative economy boom of early 2010, Ana wrote thoughtful reflections on the Guardian and other news outlets. She recently came back to our attention for her brand new newsletter “The Sociology of Business” where she explores the transformation of retail, modern brand building, and how new social and cultural patterns impact the business. We talk about the changing relationship between brands and consumers, what role culture plays in this transformation, and how technology can help - but never fully replace - human interaction. Our conversation also included in-depth reflections about how brands are reacting to the current context of COVID-19 and about the increasing need for empathy and social responsibility in these turbulent times. Read more on our Medium story here https://stories.platformdesigntoolkit.com/ Here are some important links from the conversation: > Ana's insightful newsletter “The Sociology of Business”, https://andjelicaaa.substack.com/> Ana's Twitter: @andjelicaaa Brands mentioned that are engaging closely with customer communities:> Glossier, an example of a platform for the community activity that is happening around the beauty products: https://www.glossier.com/, https://intothegloss.com/> Rapha for cycling communities: https://www.rapha.cc/ > Track smith running brand: https://www.tracksmith.com/> Outdoor voices:https://www.outdoorvoices.com/ Other topics mentioned:> Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/399136.Imagined_Communities> Some concepts from Japanese culture inspiring the west: Omotenashi, Kintsugi, Wabi-Sabi> Demna Gvasalia, Georgian fashion designer, currently the creative director of Balenciaga https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demna_Gvasalia Music by liosound.Recorded on March 27th 2020

Firstly, we'd like to introduce you all to Alex D'Aloia, who is managing our Facebook group TFS Chats – you might remember the blog post that he wrote for us at the start of this year: "Anthropologists and Dragons". Make sure to check out the chat group after listening to this episode and let us know what questions you have and what you found most interesting. Julia [1:19] starts off our conversation this month by turning our attention to things – specifically, things that we have an emotional attachment to that are in our home environment. From an anthropological perspective, we could turn to Daniel Miller, who writes about material culture and attachment; but there's also a rise in minimalistic households formed around Marie Kondo's example of, essentially, if it doesn't spark joy, then you don't need it, which creates a new understanding of what the material household environment should be. How do we deal with stuff and the emotion of stuff in the home environment? Kylie [6:54] then moves our conversation towards activism, asking us: what is it that insights social action, especially when the social action is for things bigger than us? For instance, in Australia we have seen social support of this kind recently regarding the introduction of the extradition bill in Hong Kong as well as the case against the deportation of the Tamil family. Alex thinks of Benedict Anderson's imagined communities and navigating our sense of belonging while Jodie questions how much is social action about the organisation of communities and how much is it about the way that social action builds momentum? Next Jodie [11:42] talks about another topic very close to home for those of us from Australia – bushfire season, which has started much earlier this year than it usually does. We have to think carefully about what a bushfire means in order to manage it, and Jodie tells us that to different people, fire means different things – to a firefighter it means one thing, to an anthropologist it means another, particularly in Indigenous contexts. Touching on Tim Neale's paper, about the increased inclusion of Indigenous people in fire management discussions (not only in Australia), Jodie asks us about the meaning of fire and how we know when it's dangerous. Alex [15:58] wraps up our conversation with some questions about anthropological methods - specifically during the early writing up stage. “Where I've been having difficulties is … trying to connect this to theory … my reluctance of imposing my own thoughts and models on my data and my informants”. Julia offers an alternative viewpoint, suggesting that you could approach the task from the opposite end – start with the theory and then find examples where the things your participants have said helps to back up the theory. Jodie encourages researchers to ask themselves “what is it that makes me think this is what I am observing?” and to be transparent about how your thinking developed. LINKS AND CITATIONS can be found on our website thefamiliarstrange.com If you'd like to support TFS, head over to our Patreon page This anthropology podcast is supported by the Australian Anthropological Society, the ANU's College of Asia and the Pacific and College of Arts and Social Sciences, and the Australian Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, and is produced in collaboration with the American Anthropological Association. Music by Pete Dabro: dabro1.bandcamp.com Shownotes by Deanna Catto, with assistance from our intern Sheawin Leong. Podcast edited by Matthew Phung and Kylie Wong Dolan