Podcasts about chicago press

What if rural progress isn't about government intervention but about the self-reliance and ingenuity of peasants themselves?  The Laissez-Faire Peasant: Post-Socialist Rural Development in Serbia (UCL Press, 2025) subverts conventional wisdom on rural development by shifting the focus from state-led planning to the agency of peasants themselves. Rejecting the notion that rural populations are passive victims of top-down policies, Jovana Dikovic presents a compelling ethnographic study of three Serbian villages, where autonomy and local cooperation drive economic and social resilience. She introduces the concept of the “laissez-faire peasant”—a figure who thrives outside rigid government schemes, shaping rural development on their own terms. By examining the friction between state policies and the everyday strategies of rural communities, Dikovic uncovers how peasant autonomy not only resists external intervention but fosters sustainable and self-sufficient growth.The first in-depth study of contemporary Serbian peasantry, this book reframes rural life as a site of innovation rather than stagnation. An area of interest for scholars of post-socialist transitions, rural development, and economic anthropology, The Laissez-Faire Peasant provides a new lens on how rural communities survive and adapt in a rapidly changing world. The Laissez-Faire Peasant: Post-Socialist Rural Development in Serbia was published in the UK by UCL Press (2025), and in the United States by University of Chicago Press (2025). The Laissez-Faire Peasant is also available online open-access through UCL Press. Guest: Jovana Dikovic (she/her), is an economic anthropologist, publicist, and head of Sustainable Development and Inclusive Growth at the Center for Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability, School of Management, Fribourg. Host: Jenna Pittman (she/her) is a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at Duke University. She studies modern European history, political economy, and Germany from 1945-1990. Scholars@Duke here Linktree 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

What if rural progress isn't about government intervention but about the self-reliance and ingenuity of peasants themselves?  The Laissez-Faire Peasant: Post-Socialist Rural Development in Serbia (UCL Press, 2025) subverts conventional wisdom on rural development by shifting the focus from state-led planning to the agency of peasants themselves. Rejecting the notion that rural populations are passive victims of top-down policies, Jovana Dikovic presents a compelling ethnographic study of three Serbian villages, where autonomy and local cooperation drive economic and social resilience. She introduces the concept of the “laissez-faire peasant”—a figure who thrives outside rigid government schemes, shaping rural development on their own terms. By examining the friction between state policies and the everyday strategies of rural communities, Dikovic uncovers how peasant autonomy not only resists external intervention but fosters sustainable and self-sufficient growth.The first in-depth study of contemporary Serbian peasantry, this book reframes rural life as a site of innovation rather than stagnation. An area of interest for scholars of post-socialist transitions, rural development, and economic anthropology, The Laissez-Faire Peasant provides a new lens on how rural communities survive and adapt in a rapidly changing world. The Laissez-Faire Peasant: Post-Socialist Rural Development in Serbia was published in the UK by UCL Press (2025), and in the United States by University of Chicago Press (2025). The Laissez-Faire Peasant is also available online open-access through UCL Press. Guest: Jovana Dikovic (she/her), is an economic anthropologist, publicist, and head of Sustainable Development and Inclusive Growth at the Center for Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability, School of Management, Fribourg. Host: Jenna Pittman (she/her) is a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at Duke University. She studies modern European history, political economy, and Germany from 1945-1990. Scholars@Duke here Linktree here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

What if rural progress isn't about government intervention but about the self-reliance and ingenuity of peasants themselves?  The Laissez-Faire Peasant: Post-Socialist Rural Development in Serbia (UCL Press, 2025) subverts conventional wisdom on rural development by shifting the focus from state-led planning to the agency of peasants themselves. Rejecting the notion that rural populations are passive victims of top-down policies, Jovana Dikovic presents a compelling ethnographic study of three Serbian villages, where autonomy and local cooperation drive economic and social resilience. She introduces the concept of the “laissez-faire peasant”—a figure who thrives outside rigid government schemes, shaping rural development on their own terms. By examining the friction between state policies and the everyday strategies of rural communities, Dikovic uncovers how peasant autonomy not only resists external intervention but fosters sustainable and self-sufficient growth.The first in-depth study of contemporary Serbian peasantry, this book reframes rural life as a site of innovation rather than stagnation. An area of interest for scholars of post-socialist transitions, rural development, and economic anthropology, The Laissez-Faire Peasant provides a new lens on how rural communities survive and adapt in a rapidly changing world. The Laissez-Faire Peasant: Post-Socialist Rural Development in Serbia was published in the UK by UCL Press (2025), and in the United States by University of Chicago Press (2025). The Laissez-Faire Peasant is also available online open-access through UCL Press. Guest: Jovana Dikovic (she/her), is an economic anthropologist, publicist, and head of Sustainable Development and Inclusive Growth at the Center for Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability, School of Management, Fribourg. Host: Jenna Pittman (she/her) is a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at Duke University. She studies modern European history, political economy, and Germany from 1945-1990. Scholars@Duke here Linktree here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

Susan Greenhalgh joins us to discuss her new book, "Soda Science: Making the World Safe for Coca Cola" (University of Chicago Press). "This Day in Rotten History" from Renaldo Migaldi follows the interview. Check out Susan's book here: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo221451790.html Help keep This Is Hell! completely listener supported and access bonus episodes by subscribing to our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thisishell Please rate and review This Is Hell! wherever you get your podcasts. It really helps the show ascend the algorithm to reach new listeners.

Matty Dalrymple talks with Jane Friedman about MIDLIST SUCCESS, including how traditional publishers are shifting focus to support mid-list authors over a longer timeframe, what indie authors have long done to keep backlist titles selling, why building a sustainable career can be more effective than chasing a breakout bestseller, and practical steps authors can take to strengthen their marketing and reader connections.   Interview video at https://tinyurl.com/TIA303YT Show notes at https://www.theindyauthor.com/episodes-all   If you find the information in this video useful, please consider supporting The Indy Author! https://www.patreon.com/theindyauthor https://www.buymeacoffee.com/mattydalrymple   Jane Friedman has spent her entire career working in the book publishing industry, with a focus on author education and trend reporting. She is the editor of The Bottom Line, the essential publishing industry newsletter for authors, and was named Publishing Commentator of the Year by Digital Book World in 2023. Her latest book is THE BUSINESS OF BEING A WRITER, SECOND EDITION (University of Chicago Press), which received a starred review from Library Journal.   Matty Dalrymple is the author of the Lizzy Ballard Thrillers, beginning with ROCK PAPER SCISSORS; the Ann Kinnear Suspense Novels, beginning with THE SENSE OF DEATH; and the Ann Kinnear Suspense Shorts. She is a member of International Thriller Writers and Sisters in Crime. Matty also writes, speaks, and consults on the writing craft and the publishing voyage, and shares what she's learned on THE INDY AUTHOR PODCAST. She has written books on the business of short fiction and podcasting for authors; her articles have appeared in "Writer's Digest" magazine. She serves as the Campaigns Manager for the Alliance of Independent Authors.

Today Jana Byars talks to Lucy Delap, Reader in Modern British and Gender History at Murray Edwards College, Cambridge University, about her new book Feminisms: A Global History (University of Chicago Press, 2020). This outstanding work, available later this year, takes a thematic approach to the topic of global feminist history to provide a unified vision that maintains appropriate nuance. Delap is a gender historian, writ large. Her first book, The Feminist Avant Garde (Cambridge 2007), examined the development of feminism in the Anglo-American context, tracing the ideas as developed in trans-Atlantic discourse. She then directed her gaze back to her homeland in subsequent publications, including Knowing their Place: Domestic Service in Twentieth Century Britain (Oxford 2011) and the 2013 Palgrave release, Men, Masculinities and Religious Change in Britain since 1890, Delap explore another expression of gender altogether. The breadth of her scholarship – women and men, intellectual elites and domestic servants, adults and children – prepared her to write this broad but fairly concise work of history. Enjoy our lively discussion! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

While we're told by politicians that the ideas of Karl Marx are foreign and have no place in this country, history proves otherwise. Andrew Hartman shows that Marx and Marxism have had an a significant influence on the United States, from Marx's journalistic writings for the New York Daily Tribune, on the mass politics of the Socialist and Communist Parties and the Wobblies, on the most radical edge of the New Deal and the New Left, and finally with the return to Marx's ideas since the Global Financial Crisis. (Encore presentation.) Andrew Hartman, Karl Marx in America University of Chicago Press, 2025 The post American Marx appeared first on KPFA.

Today Jana Byars talks to Lucy Delap, Reader in Modern British and Gender History at Murray Edwards College, Cambridge University, about her new book Feminisms: A Global History (University of Chicago Press, 2020). This outstanding work, available later this year, takes a thematic approach to the topic of global feminist history to provide a unified vision that maintains appropriate nuance. Delap is a gender historian, writ large. Her first book, The Feminist Avant Garde (Cambridge 2007), examined the development of feminism in the Anglo-American context, tracing the ideas as developed in trans-Atlantic discourse. She then directed her gaze back to her homeland in subsequent publications, including Knowing their Place: Domestic Service in Twentieth Century Britain (Oxford 2011) and the 2013 Palgrave release, Men, Masculinities and Religious Change in Britain since 1890, Delap explore another expression of gender altogether. The breadth of her scholarship – women and men, intellectual elites and domestic servants, adults and children – prepared her to write this broad but fairly concise work of history. Enjoy our lively discussion! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

Today Jana Byars talks to Lucy Delap, Reader in Modern British and Gender History at Murray Edwards College, Cambridge University, about her new book Feminisms: A Global History (University of Chicago Press, 2020). This outstanding work, available later this year, takes a thematic approach to the topic of global feminist history to provide a unified vision that maintains appropriate nuance. Delap is a gender historian, writ large. Her first book, The Feminist Avant Garde (Cambridge 2007), examined the development of feminism in the Anglo-American context, tracing the ideas as developed in trans-Atlantic discourse. She then directed her gaze back to her homeland in subsequent publications, including Knowing their Place: Domestic Service in Twentieth Century Britain (Oxford 2011) and the 2013 Palgrave release, Men, Masculinities and Religious Change in Britain since 1890, Delap explore another expression of gender altogether. The breadth of her scholarship – women and men, intellectual elites and domestic servants, adults and children – prepared her to write this broad but fairly concise work of history. Enjoy our lively discussion! 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

Today Jana Byars talks to Lucy Delap, Reader in Modern British and Gender History at Murray Edwards College, Cambridge University, about her new book Feminisms: A Global History (University of Chicago Press, 2020). This outstanding work, available later this year, takes a thematic approach to the topic of global feminist history to provide a unified vision that maintains appropriate nuance. Delap is a gender historian, writ large. Her first book, The Feminist Avant Garde (Cambridge 2007), examined the development of feminism in the Anglo-American context, tracing the ideas as developed in trans-Atlantic discourse. She then directed her gaze back to her homeland in subsequent publications, including Knowing their Place: Domestic Service in Twentieth Century Britain (Oxford 2011) and the 2013 Palgrave release, Men, Masculinities and Religious Change in Britain since 1890, Delap explore another expression of gender altogether. The breadth of her scholarship – women and men, intellectual elites and domestic servants, adults and children – prepared her to write this broad but fairly concise work of history. Enjoy our lively discussion! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Explore the captivating Chidambaram Nataraja Temple, home to Lord Shiva's cosmic dance, the "Anand Tandav." Let's delve into its spiritual symbolism, and its role as the Pancha Bhoota Sthala representing the element of space.Contact, follow and support my work - all in one place: ⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/NamaskarIndia⁠UPI ID: 9893547492@paytmBibliography:Capra, F. (1999). The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism. Shambhala Publications.Michell, G. (1995). The Hindu Temple: An Introduction to Its Meaning and Forms. University of Chicago Press.Subrahmanyam, K. (1997). Nataraja in Art, Thought, and Literature. New Century Book House.Ramaswami, N. S. (1979). Chidambaram: Home of Nataraja. Rashtrapati Bhavan Publications.Topic: Indian mythology | Hindu mythology | Hinduism

Today Jana Byars talks to Lucy Delap, Reader in Modern British and Gender History at Murray Edwards College, Cambridge University, about her new book Feminisms: A Global History (University of Chicago Press, 2020). This outstanding work, available later this year, takes a thematic approach to the topic of global feminist history to provide a unified vision that maintains appropriate nuance. Delap is a gender historian, writ large. Her first book, The Feminist Avant Garde (Cambridge 2007), examined the development of feminism in the Anglo-American context, tracing the ideas as developed in trans-Atlantic discourse. She then directed her gaze back to her homeland in subsequent publications, including Knowing their Place: Domestic Service in Twentieth Century Britain (Oxford 2011) and the 2013 Palgrave release, Men, Masculinities and Religious Change in Britain since 1890, Delap explore another expression of gender altogether. The breadth of her scholarship – women and men, intellectual elites and domestic servants, adults and children – prepared her to write this broad but fairly concise work of history. Enjoy our lively discussion! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Many local policymakers make decisions based on a deep-seated belief: what's good for the rich is good for cities. Convinced that local finances depend on attracting wealthy firms and residents, municipal governments lavish public subsidies on their behalf. Whatever form this strategy takes—tax-exempt apartments, corporate incentives, debt-financed mega projects—its rationale remains consistent and assumed to be true. But this wasn't always the case. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, a wide range of activists, citizens, and intellectuals in New York City connected local fiscal crises to the greed and waste of the rich. These figures saw other routes to development, possibilities rooted in alternate ideas about what was fiscally viable. In The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1865–1981 (U of Chicago Press, 2025), Daniel Wortel-London argues that urban economics and politics are shaped by what he terms the “fiscal imagination” of policymakers, activists, advocates, and other figures. His survey of New York City during a period of explosive growth shows how residents went beyond the limits of redistributive liberalism to imagine how their communities could become economically viable without the largesse of the wealthy. Their strategies—which included cooperatives, public housing, land value taxation, public utilities, and more—centered the needs and capabilities of ordinary residents as the basis for local economies that were both prosperous and just. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) holds an MPhil in intellectual history from the University of Cambridge. 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

For this episode of Liminal Library, I interviewed Dan Davies about The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind (U Chicago Press, 2025). Davies examines how we've systematically engineered responsibility out of our institutions, creating a world where major decisions happen without clear human accountability. Davies draws on Stafford Beer's cybernetics to explain how modern organizations function as systems with their own patterns and responses. As he puts it, "the system is not conscious and so does not have incentives, but it has consistent patterns of response to stimuli." This isn't about individual moral failures – it's about the industrialization of decision-making itself. We've moved from Harry Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" to complex processes and standardized criteria that diffuse responsibility across multiple layers. When things go wrong – financial crises, environmental failures, social breakdowns – no single person can be held accountable because no single person actually made the decision. Davies traces this transformation through three revolutions: the managerial revolution that shifted control from owners to professional administrators, the cybernetic revolution that offered tools to understand these systems but never fully materialized, and the neoliberal revolution that reshaped society while ignoring that increasingly, systems rather than people make the decisions affecting our lives. These accountability machines, as Davies calls them, operate according to their own logic and constraints. Understanding them is essential for grasping why institutional failures seem both inevitable and impossible to prevent within our current frameworks. 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

Many local policymakers make decisions based on a deep-seated belief: what's good for the rich is good for cities. Convinced that local finances depend on attracting wealthy firms and residents, municipal governments lavish public subsidies on their behalf. Whatever form this strategy takes—tax-exempt apartments, corporate incentives, debt-financed mega projects—its rationale remains consistent and assumed to be true. But this wasn't always the case. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, a wide range of activists, citizens, and intellectuals in New York City connected local fiscal crises to the greed and waste of the rich. These figures saw other routes to development, possibilities rooted in alternate ideas about what was fiscally viable. In The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1865–1981 (U of Chicago Press, 2025), Daniel Wortel-London argues that urban economics and politics are shaped by what he terms the “fiscal imagination” of policymakers, activists, advocates, and other figures. His survey of New York City during a period of explosive growth shows how residents went beyond the limits of redistributive liberalism to imagine how their communities could become economically viable without the largesse of the wealthy. Their strategies—which included cooperatives, public housing, land value taxation, public utilities, and more—centered the needs and capabilities of ordinary residents as the basis for local economies that were both prosperous and just. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) holds an MPhil in intellectual history from the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Many local policymakers make decisions based on a deep-seated belief: what's good for the rich is good for cities. Convinced that local finances depend on attracting wealthy firms and residents, municipal governments lavish public subsidies on their behalf. Whatever form this strategy takes—tax-exempt apartments, corporate incentives, debt-financed mega projects—its rationale remains consistent and assumed to be true. But this wasn't always the case. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, a wide range of activists, citizens, and intellectuals in New York City connected local fiscal crises to the greed and waste of the rich. These figures saw other routes to development, possibilities rooted in alternate ideas about what was fiscally viable. In The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1865–1981 (U of Chicago Press, 2025), Daniel Wortel-London argues that urban economics and politics are shaped by what he terms the “fiscal imagination” of policymakers, activists, advocates, and other figures. His survey of New York City during a period of explosive growth shows how residents went beyond the limits of redistributive liberalism to imagine how their communities could become economically viable without the largesse of the wealthy. Their strategies—which included cooperatives, public housing, land value taxation, public utilities, and more—centered the needs and capabilities of ordinary residents as the basis for local economies that were both prosperous and just. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) holds an MPhil in intellectual history from the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

For this episode of Liminal Library, I interviewed Dan Davies about The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind (U Chicago Press, 2025). Davies examines how we've systematically engineered responsibility out of our institutions, creating a world where major decisions happen without clear human accountability. Davies draws on Stafford Beer's cybernetics to explain how modern organizations function as systems with their own patterns and responses. As he puts it, "the system is not conscious and so does not have incentives, but it has consistent patterns of response to stimuli." This isn't about individual moral failures – it's about the industrialization of decision-making itself. We've moved from Harry Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" to complex processes and standardized criteria that diffuse responsibility across multiple layers. When things go wrong – financial crises, environmental failures, social breakdowns – no single person can be held accountable because no single person actually made the decision. Davies traces this transformation through three revolutions: the managerial revolution that shifted control from owners to professional administrators, the cybernetic revolution that offered tools to understand these systems but never fully materialized, and the neoliberal revolution that reshaped society while ignoring that increasingly, systems rather than people make the decisions affecting our lives. These accountability machines, as Davies calls them, operate according to their own logic and constraints. Understanding them is essential for grasping why institutional failures seem both inevitable and impossible to prevent within our current frameworks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Many local policymakers make decisions based on a deep-seated belief: what's good for the rich is good for cities. Convinced that local finances depend on attracting wealthy firms and residents, municipal governments lavish public subsidies on their behalf. Whatever form this strategy takes—tax-exempt apartments, corporate incentives, debt-financed mega projects—its rationale remains consistent and assumed to be true. But this wasn't always the case. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, a wide range of activists, citizens, and intellectuals in New York City connected local fiscal crises to the greed and waste of the rich. These figures saw other routes to development, possibilities rooted in alternate ideas about what was fiscally viable. In The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1865–1981 (U of Chicago Press, 2025), Daniel Wortel-London argues that urban economics and politics are shaped by what he terms the “fiscal imagination” of policymakers, activists, advocates, and other figures. His survey of New York City during a period of explosive growth shows how residents went beyond the limits of redistributive liberalism to imagine how their communities could become economically viable without the largesse of the wealthy. Their strategies—which included cooperatives, public housing, land value taxation, public utilities, and more—centered the needs and capabilities of ordinary residents as the basis for local economies that were both prosperous and just. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) holds an MPhil in intellectual history from the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Many local policymakers make decisions based on a deep-seated belief: what's good for the rich is good for cities. Convinced that local finances depend on attracting wealthy firms and residents, municipal governments lavish public subsidies on their behalf. Whatever form this strategy takes—tax-exempt apartments, corporate incentives, debt-financed mega projects—its rationale remains consistent and assumed to be true. But this wasn't always the case. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, a wide range of activists, citizens, and intellectuals in New York City connected local fiscal crises to the greed and waste of the rich. These figures saw other routes to development, possibilities rooted in alternate ideas about what was fiscally viable. In The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1865–1981 (U of Chicago Press, 2025), Daniel Wortel-London argues that urban economics and politics are shaped by what he terms the “fiscal imagination” of policymakers, activists, advocates, and other figures. His survey of New York City during a period of explosive growth shows how residents went beyond the limits of redistributive liberalism to imagine how their communities could become economically viable without the largesse of the wealthy. Their strategies—which included cooperatives, public housing, land value taxation, public utilities, and more—centered the needs and capabilities of ordinary residents as the basis for local economies that were both prosperous and just. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) holds an MPhil in intellectual history from the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

For this episode of Liminal Library, I interviewed Dan Davies about The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind (U Chicago Press, 2025). Davies examines how we've systematically engineered responsibility out of our institutions, creating a world where major decisions happen without clear human accountability. Davies draws on Stafford Beer's cybernetics to explain how modern organizations function as systems with their own patterns and responses. As he puts it, "the system is not conscious and so does not have incentives, but it has consistent patterns of response to stimuli." This isn't about individual moral failures – it's about the industrialization of decision-making itself. We've moved from Harry Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" to complex processes and standardized criteria that diffuse responsibility across multiple layers. When things go wrong – financial crises, environmental failures, social breakdowns – no single person can be held accountable because no single person actually made the decision. Davies traces this transformation through three revolutions: the managerial revolution that shifted control from owners to professional administrators, the cybernetic revolution that offered tools to understand these systems but never fully materialized, and the neoliberal revolution that reshaped society while ignoring that increasingly, systems rather than people make the decisions affecting our lives. These accountability machines, as Davies calls them, operate according to their own logic and constraints. Understanding them is essential for grasping why institutional failures seem both inevitable and impossible to prevent within our current frameworks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

For this episode of Liminal Library, I interviewed Dan Davies about The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind (U Chicago Press, 2025). Davies examines how we've systematically engineered responsibility out of our institutions, creating a world where major decisions happen without clear human accountability. Davies draws on Stafford Beer's cybernetics to explain how modern organizations function as systems with their own patterns and responses. As he puts it, "the system is not conscious and so does not have incentives, but it has consistent patterns of response to stimuli." This isn't about individual moral failures – it's about the industrialization of decision-making itself. We've moved from Harry Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" to complex processes and standardized criteria that diffuse responsibility across multiple layers. When things go wrong – financial crises, environmental failures, social breakdowns – no single person can be held accountable because no single person actually made the decision. Davies traces this transformation through three revolutions: the managerial revolution that shifted control from owners to professional administrators, the cybernetic revolution that offered tools to understand these systems but never fully materialized, and the neoliberal revolution that reshaped society while ignoring that increasingly, systems rather than people make the decisions affecting our lives. These accountability machines, as Davies calls them, operate according to their own logic and constraints. Understanding them is essential for grasping why institutional failures seem both inevitable and impossible to prevent within our current frameworks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Many local policymakers make decisions based on a deep-seated belief: what's good for the rich is good for cities. Convinced that local finances depend on attracting wealthy firms and residents, municipal governments lavish public subsidies on their behalf. Whatever form this strategy takes—tax-exempt apartments, corporate incentives, debt-financed mega projects—its rationale remains consistent and assumed to be true. But this wasn't always the case. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, a wide range of activists, citizens, and intellectuals in New York City connected local fiscal crises to the greed and waste of the rich. These figures saw other routes to development, possibilities rooted in alternate ideas about what was fiscally viable. In The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1865–1981 (U of Chicago Press, 2025), Daniel Wortel-London argues that urban economics and politics are shaped by what he terms the “fiscal imagination” of policymakers, activists, advocates, and other figures. His survey of New York City during a period of explosive growth shows how residents went beyond the limits of redistributive liberalism to imagine how their communities could become economically viable without the largesse of the wealthy. Their strategies—which included cooperatives, public housing, land value taxation, public utilities, and more—centered the needs and capabilities of ordinary residents as the basis for local economies that were both prosperous and just. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) holds an MPhil in intellectual history from the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For this episode of Liminal Library, I interviewed Dan Davies about The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind (U Chicago Press, 2025). Davies examines how we've systematically engineered responsibility out of our institutions, creating a world where major decisions happen without clear human accountability. Davies draws on Stafford Beer's cybernetics to explain how modern organizations function as systems with their own patterns and responses. As he puts it, "the system is not conscious and so does not have incentives, but it has consistent patterns of response to stimuli." This isn't about individual moral failures – it's about the industrialization of decision-making itself. We've moved from Harry Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" to complex processes and standardized criteria that diffuse responsibility across multiple layers. When things go wrong – financial crises, environmental failures, social breakdowns – no single person can be held accountable because no single person actually made the decision. Davies traces this transformation through three revolutions: the managerial revolution that shifted control from owners to professional administrators, the cybernetic revolution that offered tools to understand these systems but never fully materialized, and the neoliberal revolution that reshaped society while ignoring that increasingly, systems rather than people make the decisions affecting our lives. These accountability machines, as Davies calls them, operate according to their own logic and constraints. Understanding them is essential for grasping why institutional failures seem both inevitable and impossible to prevent within our current frameworks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Many local policymakers make decisions based on a deep-seated belief: what's good for the rich is good for cities. Convinced that local finances depend on attracting wealthy firms and residents, municipal governments lavish public subsidies on their behalf. Whatever form this strategy takes—tax-exempt apartments, corporate incentives, debt-financed mega projects—its rationale remains consistent and assumed to be true. But this wasn't always the case. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, a wide range of activists, citizens, and intellectuals in New York City connected local fiscal crises to the greed and waste of the rich. These figures saw other routes to development, possibilities rooted in alternate ideas about what was fiscally viable. In The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1865–1981 (U of Chicago Press, 2025), Daniel Wortel-London argues that urban economics and politics are shaped by what he terms the “fiscal imagination” of policymakers, activists, advocates, and other figures. His survey of New York City during a period of explosive growth shows how residents went beyond the limits of redistributive liberalism to imagine how their communities could become economically viable without the largesse of the wealthy. Their strategies—which included cooperatives, public housing, land value taxation, public utilities, and more—centered the needs and capabilities of ordinary residents as the basis for local economies that were both prosperous and just. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) holds an MPhil in intellectual history from the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For this episode of Liminal Library, I interviewed Dan Davies about The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind (U Chicago Press, 2025). Davies examines how we've systematically engineered responsibility out of our institutions, creating a world where major decisions happen without clear human accountability. Davies draws on Stafford Beer's cybernetics to explain how modern organizations function as systems with their own patterns and responses. As he puts it, "the system is not conscious and so does not have incentives, but it has consistent patterns of response to stimuli." This isn't about individual moral failures – it's about the industrialization of decision-making itself. We've moved from Harry Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" to complex processes and standardized criteria that diffuse responsibility across multiple layers. When things go wrong – financial crises, environmental failures, social breakdowns – no single person can be held accountable because no single person actually made the decision. Davies traces this transformation through three revolutions: the managerial revolution that shifted control from owners to professional administrators, the cybernetic revolution that offered tools to understand these systems but never fully materialized, and the neoliberal revolution that reshaped society while ignoring that increasingly, systems rather than people make the decisions affecting our lives. These accountability machines, as Davies calls them, operate according to their own logic and constraints. Understanding them is essential for grasping why institutional failures seem both inevitable and impossible to prevent within our current frameworks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Executive Order 9066, which authorized the confinement of tens of thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living in the Western U.S., sending them to cramped, hastily-constructed camps like Manzanar and Amache.  One such Japanese-American was Karl Yoneda, a well-known labor activist–and the husband of Elaine Yoneda, a Jewish-American woman. Elaine soon followed her husband to the Manzanar camp, after authorities threatened to send her three-year-old mixed-race son, Thomas, to the camp alone.  The Yonedas time in the camp is the subject of Tracy Slater's book, Together in Manzanar: The True Story of a Japanese Jewish Family in an American Concentration Camp (Chicago Review Press, 2025) Tracy is a Jewish American writer from Boston, based in her husband's country of Japan. Her previous book was the mixed-marriage memoir The Good Shufu: Finding Love, Self, and Home on the Far Side of the World (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2015). She has also published work in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Time's Made by History, and more. You can find more reviews, excerpts, interviews, and essays at The Asian Review of Books, including its review of Together in Manzanar. Follow on Twitter at @BookReviewsAsia. Nicholas Gordon is an editor for a global magazine, and a reviewer for the Asian Review of Books. He can be found on Twitter at @nickrigordon. 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

On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Executive Order 9066, which authorized the confinement of tens of thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living in the Western U.S., sending them to cramped, hastily-constructed camps like Manzanar and Amache.  One such Japanese-American was Karl Yoneda, a well-known labor activist–and the husband of Elaine Yoneda, a Jewish-American woman. Elaine soon followed her husband to the Manzanar camp, after authorities threatened to send her three-year-old mixed-race son, Thomas, to the camp alone.  The Yonedas time in the camp is the subject of Tracy Slater's book, Together in Manzanar: The True Story of a Japanese Jewish Family in an American Concentration Camp (Chicago Review Press, 2025) Tracy is a Jewish American writer from Boston, based in her husband's country of Japan. Her previous book was the mixed-marriage memoir The Good Shufu: Finding Love, Self, and Home on the Far Side of the World (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2015). She has also published work in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Time's Made by History, and more. You can find more reviews, excerpts, interviews, and essays at The Asian Review of Books, including its review of Together in Manzanar. Follow on Twitter at @BookReviewsAsia. Nicholas Gordon is an editor for a global magazine, and a reviewer for the Asian Review of Books. He can be found on Twitter at @nickrigordon. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/asian-american-studies

On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Executive Order 9066, which authorized the confinement of tens of thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living in the Western U.S., sending them to cramped, hastily-constructed camps like Manzanar and Amache.  One such Japanese-American was Karl Yoneda, a well-known labor activist–and the husband of Elaine Yoneda, a Jewish-American woman. Elaine soon followed her husband to the Manzanar camp, after authorities threatened to send her three-year-old mixed-race son, Thomas, to the camp alone.  The Yonedas time in the camp is the subject of Tracy Slater's book, Together in Manzanar: The True Story of a Japanese Jewish Family in an American Concentration Camp (Chicago Review Press, 2025) Tracy is a Jewish American writer from Boston, based in her husband's country of Japan. Her previous book was the mixed-marriage memoir The Good Shufu: Finding Love, Self, and Home on the Far Side of the World (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2015). She has also published work in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Time's Made by History, and more. You can find more reviews, excerpts, interviews, and essays at The Asian Review of Books, including its review of Together in Manzanar. Follow on Twitter at @BookReviewsAsia. Nicholas Gordon is an editor for a global magazine, and a reviewer for the Asian Review of Books. He can be found on Twitter at @nickrigordon. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Executive Order 9066, which authorized the confinement of tens of thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living in the Western U.S., sending them to cramped, hastily-constructed camps like Manzanar and Amache.  One such Japanese-American was Karl Yoneda, a well-known labor activist–and the husband of Elaine Yoneda, a Jewish-American woman. Elaine soon followed her husband to the Manzanar camp, after authorities threatened to send her three-year-old mixed-race son, Thomas, to the camp alone.  The Yonedas time in the camp is the subject of Tracy Slater's book, Together in Manzanar: The True Story of a Japanese Jewish Family in an American Concentration Camp (Chicago Review Press, 2025) Tracy is a Jewish American writer from Boston, based in her husband's country of Japan. Her previous book was the mixed-marriage memoir The Good Shufu: Finding Love, Self, and Home on the Far Side of the World (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2015). She has also published work in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Time's Made by History, and more. You can find more reviews, excerpts, interviews, and essays at The Asian Review of Books, including its review of Together in Manzanar. Follow on Twitter at @BookReviewsAsia. Nicholas Gordon is an editor for a global magazine, and a reviewer for the Asian Review of Books. He can be found on Twitter at @nickrigordon. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Executive Order 9066, which authorized the confinement of tens of thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living in the Western U.S., sending them to cramped, hastily-constructed camps like Manzanar and Amache.  One such Japanese-American was Karl Yoneda, a well-known labor activist–and the husband of Elaine Yoneda, a Jewish-American woman. Elaine soon followed her husband to the Manzanar camp, after authorities threatened to send her three-year-old mixed-race son, Thomas, to the camp alone.  The Yonedas time in the camp is the subject of Tracy Slater's book, Together in Manzanar: The True Story of a Japanese Jewish Family in an American Concentration Camp (Chicago Review Press, 2025) Tracy is a Jewish American writer from Boston, based in her husband's country of Japan. Her previous book was the mixed-marriage memoir The Good Shufu: Finding Love, Self, and Home on the Far Side of the World (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2015). She has also published work in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Time's Made by History, and more. You can find more reviews, excerpts, interviews, and essays at The Asian Review of Books, including its review of Together in Manzanar. Follow on Twitter at @BookReviewsAsia. Nicholas Gordon is an editor for a global magazine, and a reviewer for the Asian Review of Books. He can be found on Twitter at @nickrigordon. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Executive Order 9066, which authorized the confinement of tens of thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living in the Western U.S., sending them to cramped, hastily-constructed camps like Manzanar and Amache.  One such Japanese-American was Karl Yoneda, a well-known labor activist–and the husband of Elaine Yoneda, a Jewish-American woman. Elaine soon followed her husband to the Manzanar camp, after authorities threatened to send her three-year-old mixed-race son, Thomas, to the camp alone.  The Yonedas time in the camp is the subject of Tracy Slater's book, Together in Manzanar: The True Story of a Japanese Jewish Family in an American Concentration Camp (Chicago Review Press, 2025) Tracy is a Jewish American writer from Boston, based in her husband's country of Japan. Her previous book was the mixed-marriage memoir The Good Shufu: Finding Love, Self, and Home on the Far Side of the World (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2015). She has also published work in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Time's Made by History, and more. You can find more reviews, excerpts, interviews, and essays at The Asian Review of Books, including its review of Together in Manzanar. Follow on Twitter at @BookReviewsAsia. Nicholas Gordon is an editor for a global magazine, and a reviewer for the Asian Review of Books. He can be found on Twitter at @nickrigordon. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/asian-review

On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced Executive Order 9066, which authorized the confinement of tens of thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living in the Western U.S., sending them to cramped, hastily-constructed camps like Manzanar and Amache.  One such Japanese-American was Karl Yoneda, a well-known labor activist–and the husband of Elaine Yoneda, a Jewish-American woman. Elaine soon followed her husband to the Manzanar camp, after authorities threatened to send her three-year-old mixed-race son, Thomas, to the camp alone.  The Yonedas time in the camp is the subject of Tracy Slater's book, Together in Manzanar: The True Story of a Japanese Jewish Family in an American Concentration Camp (Chicago Review Press, 2025) Tracy is a Jewish American writer from Boston, based in her husband's country of Japan. Her previous book was the mixed-marriage memoir The Good Shufu: Finding Love, Self, and Home on the Far Side of the World (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2015). She has also published work in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Time's Made by History, and more. You can find more reviews, excerpts, interviews, and essays at The Asian Review of Books, including its review of Together in Manzanar. Follow on Twitter at @BookReviewsAsia. Nicholas Gordon is an editor for a global magazine, and a reviewer for the Asian Review of Books. He can be found on Twitter at @nickrigordon. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

The rise and popular support for authoritarianism around the world and within traditional democracies have spurred debates over the meaning of the term “fascist” and when and whether it is appropriate to use it. The landmark study Fascism: The History of a Word (The University of Chicago Press, 2025) takes this debate further by tackling its most fundamental questions: How did the terms “fascism” and “fascist” come to be in the first place? How and in what circumstances have they been used? How can they be understood today? And what are the advantages (or disadvantages) of using “fascism” to make sense of interwar authoritarianism as well as contemporary politics?Exploring the writings and deeds of political leaders, activists, artists, authors, and philosophers, Federico Marcon traces the history of the term's use (and usefulness) in relation to Mussolini's political regime, antifascist resistance, and the quest of postwar historians to develop a definition of a “fascist minimum.” This investigation of the semiotics of “fascism” also aims to inquire about people's voluntary renunciation of the modern emancipatory ideals of freedom, equality, and solidarity. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

A unique mummy in an excellent settingIn this episode of the Mummy Movie Podcast, we examine Belphegor Phantom of the Louvre!Episode suggested by Storybook: Sacred Lore of Witchcraft PodcastWebsite: https://lnk.bio/StorybookPodcastPatreon: patreon.com/MummyMoviePodcastEmail: mummymoviepodcast@gmail.comBibliographyAssmann, J. (2011). Death and salvation in ancient Egypt. Cornell University Press.Dodson, A. (2012). Afterglow of empire: Egypt from the fall of the New Kingdom to the Saite Renaissance. Cairo: American University in Cairo PressIkram, S. (2015). Death and burial in ancient Egypt. American University in Cairo Press.Taylor, J. H. (1989). Egyptian coffins (Vol. 11). Bloomsbury Shire Publications.Taylor, J. H. (2001). Death and the afterlife in ancient Egypt. University of Chicago Press.Teeter, E. (2011). Religion and ritual in ancient Egypt. Cambridge University Press.Warburton, D., & Hornung, E. (2007). The Egyptian Amduat: the book of the hidden chamber. Living Human Heritage Publications.Taylor, J. H. (1989). Egyptian coffins (Vol. 11). Bloomsbury Shire Publications.Warburton, D., & Hornung, E. (2007). The Egyptian Amduat: the book of the hidden chamber. Living Human Heritage Publications. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this video, I explore Aleister Crowley's The Vision and the Voice and why it remains one of the most powerful and unsettling texts in the Western esoteric tradition. I look at how the figure of Babalon emerges as both a theophany and a ritual of unmaking, and how this visionary work challenges our assumptions about magic, subjectivity, and divine encounter. I also trace the shifting image of Lilith, from biblical warning to occult icon, focusing on her reimagining in modern esotericism through figures like Kenneth Grant and the rise of feminist magical traditions. If you're interested in Thelema, mysticism, or the deeper currents behind the archetypes of the divine feminine, this lecture offers a chance to descend into the Aethyrs and return transformed.CONNECT & SUPPORT

If only you spent more time working and less time procrastinating, your life would be so much better. Right? Friend, I know how you feel, but it's not that simple. Some forms of procrastination actually help us get our work done, while some forms of work are just a waste of your time. In fact, I've come to realise that the very idea of procrastination is pretty unhelpful, and it can stand in the way of understanding why we struggle to make progress, and how to fix it. In this episode, I'm going to share with you a more empowering way to think about how to get things done.Brand new download! Click here for the 'Comfort vs relevance: resist the work/procrastination binary!' worksheet, or find it on the Resources page of The Academic Imperfectionist website.ReferencesGrant, Adam. 2016: 'Why I taught myself to procrastinate', New York Times.Jensen, Joli. 2017: Write No Matter What (Chicago: University of Chicago Press). 

In this episode, we delve into the environmental toll of the ongoing war in Ukraine. Comparing the impacts with our multiple climate disasters, we have witnessed how environmental destruction has dramatically altered our understanding of home, place, and belonging. To trace ways in which ecological grief is echoed and reckoned with across these different contexts, EcoJustice Radio shares the Thomas Mann House presentation of a conversation between Darya Tsymbalyuk (University of Chicago) and Ursula K. Heise (UCLA). Support the Podcast via PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=LBGXTRM292TFC&source=url Tsymbalyuk's recent book, ‘Ecocide in Ukraine', highlights the devastating impact of the conflict on Ukraine's ecosystems and landscapes. From pollution and destruction of habitats to the emotional connections of locals to their environment, this episode sheds light on the often-overlooked ecological consequences of war. Drawing connections between Ukrainian experiences, the scarred lands of the Pacific Palisades, and beyond, Tsymbalyuk and Heise discuss the loss of cherished places and species to examine the role of storytelling and the cultural imaginations in ways of inhabiting the damaged Earth. For an extended interview and other benefits, become an EcoJustice Radio patron at https://www.patreon.com/ecojusticeradio Ecocide in Ukraine Book: https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=ecocide-in-ukraine-the-environmental-cost-of-russias-war--9781509562497 Darya Tsymbalyuk [https://daryatsymbalyuk.com/] is an interdisciplinary scholar, and her practice includes writing and image-making. Most of Darya's work lies at the intersection of environmental humanities and artistic research. She is a recipient of the Mary Zirin Prize from the Association of Women in Slavic Studies (2023), and the author of multiple articles in environmental humanities. Her book “Ecocide in Ukraine: The Environmental Cost of Russia's War” from Polity Press was published in 2025. Darya serves as an Assistant Professor at the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures and the Committee on Environment, Geography, and Urbanization (CEGU), University of Chicago. Ursula K. Heise [https://english.ucla.edu/people-faculty/heise-ursula-k/] holds the Marcia H. Howard Term Chair in Literary Studies in the Department of English and the Institute of the Environment and Sustainability at UCLA. She is co-founder and current Director of the Lab for Environmental Narrative Strategies (LENS). Her books include, among others, Sense of Place and Sense of Planet: The Environmental Imagination of the Global (Oxford University Press, 2008) and Imagining Extinction: The Cultural Meanings of Endangered Species (University of Chicago Press, 2016). Jack Eidt is an urban planner, environmental journalist, and climate organizer, as well as award-winning fiction writer. He is Co-Founder of SoCal 350 Climate Action and Executive Producer of EcoJustice Radio. He writes a column on PBS SoCal called High & Dry [https://www.pbssocal.org/people/high-dry]. He is also Founder and Publisher of WilderUtopia [https://wilderutopia.com], a website dedicated to the question of Earth sustainability, finding society-level solutions to environmental, community, economic, transportation and energy needs. Podcast Website: http://ecojusticeradio.org/ Podcast Blog: https://www.wilderutopia.com/category/ecojustice-radio/ Support the Podcast: Patreon https://www.patreon.com/ecojusticeradio PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=LBGXTRM292TFC&source=url Executive Producer and Host: Jack Eidt Engineer and Original Music: Blake Quake Beats Episode 264

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the German physicist who, at the age of 23 and while still a student, effectively created quantum mechanics for which he later won the Nobel Prize. Werner Heisenberg made this breakthrough in a paper in 1925 when, rather than starting with an idea of where atomic particles were at any one time, he worked backwards from what he observed of atoms and their particles and the light they emitted, doing away with the idea of their continuous orbit of the nucleus and replacing this with equations. This was momentous and from this flowed what's known as his Uncertainty Principle, the idea that, for example, you can accurately measure the position of an atomic particle or its momentum, but not both. With Fay Dowker Professor of Theoretical Physics at Imperial College London Harry Cliff Research Fellow in Particle Physics at the University of Cambridge And Frank Close Professor Emeritus of Theoretical Physics and Fellow Emeritus at Exeter College at the University of Oxford Producer: Simon Tillotson Reading list: Philip Ball, Beyond Weird: Why Everything You Thought You Knew about Quantum Physics Is Different (Vintage, 2018) John Bell, ‘Against 'measurement'' (Physics World, Vol 3, No 8, 1990) Mara Beller, Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution (University of Chicago Press, 2001) David C. Cassidy, Beyond Uncertainty: Heisenberg, Quantum Physics, And The Bomb (Bellevue Literary Press, 2010) Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy (first published 1958; Penguin Classics, 2000) Carlo Rovelli, Helgoland: The Strange and Beautiful Story of Quantum Physics (Penguin, 2022) Spanning history, religion, culture, science and philosophy, In Our Time from BBC Radio 4 is essential listening for the intellectually curious. In each episode, host Melvyn Bragg and expert guests explore the characters, events and discoveries that have shaped our world.

Ephesians 6:14b tells us to stand firm with the breastplate of righteousness in place. But what does that look like in our everyday decisions?In this week's episode, Angie and Susie unpack how righteousness is more than a lofty word, it's about choosing to live in a way that aligns with God's character. From the decisions we make in private to how we treat others in public, righteousness protects our hearts and helps us walk in step with the Spirit.Together, we explore how God's justifying grace bridges the gap between our imperfections and His holiness and how living in that grace shapes the choices we make each day.Ephesians 6:14b (NIV)with the breastplate of righteousness in place,https://livesteadyon.com/https://susiecrosby.com/Free Resource: Armor of God Quick Reference GuideWant a simple, powerful way to keep the truths of Ephesians 6 close at hand? Download our Armor of God Quick Reference Guide—a one-page visual that outlines each piece of armor, highlights a key truth to remember, and includes a supporting scripture.Pin it to your fridge, tuck it in your Bible, or post it by your desk. Let it be a daily reminder that you are equipped to stand firm.Click here to download your free guide: https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/sl/LDKZP6U/armorStep By Step Study SheetWant to follow along with your own study? Download the free Step By Step study sheet to dig into scripture one word at a time and apply God's truth to your life.Get your study sheet here.https://www.logos.com/https://enduringword.com/https://www.wordhippo.com/https://www.biblegateway.com/https://www.blueletterbible.org/William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 247.James Strong, A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009), 23.Francis Foulkes, Ephesians: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 10, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 179–180.Max Anders, Galatians-Colossians, vol. 8, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 191.Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene Albert Nida, A Handbook on Paul's Letter to the Ephesians, UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1993), 161.Harold W. Hoehner, “Ephesians,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 643.Theme music:Glimmer by Andy Ellison

On this episode of Virtual Sentiments, host Kristen Collins speaks with Amit Ron and Abraham Singer, co-authors of Everyone's Business:What Companies Owe Society (The University of Chicago Press, 2024). Together, Ron and Singer argue that businesses should move beyond profit and stakeholder models to actively protect democratic practices such as inclusion, reflexivity, and public oversight. They reject corporate claims to “civil disobedience” as prone to self-interest and warn against lobbying practices that create only the appearance of public participation. Drawing on the idea of institutional pluralism, they emphasize that democracy's role is to continually assess and revise the work of different institutions to ensure they serve the public interest.Dr. Amit Ron is an Associate Professor in School of Social and Behavioral Sciences at Arizona State University, focusing on the history of political economy and democratic theory.Dr. Abraham Singer is an Associate Professor of Management at Quinlan School of Business at Loyola University Chicago, specializing in business ethics and political theory.Read more work from Kristen Collins.Show Notes:Abe and Amit's book, Everyone's Business: What Companies Owe Society (The University of Chicago Press, 2024)Virtual Sentiments, S3E1 "Kris Rose on Deliberative Democracy and Meta's Community Forums"Virtual Sentiments, S3E5 "Alice Siu on Deliberative Polling and the Future of Democratic Dialogue"Virtual Sentiments, S1E4 "Jennifer Forestal on Designing Democratic Digital Spaces"Kevin Elliot's Democracy for Busy PeopleMark Warren's article, "Political Corruption as Duplicitous Exclusion"Pierre-Yves Néron's Seeing Like a Firm: Social Justice, Corporatiosn and the Conservative OrderScherer and Palazzo's 2007 article, "Toward a Political Conception of Corporate Responsibility: Business and Society Seen From a Habermasian Perspective"If you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramLearn more about Academic & Student ProgramsFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatus

This week, I argue that we must have some degree of artifice to organize our thoughts and recognize the things we see in our world.---Click here to support the Wednesday Blog: https://www.patreon.com/sthosdkane---Sources:[1] For my recent essays referring to this current historiographic project see “On Sources,” Wednesday Blog 6.22, “On Writing,” Ibid., 6.27, and “On Knowledge,” Ibid., 6.29.[2] Lee Alan Dugatkin, Mr. Jefferson and the Giant Moose, (University of Chicago Press, 2009).[3] Staffan Müller-Wille, “Linnean Lens | Linnaeus' Lapland Journey Diary (1732),“ moderated by Isabelle Charmantier, virtual lecture, 12 May 2025, by the Linnean Society of London, YouTube, 1:04:18, link here.[4] Jason Roberts, Every Living Thing: The Great and Deadly Race to Know All Life, (Random House, 2024), 45–49.[5] Roberts, 20.[6] Roberts, 115–125.[7] Roberts, 109.[8] André Thevet, Les Singularitez de la France Antarctique, (Antwerp, 1558), 16r–16v. The translation is my own.[9] Roberts, 109.[10] Damião de Góis, Chronica do Felicissimo Rei Dom Emanuel, 4 vols., (Lisbon, 1566–1567).[11] Geraldine Heng, The Invention of Race in the European Middle Ages, (Cambridge University Press, 2018), 190.[12] Roberts, 110.[13] Michael Wintroub, A Savage Mirror: Power, Identity, and Knowledge in Early Modern France, (Stanford University Press, 2006), 42.[14] Roberts, xii.[15] Roberts, 107.[16] Roberts, 96–98.[17] Michael Allin, Zarafa: A Giraffe's True Story, from Deep in Africa to the Heart of Paris, (Delta, 1998).

A conversation with Linda Zerilli about her recent book, "A Democratic Theory of Truth" (U of Chicago Press).

The rise and popular support for authoritarianism around the world and within traditional democracies have spurred debates over the meaning of the term “fascist” and when and whether it is appropriate to use it. The landmark study Fascism: The History of a Word (The University of Chicago Press, 2025) takes this debate further by tackling its most fundamental questions: How did the terms “fascism” and “fascist” come to be in the first place? How and in what circumstances have they been used? How can they be understood today? And what are the advantages (or disadvantages) of using “fascism” to make sense of interwar authoritarianism as well as contemporary politics?Exploring the writings and deeds of political leaders, activists, artists, authors, and philosophers, Federico Marcon traces the history of the term's use (and usefulness) in relation to Mussolini's political regime, antifascist resistance, and the quest of postwar historians to develop a definition of a “fascist minimum.” This investigation of the semiotics of “fascism” also aims to inquire about people's voluntary renunciation of the modern emancipatory ideals of freedom, equality, and solidarity. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

The rise and popular support for authoritarianism around the world and within traditional democracies have spurred debates over the meaning of the term “fascist” and when and whether it is appropriate to use it. The landmark study Fascism: The History of a Word (The University of Chicago Press, 2025) takes this debate further by tackling its most fundamental questions: How did the terms “fascism” and “fascist” come to be in the first place? How and in what circumstances have they been used? How can they be understood today? And what are the advantages (or disadvantages) of using “fascism” to make sense of interwar authoritarianism as well as contemporary politics?Exploring the writings and deeds of political leaders, activists, artists, authors, and philosophers, Federico Marcon traces the history of the term's use (and usefulness) in relation to Mussolini's political regime, antifascist resistance, and the quest of postwar historians to develop a definition of a “fascist minimum.” This investigation of the semiotics of “fascism” also aims to inquire about people's voluntary renunciation of the modern emancipatory ideals of freedom, equality, and solidarity. 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

The rise and popular support for authoritarianism around the world and within traditional democracies have spurred debates over the meaning of the term “fascist” and when and whether it is appropriate to use it. The landmark study Fascism: The History of a Word (The University of Chicago Press, 2025) takes this debate further by tackling its most fundamental questions: How did the terms “fascism” and “fascist” come to be in the first place? How and in what circumstances have they been used? How can they be understood today? And what are the advantages (or disadvantages) of using “fascism” to make sense of interwar authoritarianism as well as contemporary politics?Exploring the writings and deeds of political leaders, activists, artists, authors, and philosophers, Federico Marcon traces the history of the term's use (and usefulness) in relation to Mussolini's political regime, antifascist resistance, and the quest of postwar historians to develop a definition of a “fascist minimum.” This investigation of the semiotics of “fascism” also aims to inquire about people's voluntary renunciation of the modern emancipatory ideals of freedom, equality, and solidarity. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

How should we understand the words, “in him all things were created” in Col 1.16? Although commonly taken to mean Christ created the universe, this view has contextual, structural, and exegetical problems. In what follows I’ll name six problems with old-creation readings before laying out why a new creation approach makes sense. I presented this talk at the 2025 Unitarian Christian Alliance (UCA) conference in Uxbridge, England. Scroll down to see the full-length paper. For those listening to the audio, here’s a quick reference to Colossians 1.15-20 Strophe 1 (Col 1.15-18a) 15a      who is (the) image of the invisible God, 15b      firstborn of all creation 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him 17a      and he is before all things 17b      and all things hold together in him 18a      and he is the head of the body of the Church,[12] Strophe 2 (Col 1.18b-20) 18b      who is (the) beginning, 18c      firstborn from the dead, 18d                  in order that he may be first in all things, 19        for in him was pleased all the fulness to dwell 20a      and through him to reconcile all things in him, 20b      making peace through the blood of his cross 20c                  whether the things upon the earth 20d                  or the things in the heavens Here’s Randy Leedy’s New Testament Diagram Here are the slides in the original PowerPoint format Download [13.82 MB] Here are the slides converted to PDF Loading... Taking too long? Reload document | Open in new tab Download [3.16 MB] To read the paper, simply scroll down or read it on Academia.edu.   Listen on Spotify   Listen on Apple Podcasts —— Links —— Check out these other papers by Sean Finnegan Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Finnegan on X @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play it out on the air Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here Get Finnegan’s book, Kingdom Journey to learn about God’s kingdom coming on earth as well as the story of how Christianity lost this pearl of great price. Get the transcript of this episode Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Below is the paper presented on July 25, 2025 in Uxbridge, England at the 2nd annual UCA UK Conference. Access this paper on Academia.edu to get the pdf. Full text is below, including bibliography and end notes. Colossians 1.16: Old Creation or New Creation? by Sean P. Finnegan Abstract  How should we understand the words, “in him all things were created” in Col 1.16? Although commonly taken to mean Christ created the universe, this view has contextual, structural, and exegetical problems. In what follows, I will explain the difficulties with the various old creation readings of Col 1.16 along with five reasons for a new creation approach. Then I'll provide a new creation reading of Col 1.16 before summarizing my findings in the conclusion. Introduction  Colossians 1.15-20 is a fascinating text of great importance for Christology. Commonly understood to be a hymn, it is fascinating in its cosmic scope and elevated Christology. Although many commentators interpret Paul[1] to say that Christ created the universe in his pre-existent state in Col 1.16, not all scholars see it that way. For example, Edward Schillebeeckx writes, “There is no mention in this text of pre-existence in the Trinitarian sense.”[2] Rather he sees “an eschatological pre-existence, characteristic of wisdom and apocalyptic.”[3] G. B. Caird agreed that Paul's focus in Col. 1.15-20 was not pre-existence (contra Lightfoot), rather, “The main thread of Paul's thought, then, is the manhood of Christ.”[4] In other words, “All that has been said in vv. 15-18 can be said of the historical Jesus.”[5] James Dunn also denied that Paul saw Christ as God's agent in creation in Col 1.15-20, claiming that such an interpretation was “to read imaginative metaphor in a pedantically literal way.”[6] James McGrath argued that “Jesus is the one through whom God's new creation takes place.” [7] Andrew Perriman likewise noted, “There is no reference to the creation of heaven and earth, light and darkness, sea and dry land, lights in the heavens, vegetation, or living creatures,”[8] also preferring a new creation approach.[9] To understand why such a broad range of scholars diverge from the old creation interpretation of Col 1.16, we will examine several contextual, structural, and exegetical problems. While explaining these, I'll also put forward four reasons to interpret Col 1.16 as new creation. Then I'll provide a fifth before giving a new creation reading of Col 1.15-20. But before going any further, let's familiarize ourselves with the text and structure. The Form of Col 1.15-20  To get our bearings, let me begin by providing a translation,[10] carefully structured to show the two strophes.[11] Strophe 1 (Col 1.15-18a) 15a      who is (the) image of the invisible God, 15b      firstborn of all creation 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him 17a      and he is before all things 17b      and all things hold together in him 18a      and he is the head of the body of the Church,[12] Strophe 2 (Col 1.18b-20) 18b      who is (the) beginning, 18c      firstborn from the dead, 18d                  in order that he may be first in all things, 19        for in him was pleased all the fulness to dwell 20a      and through him to reconcile all things in him, 20b      making peace through the blood of his cross 20c                  whether the things upon the earth 20d                  or the things in the heavens Here I've followed the two-strophe structure (1.15-18a and 18b-20) noted more than a century ago by the classical philologist Eduard Norden[13] and repeated by James Robinson,[14] Edward Lohse,[15] Edward Schweizer,[16] James Dunn,[17] Ben Witherington III,[18] and William Lane[19] among others. By lining up the parallel lines of the two strophes, we can clearly see the poetic form. Strophe 1 15a who is (the) image… 15b firstborn of all creation 16a for in him were created all things… 16e  all things have been created through him… Strophe 2 18b who is (the) beginning, 18c firstborn from the dead … 19 for in him was pleased all… 20a and through him to reconcile all things in him… Such striking repeated language between the two strophes means that we should be careful to maintain the parallels between them and not take a grammatical or exegetical position on a word or phrase that would disconnect it from the parallel line in the other strophe. Some scholars, including F. F. Bruce,[20] Michael Bird,[21] David Pao,[22] among others proposed vv. 17-18a as an independent transitional link between the two strophes. Lohse explained the motivation for this unlikely innovation as follows. Above all, it is curious that at the end of the first, cosmologically oriented strophe, Christ is suddenly referred to as the “head of the body, the church” (1:18a κεφαλή τοῦ σώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας). Considering its content, this statement would have to be connected with the second strophe which is characterized by soteriological statements. The structure of the hymn, however, places it in the first strophe.[23] For interpreters who prefer to think of the first strophe as cosmogony and the second as soteriology, a line about Christ's headship over the church doesn't fit very well. They restructure the form based on their interpretation of the content. Such a policy reverses the order of operations. One should determine the form and then interpret the content in light of structure. Lohse was right to reject the addition of a new transitional bridge between the two strophes. He called it “out of the question” since vv. 17-18a underscore “all things” and “serve as a summary that brings the first strophe to a conclusion.”[24] Now that we've oriented ourselves to some degree, let's consider old creation readings of Col 1.16 and the problems that arise when reading it that way. Old Creation Readings  Within the old creation paradigm for Col 1.16 we can discern three groups: those who see (A) Christ as the agent by whom God created, (B) Wisdom as the agent, and (C) Christ as the purpose of creation. Although space won't allow me to interact with each of these in detail, I will offer a brief critique of these three approaches. As a reminder, here is our text in both Greek and English. Colossians 1.16 16a      ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα 16b                  ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, 16c                  τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, 16d                  εἴτε θρόνοι εἴτε κυριότητες εἴτε ἀρχαὶ εἴτε ἐξουσίαι· 16e      τὰ πάντα δι' αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται· 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him 1. Christ as the Agent of Creation Scot McKnight is representative in his claim that “The emphasis of the first stanza is Christ as the agent of creation … and the second is Christ as the agent of redemption.”[25] This view sees the phrase “in him were created all things” as Christ creating the universe in the beginning. However, this position has six problems with it. Firstly, the context of the poem—both before (vv. 13-14) and after (vv. 21-22)—is clearly soteriological not cosmogonical.[26] By inserting vv. 15-20 into the text after vv. 13-14, Paul connected the two together.[27] V. 15 begins with ὅς ἐστιν (who is), which makes it grammatically dependent on vv. 13-14. “It is widely accepted,” wrote Dunn, “that this passage is a pre-Pauline hymn interpolated and interpreted to greater or less extent by Paul.”[28] By placing the poem into a redemptive frame, Paul indicated how he interpreted it. The fact that God “rescued us from the authority of darkness and transferred (us) into the kingdom of his beloved son” is the controlling context (v. 13).[29] As I will show below, I believe vv. 15-20 are ecclesiology not protology, since ecclesiology naturally flows from soteriology. Rather than remaining in the old domain of darkness, vulnerable to malevolent spiritual powers of this age, Colossian Christians are transferred into the new domain of Christ. The context makes it more natural to interpret the creation language of vv. 15-16 in light of Christ's redemptive work—as references to new creation rather than old creation. Doing so retains the contextual frame rather than jumping back to the beginning of time. A second problem arises when we consider the phrase “image of the invisible God” in v. 15. Although some see a Stoic or Wisdom reference here, I agree with F. F. Bruce who said, “No reader conversant with the OT scriptures, on reading these words of Paul, could fail to be reminded of the statement in Gen. 1:26f., that man was created by God ‘in his own image.'”[30] Immediately after making humanity in his own image, God blessed us with dominion over the earth. Philo also connected humanity's image of God with “the rulership over the earthly realms.”[31] But if the Christ of v. 15 is the pre-existent son prior to his incarnation, as the old creation model posits, “How can he be the ‘image of God,'” asked Eduard Schweizer, since “the one who is thus described here is not the earthly Jesus?”[32] It is precisely by virtue of his humanity that Jesus is the image of God not his pre-existence.[33] Thus, image-of-God language points us to the creation of a new humanity. A third problem is that “firstborn of all creation” prima facia implies that Christ is a member of creation (a partitive genitive). This is how Paul thought about Christ as firstborn in Rom 8.29 when he called Christ “firstborn among many brothers and sisters.” Clearly he saw Christ as a member of the “ἀδελφοῖς” (brothers and sisters). Furthermore, “πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως” (firstborn of all creation) in v. 15 parallels “πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν” (firstborn from the dead) v. 18. Although the former (v. 15) can be taken as a genitive of subordination (firstborn over creation) or as a partitive genitive (firstborn of creation), the latter (v. 18) is unambiguously partitive. Because v. 18 includes the word ἐκ (from/out of), instead of a multivalent genitive, it must mean that Jesus was himself a member of the dead prior to his resurrection. Likewise, he was the firstborn member of creation. To take v. 15 as a genitive of subordination and v. 18 in a partitive sense allows theology to drive exegesis over against the clear structural link between v. 15b and v. 18c. In fact, as the BDAG noted, Christ is “the firstborn of a new humanity.”[34] He is chronologically born first and, by virtue of that, also preeminent.[35] Fourthly, the phrase, “ἐν αὐτῷ” (in him), implies soteriology not protology as it does throughout the Pauline corpus. The prepositional phrases “in Christ,” “in the Lord,” “in him,” and others that are similar occur more than a hundred times in Paul's epistles. McKnight elucidated the sense nicely: “This expression, then, is the inaugurated eschatological reality into which the Christian has been placed, and it also evokes the new-creation realities that a person discovers.”[36] Creation in Christ is not likely to refer to Genesis creation. In fact, apart from Col 1.16, there is no text within Paul or the rest of the Bible that speaks of the origin of the universe as something created “in Christ.”[37] Sadly translators routinely obscure this fact by translating “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “by him.”[38] Amazingly, the NASB and ESV render “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “in him” in every other usage apart from Col 1.16![39] For the sake of consistency, it makes better sense to render “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “in him” and let the reader decide how to interpret it. Fifthly, the line, “and he is the head of the body, the Church” (v. 18a) clearly roots the first strophe in redemptive history not creation. Our English translations follow Robert Estienne's verse divisions, which confusingly combine the last line of the first strophe (v. 18a) and the first line of the second (v. 18b), obscuring the native poetic structure. As I made the case above, the structure of the text breaks into two strophes with v. 18a included in the first one. As I mentioned earlier, vv. 15-20 are a pre-existing poem that Paul has modified and incorporated into the text of Colossians. Ralph Martin pointed out that the poem contains “no less than five hapax legomena” and “about ten non-Pauline expressions.”[40] Additionally, there appear to be awkward additions that disrupt the symmetry. These additions are the most explicitly Christian material. It is likely that the original said, “and he is the head of the body” to which Paul appended “the church.” Edward Schillebeeckx commented on this. In Hellenistic terms this must primarily mean that he gives life and existence to the cosmos. Here, however, Colossians drastically corrects the ideas … The correction made by Colossians is to understand ‘body' as a reference to the church, and not the cosmos. This alters the whole perspective of the cultural and religious setting … The cosmic background is reinterpreted in terms of salvation history and ecclesiology. In fact Christ is already exercising his lordship over the world now … however, he is doing this only as the head of the church, his body, to which he gives life and strength. Thus Colossians claims that the church alone, rather than the cosmos, is the body of Christ.[41] If this is true, it shows Paul's careful concern to disallow a strictly old creation or protological reading of the first strophe. For by inserting “of the church,” he has limited the context of the first strophe to the Christ event. “The addition of ‘the church,'” wrote Dunn, “indicates that for Paul at any rate the two strophes were not dealing with two clearly distinct subjects (cosmology and soteriology).”[42] Karl-Joseph Kuschel wrote, “The answer would seem to be he wanted to ‘disturb' a possible cosmological-protological fancy in the confession of Christ … to prevent Christ from becoming a purely mythical heavenly being.”[43] Thus Paul's addition shows us he interpreted the creation of v16 as new creation. Lastly, theological concerns arise when taking Col 1.16 as old creation. The most obvious is that given the partitive genitive of v. 15, we are left affirming the so-called Arian position that God created Christ as the firstborn who, in turn, created everything else. Another thorn in the side of this view is God's insistence elsewhere to be the solo creator (Isa 44.24; cf. 45.18). On the strength of this fact, modalism comes forward to save the day while leaving new problems in its wake. However, recognizing Col 1.15-20 as new creation avoids such theological conundrums. 2. Wisdom as the Agent of Creation Dustin Smith noted, “The christological hymn contains no less than nine characteristics of the wisdom of God (e.g., “image,” “firstborn,” agent of creation, preceding all things, holding all things together) that are reapplied to the figure of Jesus.”[44] Some suggest that Col 1.15-20 is actually a hymn to Wisdom that Paul Christianized.[45] The idea is that God created the universe through his divine Wisdom, which is now embodied or incarnate in Christ. Dunn explained it as follows. If then Christ is what God's power/wisdom came to be recognized as, of Christ it can be said what was said first of wisdom—that ‘in him (the divine wisdom now embodied in Christ) were created all things.' In other words the language may be used here to indicate the continuity between God's creative power and Christ without the implication being intended that Christ himself was active in creation.[46] Before pointing out some problems, I must admit much of this perspective is quite noncontroversial. That Jewish literature identified Wisdom as God's creative agent, that there are linguistic parallels between Col 1.15-20 and Wisdom, and that the historical Jesus uniquely embodied Wisdom to an unprecedented degree are not up for debate. Did Paul expect his readers to pick up on the linguistic parallels? Afterall, he could have just said “in her were created all things” in v. 16, clearly making the connection with the grammatically feminine σοφία (Wisdom). Better yet, he could have said, “in Wisdom were created all things.” Even if the poem was originally to Wisdom, Paul has thoroughly Christianized it, applying to Christ what had been said of Wisdom. However, the most significant defeater for this view is that applying Wisdom vocabulary to Christ only works one way. Wisdom has found her home in Christ. This doesn't mean we can attribute to Christ what Wisdom did before she indwelt him any more than we can attribute to the living descendants of Nazis the horrific deeds of their ancestors. Perriman's critique is correct: “The point is not that the act of creation was Christlike, rather the reverse: recent events have been creation-like. The death and resurrection of Jesus are represented as the profoundly creative event in which the wisdom of God is again dynamically engaged, by which a new world order has come about.”[47] Once again a new creation approach makes better sense of the text. 3. Christ as the Purpose of Creation Another approach is to take ἐν αὐτῷ (in him) in a telic sense. Martha King, a linguist with SIL, said the phrase can mean “in association with Christ everything was created” or “in connection with Christ all things were created.”[48] Lexicographer, Joseph Thayer, sharpened the sense with the translation, “[I]n him resides the cause why all things were originally created.”[49] William MacDonald's translation brought this out even more with the phrase, “because for him everything … was created.”[50] The idea is that God's act of creation in the beginning was with Christ in view. As Eric Chang noted, “Christ is the reason God created all things.”[51] G. B. Caird said, “He is the embodiment of that purpose of God which underlies the whole creation.”[52] The idea is one of predestination not agency.[53] Christ was the goal for which God created all things. A weakness of this view is that purpose is better expressed using εἰς or δία with an accusative than ἐν. Secondly, the parallel line in the second strophe (v. 19) employs “ἐν αὐτῷ” in a clearly locative sense: “in him all the fullness was pleased to dwell.” So even though “ἐν αὐτῷ” could imply purpose, in this context it much more likely refers to location. Lastly, Paul mentioned the sense of purpose at the end of v. 16 with “εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται” (for him has been created), so it would be repetitive to take “ἐν αὐτῷ” that way as well. To sum up, the three positions that see Col 1.16 as a reference to old creation all have significant problems. With these in mind, let us turn our attention to consider a fourth possibility: that Paul has in mind new creation. Reasons for a New Creation Reading I've already provided four reasons why Col 1.15-20 refers to new creation: (1) calling Christ the image of God points to the new humanity begun in Christ as the last Adam;[54] (2) since the firstborn of the old creation was Adam (or, perhaps, Seth), Jesus must be the firstborn of the new creation; (3) saying Jesus is the head of the church, limits the focus for the first strophe to the time following the Christ event; (4) the context of the poem, both before (vv. 13-14) and after (vv. 21-22) is soteriological, making an old creation paradigm awkward, while a new creation view fits perfectly. The Catholic priest and professor, Franz Zeilinger, summarized the situation nicely: “Christ is (through his resurrection from the realm of death) Lord over the possession granted to him, of which he is the ἀρχή (beginning) and archetype, … and head and beginning of the eschatological new creation!”[55] Additionally, a new creation paradigm fits best with Paul's elaboration of what visible and invisible things in heaven and on earth he has in mind. Once again, here's our text. 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him By specifying thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities, we discern Paul's train of thought. Form critics are quick to point out that v. 16d is Paul's addition to the poem. Without it, the reader may have thought of sky, land, and animals—old creation. However, with v. 16d present, we direct our attention to political realities not God's creative power or engineering genius. Martha King noted the two possible meanings for εἴτε: (1) specifying the “invisible things” or (2) giving examples of “all things.” Taking the second view, we read “in him were created all things, including thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities.”[56] Randy Leedy also presented this position in his sentence diagrams, identifying v. 16d as equivalent to v. 16c and v. 16b, all of which modify τὰ πάντα (all things) at the end of v. 16a. (See Appendix for Leedy's diagram.) Perriman pressed home the point when he wrote: The fact is that any interpretation that takes verse 16 to be a reference to the original creation has to account for the narrow range of created things explicitly listed. … The Colossians verse mentions only the creation of political entities—thrones, lordships, rulers and authorities, visible and invisible—either in the already existing heaven or on the already existing and, presumably, populated earth. What this speaks of is a new governmental order consisting of both invisible-heavenly and visibly-earthly entities.”[57] Understanding v. 16d as equivalent to “all things” in v. 16a nicely coheres with a new-creation paradigm. However, taken the other way—as an elaboration of only the invisible created realities—v. 16d introduces an asymmetrical and clumsy appendix. A New Creation Reading of Col 1.16 Now that we've considered some problems with old creation views and some reasons to read Col 1.16 from a new creation perspective, let's consider how a new creation reading works. New creation is all about the new breaking into the old, the future into the present. G. F. Wessels said, “Paul made clear that there is a present realized aspect of salvation, as well as a future, still outstanding aspect, which will only be realized at the eschaton.”[58] New creation, likewise, has future and present realities. Exiting Old Creation Before becoming part of the new creation, one must exit the old creation. “Our old humanity was co-crucified“ (Rom 6.6). “With Christ you died to the elemental principles of the world” (Col 2.20). “As many as were baptized into Christ Jesus, were baptized into his death” (Rom 6.3). We were “co-buried with him through baptism into the death … having been united with the likeness of his death” (Rom 6.4-5). Our death with him through baptism kills our allegiance and submission to the old powers and the old way of life “in which you formerly walked according to the zeitgeist of this world, according to the rule of the authority of the air, the spirit which now works in the children of disobedience” (Eph 2.2). Entering New Creation As death is the only way out of the old creation, so resurrection is the only way into the new creation. “You have been co-raised with Christ” (Col 3.1). God “co-made-alive us together with him” (Col 2.13).[59] By virtue of our union with Christ, we ourselves are already “co-raised and co-seated us in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus” (Eph 2.6). The result of this is that “we also may walk in newness of life” (Rom 6.4). For those who are “in Christ, (there is) a new creation; the old has passed away, behold (the) new has come into existence” (2 Cor 5.17). “They have been ‘transported,'” wrote Schillebeeckx, “they already dwell above in Christ's heavenly sphere of influence (Col 1.13)—the soma Christou … that is the church!”[60] Community For the people of God, “neither circumcision is anything nor uncircumcision but a new creation” is what matters (Gal 6.15). Those who “are clothed with the new” are “being renewed in knowledge according to the image of him who created, where there is no Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, (or) free, but Christ (is) all and in all” (Col 3.10-11). Through Christ God has nullified the law “in order that he might create the two into one new humanity in him” (Eph 2.14-15). Thus, within new creation, ethnic identity still exists, but it is relativized, our identity in Christ taking priority ahead of other affiliations and duties. Lifestyle When the lost become saved through faith, they become his creation (ποίημα), “created in Christ Jesus for good works” (Eph 2.10). This means we are to “lay aside the former way of life, the old humanity corrupted according to deceitful desires” and instead be clothed with “the new humanity created according to God in righteousness and holiness of the truth” (Eph 4.22-24). Rather than lying to one another, we must “strip off the old humanity with its way of acting” and “be clothed with the new (humanity), renewed in knowledge according to the image of the one who created it” (Col 3.9-10). “The ones who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the passions and the lusts” and instead “walk by the spirit” (Gal 5.24-25). Ultimately, All Creation Although new creation is currently limited to those who voluntarily recognize Jesus as Lord, all “creation is waiting with eager expectation for the unveiling of the children of God” (Rom 8.19). Because of the Christ event, the created order eagerly awaits the day when it will escape “the enslavement of corruption” and gain “the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (v. 21). Like a bone out of joint, creation does not function properly. Once Christ sets it right, it will return to its proper order and operation under humanity's wise and capable rulership in the eschaton. Eschatology God predetermined that those who believe will be “conformed to the image of his son, that he be firstborn among many brothers and sisters” (Rom 8.29). Thus, the resurrected Christ is the prototype, “the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor 15.20). Whereas “in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive” (v. 22). We await Christ's return to “transform the body of our humble station (that it be) shaped to his glorious body according to the energy which makes him able to also to subject all things to himself.” (Phil 3.21). This is the end goal of new creation: resurrected subjects of God's kingdom joyfully living in a renewed world without mourning, crying, and pain forevermore (Isa 65.17-25; Rev 21-22). The Powers Taking Col 1.16 as a new creation text adds key information about the present governing powers to this richly textured picture. In Christ God created thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities. He made these through Christ and for Christ with the result that Christ himself is before all things, and in Christ all things hold together (Col 1.17). He is the head of the body, the Church (Col 1.18). We find very similar language repeated in Ephesians in the context of Christ's exaltation.[61] Ephesians 1.20-23 20 Which [power] he energized in Christ having raised him from the dead and seated (him) on his right (hand) in the heavenlies 21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name named, not only in this age but also in the one to come; 22 and he subjected all things under his feet and gave him (as) head over all things in the Church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of the one who fills all things in all. The parallels are striking. Both speak of Christ's resurrection, Christ's exalted position of authority over all the powers, Christ's role as head of the church, and both mention the fullness. It's easy to miss the connection between these two passages since most think of Eph 1.20-22 as ascension theology and Col 1.15-20 as creation theology. But, if we adjust our thinking to regard Col 1.16 as new creation, we see how the two fit together. In Ephesians we see Christ's ascension to God's right hand as the reason for a cosmic reordering of authorities with the result that all rule, authority, power, and dominion are subjected to him. (Though we may be accustomed to reading these powers in Eph 1.21 as only malevolent owing to Eph 2.2 and 6.12, the list here must be mixed, since only benevolent powers will survive the final judgement and continue into the age to come.) Instead of exaltation, in Colossians Paul employed the language of creation to describe Christ's relation to the powers. Perhaps lesser terms like reassign, reorder, or establish were just too small to adequately express the magnitude of how the Christ event has changed the world—both in heaven and on earth. The only term big enough to convey the new situation was “creation”—the very same word he routinely used elsewhere with the meaning of new creation.[62] We can gain more insight by considering what the powers of Eph 1.21 and Col 1.16 mean. McKnight saw them “as earthly, systemic manifestations of (perhaps fallen) angelic powers—hence, the systemic worldly, sociopolitical manifestations of cosmic/angelic rebellion against God.”[63] I partially agree with McKnight here. He's right to see the powers as both heavenly and earthly, or better, as the heavenly component of the earthly sociopolitical realities, but he has not made room for the new authority structures created in Christ. John Schoenheit helpfully explained it this way: Not only did Jesus create his Church out of Jew and Gentile, he had to create the structure and positions that would allow it to function, both in the spiritual world (positions for the angels that would minister to the Church—see Rev. 1:1, “his angel”) and in the physical world (positions and ministries here on earth—see Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11).[64] We must never forget that Paul has an apocalyptic worldview—a perspective that seeks to unveil the heavenly reality behind the earthly. He believed in powers of darkness and powers of light. In Christ were created thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities (Col 1.16). He is “the head of all rule and authority” (Col 2.10). These new creation realities make progress against the old powers that still hold sway in the world outside the Church. Although the old powers are still at work, those who are in Christ enjoy his protection. With respect to the Church, he has already “disarmed the rulers and authorities” (Col 2.15). We can don “the armor of God that we be able to stand against the methods of the devil” (Eph 6.11) and “subduing everything, to stand” (v. 13). We find glimpses of this heavenly reality scattered in other places in the Bible. Peter mentioned how Christ “is on the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, angels and authorities and power having been subjected to him” (1 Pet 3.22). In John's Revelation, he addressed each of the seven letters to the angels of their respective churches.[65] Although it's hard for us to get details on precisely what happened at Christ's ascension, something major occurred, not just on earth, but also in the spiritual realm. Jesus's last recorded words in Matthew are: “all authority in heaven and upon earth was given to me” (Mat 28.18-20). Presumably such a statement implies that prior to his resurrection Jesus did not have all authority in heaven and earth. It didn't exist until it was created. Similarly, because of his death, resurrection, and ascension, Christ has “become so much better than the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to them” (Heb 1.4). Once again, the text implies that Christ was not already superior to the angels, but “after making purification of the sins, he sat on the right hand of the majesty on high” at which time he became preeminent (Heb 1.3). Perhaps this also explains something about why Christ “proclaimed to the spirits in prison” (1 Pet 3.19). Another possibility is that Christ's ascension (Rev 12.5) triggered a war in heaven (v. 7) with the result that the dragon and his angels suffered defeat (v. 8) and were thrown out of heaven down to the earth (v. 9). Sadly, for most of the history of the church we have missed this Jewish apocalyptic approach that was obvious to Paul, limiting salvation to individual sins and improved morality.[66] Only in the twentieth century did interpreters begin to see the cosmic aspect of new creation. Margaret Thrall wrote the following. The Christ-event is the turning-point of the whole world … This Christ ‘in whom' the believer lives is the last Adam, the inaugurator of the new eschatological humanity. … Paul is saying that if anyone exists ‘in Christ', that person is a newly-created being. … In principle, through the Christ-event and in the person of Christ, the new world and the new age are already objective realities.[67] New creation is, in the words of J. Louis Martyn “categorically cosmic and emphatically apocalyptic.”[68] In fact, “The advent of the Son and of his Spirit is thus the cosmic apocalyptic event.”[69] In Christ is the beginning of a whole new creation, an intersecting community of angelic and human beings spanning heaven and earth. The interlocking of earthly (visible) and heavenly (invisible) authority structures points to Paul's apocalyptic holism. The Church was not on her own to face the ravages of Rome's mad love affair with violence and power. In Christ, people were no longer susceptible to the whims of the gods that have wreaked so much havoc from time immemorial.[70] No, the Church is Christ's body under his direct supervision and protection. As a result, the Church is the eschatological cosmic community. It is not merely a social club; it has prophetic and cosmic dimensions. Prophetically, the Church points to the eschaton when all of humanity will behave then how the Church already strives to live now—by the spirit instead of the flesh (Gal 5.16-25). Cosmically, the Church is not confined to the earth. There is a heavenly dimension with authority structures instantiated under Christ to partner with the earthly assemblies. God's “plan for the fulness of the times” is “to head up all thing in the Christ, the things upon the heavens and the things upon the earth in him” (Eph 1.10). Although this is his eschatological vision, Zeilinger pointed out that it is already happening. [T]he eschatological world given in Christ is realized within the still-existing earthly creation through the inclusion of the human being in Christ, the exalted one, by means of the proclamation of salvation and baptism. The eschaton spreads throughout the world in the kerygma and becomes reality, in that the human being, through baptism, becomes part of Christ—that is, in unity with him, dies to the claim of the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου (2.20) and is raised with him to receive his eschatological life. The people thus incorporated into the exalted Christ thereby form, in him and with him, the new creation of the eschaton within the old! The body of Christ is thus recognizable as the expanding Church. In it, heavenly and earthly space form, in a certain sense, a unity.[71] The Church is a counter society, and embassy of the future kingdom shining the light of the age to come into the present in the power of the spirit with the protection of Christ and his heavenly powers over against the powers of darkness, who/which are still quite active—especially in the political realities of our present evil age (Gal 1.4). We bend the knee to the cosmic Christ now in anticipation of the day when “every knee may bend: heavenly and earthly and subterranean” (Phil 2.10) and “every tongue may confess that Jesus Christ (is) Lord” (v. 11). Christ's destiny is to fulfil the original Adamic mandate to multiply, fill, and have dominion over the earth (Gen 1.28). He has already received all authority in heaven and earth (Mat 28.18). God has given him “dominion over the works of your hands and put all things under his feet” as the quintessential man (Ps 8.6). Even so, “Now we do not yet see all things subjected to him” (Heb 2.8), but when he comes “he will reign into the ages of the ages” (Rev 11.15). Until then, he calls the Church to recognize his preeminence and give him total allegiance both in word and deed. Conclusion We began by establishing that the structure of the poetic unit in Col 1.15-20 breaks into two strophes (15-18a and 18b-20). We noted that Paul likely incorporated pre-existing material into Colossians, editing it as he saw fit. Then we considered the problems with the three old creation readings: (A) Christ as the agent of creation, (B) Wisdom as the agent of creation, and (C) Christ as the purpose of creation. In the course of critiquing (A), which is by far most popular, we observed several reasons to think Col 1.16 pertained to new creation, including (1) the image of God language in v. 15a, (2) the firstborn of all creation language in v. 15b, (3) the head of the Church language in v. 18a, and (4) the soteriological context (frame) of the poem (vv. 13-14, 21-22). To this I added a fifth syntactical reason that 16d as an elaboration of “τἀ πάντα” (all things) of 16a. Next, we explored the idea of new creation, especially within Paul's epistles, to find a deep and richly textured paradigm for interpreting God's redemptive and expanding sphere of influence (in Christ) breaking into the hostile world. We saw that new Christians die and rise with Christ, ending their association with the old and beginning again as a part of the new—a community where old racial, legal, and status divisions no longer matter, where members put off the old way of living and instead become clothed with the new humanity, where people look forward to and live in light of the ultimate transformation to be brought about at the coming of Christ. Rather than limiting new creation to the salvation of individuals, or even the sanctifying experience of the community, we saw that it also includes spiritual powers both “in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities” (Col 1.16). Reading Col 1.15-20 along with Eph 1.20-23 we connected God's creation of the powers in Christ with his exaltation of Christ to his right hand “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name named, not only in this age but also in the one to come” (Eph 1.21). The point from both texts is clear: as “the head of the body, the Church” (Col 1.18; Eph 1.22), Christ is “before all things” (Col 1.17), “first in all things” (Col 1.18), and “far above all” (Eph 1.21), since God has “subjected all things under his feet” (Eph 1.22). Christ is preeminent as the firstborn of all new creation, “the new Adam … the starting point where new creation took place.”[72] Although the old powers still hold sway in the world, those in the interlocked heaven-and-earth new creation domain where Christ is the head, enjoy his protection if they remain “in the faith established and steadfast and not shifting away from the hope of the gospel” (Col 1.23). This interpretation has several significant advantages. It fits into Paul's apocalyptic way of thinking about Christ's advent and exaltation. It also holds together the first strophe of the poem as a unit. Additionally, it makes better sense of the context. (The ecclesiology of Col 1.15-18a follows logically from the soteriological context of vv. 13-14.) Lastly, it is compatible with a wide range of Christological options. Appendix Here is Col 1.16 from Leedy's sentence diagrams.[73] Of note is how he equates the τὰ πάντα of 16a with 16c and 16d rather than seeing 16d as an elaboration of τά ὁρατά. Bibliography Bauer, Walter, Frederick William  Danker, William F. Arndt, F. Gingrich, Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, and Viktor Reichmann. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000. Bird, Michael F. Colossians and Philemon. A New Covenant Commentary. Cambridge, England: The Lutterworth Press, 2009. Brown, Anna Shoffner. “Nothing ‘Mere’ About a Man in the Image of God.” Paper presented at the Unitarian Christian Alliance, Springfield, OH, Oct 14, 2022. Bruce, E. K. Simpson and F. F. The Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament, edited by Ned B. Stonehouse. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1957. Buzzard, Anthony F. Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian. Morrow, GA: Restoration Fellowship, 2007. Caird, G. B. New Testament Theology. Edited by L. D. Hurst. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 2002. Caird, G. B. Paul’s Letters from Prison. New Clarendon Bible, edited by H. F. D. Sparks. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1976. Carden, Robert. One God: The Unfinished Reformation. Revised ed. Naperville, IL: Grace Christian Press, 2016. Chang, Eric H. H. The Only Perfect Man. Edited by Bentley C. F. Chang. 2nd ed. Montreal, QC: Christian Disciples Church Publishers, 2017. Deuble, Jeff. Christ before Creeds. Latham, NY: Living Hope International Ministries, 2021. Dunn, James D. G. Christology in the Making. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Dunn, James D. G. The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon. New International Greek Testament Commentary, edited by Gasque Marshall, Hagner. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Heiser, Michael S. The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019. King, Martha. An Exegetical Summary of Colossians. Dallas, TX: SIL International, 1992. Kuschel, Karl-Joseph. Born before All Time? Translated by John Bowden. New York, NY: Crossroad, 1992. Originally published as Beforen vor aller Zeit? Lane, William L. The New Testament Page by Page. Open Your Bible Commentary, edited by Martin Manser. Bath, UK: Creative 4 International, 2013. Leedy, Randy A. The Greek New Testament Sentence Diagrams. Norfolk, VA: Bible Works, 2006. Lohse, Edward. Colossians and Philemon. Hermeneia. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1971. MacDonald, William Graham. The Idiomatic Translation of the New Testament. Norfolk, VA: Bibleworks, 2012. Mark H. Graeser, John A. Lynn, John W. Schoenheit. One God & One Lord. 4th ed. Martinsville, IN: Spirit & Truth Fellowship International, 2010. Martin, Ralph. “An Early Christian Hymn (Col. 1:15-20).” The Evangelical Quarterly 36, no. 4 (1964): 195–205. Martyn, J. Louis. Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1997. McGrath, James F. The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2009. McKnight, Scot. The Letter to the Colossians. New International Commentary on the New Testament, edited by Joel B. Green. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2018. Norden, Eduard. Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen Zur Formengeschichte Religiöser Rede. 4th ed. Stuttgart, Germany: B. G. Teubner, 1956. Originally published as 1913. Pao, David. Colossians and Philemon. Zondervan Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament, edited by Clinton E. Arnold. Grand Rapid, MI: Zondervan, 2012. Perriman, Andrew. In the Form of a God. Studies in Early Christology, edited by David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022. Philo. The Works of Philo. The Norwegian Philo Concordance Project. Edited by Kåre Fuglseth Peder Borgen, Roald Skarsten. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2005. Robinson, James M. “A Formal Analysis of Colossians 1:15-20.” Journal of Biblical Literature 76, no. 4 (1957): 270–87. Schillebeeckx, Eduard. Christ: The Experience of Jesus as Lord. Translated by John Bowden. New York, NY: The Seabury Press, 1977. Schoberg, Gerry. Perspectives of Jesus in the Writings of Paul. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2013. Schweizer, Eduard. The Letter to the Colossians. Translated by Andrew Chester. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982. Smith, Dustin R. Wisdom Christology in the Gospel of John. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2024. Snedeker, Donald R. Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals. Bethesda, MD: International Scholars Publications, 1998. Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Thrall, Margaret. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Vol. 1. The International Critical Commentary, edited by C. E. B. Cranfield J. A. Emerton, G. N. Stanton. Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994. Wachtel, William M. “Colossians 1:15-20–Preexistence or Preeminence?” Paper presented at the 14th Theological Conference, McDonough, GA, 2005. Wessels, G. F. “The Eschatology of Colossians and Ephesians.” Neotestamentica 21, no. 2 (1987): 183–202. Witherington III, Ben The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary of the Captivity Epistles. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007. Yates, Roy. The Epistle to the Colossians. London: Epworth Press, 1993. Zeilinger, Franz. Der Erstgeborene Der Schöpfung. Wien, Österreich: Herder, 1974. Footnotes [1] Since the nineteenth century biblical scholars have been divided over whether Paul wrote Colossians. One of the major reasons for thinking Paul didn't write Colossians is his exalted Christology—the very conclusion this paper seeks to undermine. A second major factor to argue against Pauline authorship is the difference in vocabulary, but this is explainable if Paul used a different amanuensis. The theologically more cosmic emphasis (also evident in Ephesians) is likely due to Paul's time in prison to reflect and expand his understanding of the Christ event. Lastly, the proto-Gnostic hints in Colossians do not require dating the epistle outside of Paul's time. Although Gnosticism flourished at the beginning of the second century, it was likely already beginning to incubate in Paul's time. [2] Eduard Schillebeeckx, Christ: The Experience of Jesus as Lord, trans. John Bowden (New York, NY: The Seabury Press, 1977), 185. [3] Schillebeeckx, 185. [4] G. B. Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, New Clarendon Bible, ed. H. F. D. Sparks (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1976), 177. [5] Caird, 181. [6] James D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, New International Greek Testament Commentary, ed. Gasque Marshall, Hagner (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 91. “[W]hat at first reads as a straightforward assertion of Christ's pre-existenct activity in creation becomes on closer analysis an assertion which is rather more profound—not of Christ as such present with God in the beginning, nor of Christ as identified with a pre-existent hypostasis or divine being (Wisdom) beside God, but of Christ as embodying and expressing (and defining) that power of God which is the manifestation of God in and to his creation.” (Italics in original.) James D. G. Dunn, Christology in the Making, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 194. [7] James F. McGrath, The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2009), 46. [8] Andrew Perriman, In the Form of a God, Studies in Early Christology, ed. David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022), 200. [9] In addition, biblical unitarians routinely interpret Col 1.16 as new creation. See Anthony F. Buzzard, Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian (Morrow, GA: Restoration Fellowship, 2007), 189–90, Robert Carden, One God: The Unfinished Reformation, Revised ed. (Naperville, IL: Grace Christian Press, 2016), 197–200, Eric H. H. Chang, The Only Perfect Man, ed. Bentley C. F. Chang, 2nd ed. (Montreal, QC: Christian Disciples Church Publishers, 2017), 151–52, Jeff Deuble, Christ before Creeds (Latham, NY: Living Hope International Ministries, 2021), 163–66, John A. Lynn Mark H. Graeser, John W. Schoenheit, One God & One Lord, 4th ed. (Martinsville, IN: Spirit & Truth Fellowship International, 2010), 493–94, Donald R. Snedeker, Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals (Bethesda, MD: International Scholars Publications, 1998), 291–92, William M. Wachtel, “Colossians 1:15-20–Preexistence or Preeminence?” (paper presented at the 14th Theological Conference, McDonough, GA, 2005), 4. [10] All translations are my own. [11] Stophes are structural divisions drawn from Greek odes akin to stanzas in poetry or verses in music. [12] Throughout I will capitalize Church since that reflects the idea of all Christians collectively not just those in a particular local assembly. [13] Eduard Norden, Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen Zur Formengeschichte Religiöser Rede, 4th ed. (Stuttgart, Germany: B. G. Teubner, 1956), 250–54. [14] James M. Robinson, “A Formal Analysis of Colossians 1:15-20,” Journal of Biblical Literature 76, no. 4 (1957): 272–73. [15] Edward Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1971), 44. [16] Eduard Schweizer, The Letter to the Colossians, trans. Andrew Chester (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982), 57. [17] Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 84. [18] Ben  Witherington III, The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary of the Captivity Epistles (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), 129. [19] William L. Lane, The New Testament Page by Page, Open Your Bible Commentary, ed. Martin Manser (Bath, UK: Creative 4 International, 2013), 765. [20] E. K. Simpson and F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Ned B. Stonehouse (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1957), 65. [21] Michael F. Bird, Colossians and Philemon, A New Covenant Commentary (Cambridge, England: The Lutterworth Press, 2009), 50. [22] David Pao, Colossians and Philemon, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament, ed. Clinton E. Arnold (Grand Rapid, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 87. [23] Lohse, 42. [24] Lohse, 43–44. [25] Scot McKnight, The Letter to the Colossians, New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Joel B. Green (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2018), 144. [26] Col 1.13-14: “who rescued us from the authority of darkness and transferred (us) into the kingdom of his beloved son in whom we have the redemption, the forgiveness of the sins.” Col 1.21-22: “And you being formerly alienated and hostile in thought in the evil deeds, but now he reconciled (you) in his body of the flesh through the death to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him.” [27] In fact, we can easily skip from vv. 13-14 to vv. 21-22. [28] Dunn, Christology in the Making, 187–88. [29] Sadly, most translations erroneously insert a paragraph between vv. 14 and 15. This produces the visual effect that v. 15 is a new thought unit. [30] Bruce, 193. [31] Moses 2.65: “τὴν ἡγεμονίαν τῶν περιγείων” in Philo, The Works of Philo, The Norwegian Philo Concordance Project (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2005). See also Sirach 17.3. [32] Schweizer, 64. [33] For a helpful treatment of how the image of God relates to Christology, see Anna Shoffner Brown, “Nothing ‘Mere’ About a Man in the Image of God” (paper presented at the Unitarian Christian Alliance, Springfield, OH, Oct 14, 2022). [34] Walter Bauer et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000), s.v. “πρωτότοκος,” 2.a. [35] Franz Zeilnger wrote, “Christ is temporally the first of a series that essentially proceeds from him, and at the same time its lord and head.” Franz Zeilinger, Der Erstgeborene Der Schöpfung (Wien, Österreich: Herder, 1974), 182. Original: “als “Wurzel” ist Christus zeitlich der erste einer Reihe, die wesentlich aus ihm hervorgeht, und zugleich ihr Herr und Haupt.” [36] McKnight, 85–86. [37] The closest parallels are 1 Cor 8.6; Heb 1.2; and John 1.3, which employ the preposition δια (through). Upon close examination these three don't teach Christ created the universe either. [38] ESV, CSB, NASB, etc. Notably the NET diverges from the other evangelical translations. Roman Catholic, mainline, and unitarian translations all tend to straightforwardly render “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “in him” in Col 1.16; cf. NABRE, NRSVUE, OGFOMMT, etc. [39] Chang, 150. [40] Ralph Martin, “An Early Christian Hymn (Col. 1:15-20),” The Evangelical Quarterly 36, no. 4 (1964): 198. [41] Schillebeeckx, 186. [42] Dunn, Christology in the Making, 191. [43] Karl-Joseph Kuschel, Born before All Time?, trans. John Bowden (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1992), 336. [44] Dustin R. Smith, Wisdom Christology in the Gospel of John (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2024), 5–6. For more on wisdom Christology in Col 1.16 see Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 89, Roy Yates, The Epistle to the Colossians (London: Epworth Press, 1993), 18–19, 23, G. B. Caird, New Testament Theology, ed. L. D. Hurst (Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 2002), 46, McGrath, 44, 46. [45] See Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 89. See also Yates, 18–19, 23. [46] Dunn, Christology in the Making, 190. [47] Perriman, 199. [48] Martha King, An Exegetical Summary of Colossians (Dallas, TX: SIL International, 1992), 53. [49] Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), s.v. “ἐν,” 1722. He recognized the cause was both instrumental and final. [50] William Graham MacDonald, The Idiomatic Translation of the New Testament (Norfolk, VA: Bibleworks, 2012). [51] Chang, 147. Similarly James McGrath wrote, “[I]f all things were intended by God to find their fulfillment in Christ, then they must have been created “in him” in the very beginning in some undefined sense, since it was axiomatic that the eschatological climax of history would be a restoration of its perfect, original state.” McGrath, 46. [52] Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, 172. [53] “God so designed the universe that it was to achieve its proper meaning and unity only under the authority of man (Gen. 128; Ps. 86). But this purpose was not to be implemented at once; it was ‘to be put into effect when the time was ripe' (Eph. 110), when Christ had lived a human life as God intended it, and had become God's image in a measure which was never true of Adam. Only in unity with ‘the proper man' could the universe be brought to its destined coherence. For one who believes in predestination it is but a small step from this to saying that the universe was created in him.” Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, 178. [54] See also Paul's Adam Christology in Rom 5.12-21; 1 Cor 15.21-22, 45-49. [55] “Christus ist (durch seine Auferstehung aus dem Todesbereich) Herr über den ihm verliehenen Besitz, dessen ἀρχή und Urbild er ist, … und Haupt und Anfang der eschatologischen Neuschöpfung!” Zeilinger, 188. [56] King, 54. [57] Perriman, 200. [58] G. F. Wessels, “The Eschatology of Colossians and Ephesians,” Neotestamentica 21, no. 2 (1987): 187. [59] I realize my translation is awkward, but I prioritized closely mirroring the Greek over presenting smooth English. The original reads, “συνεζωοποίησεν ὑμᾶς σὺν αὐτῷ.” [60] Schillebeeckx, 187. [61] Scholars who make this connection include Caird, New Testament Theology, 216, Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, 177, McGrath, 44, Perriman, 201. [62] In fact, only two of the texts I cited above explicitly say “new creation” (2 Cor 5.17 and Gal 6.15). In all the others, Paul blithely employed creation language, expecting his readers to understand that he was not talking about the creation of the universe, but the creation of the new humanity in Christ—the Church. [63] McKnight, 152. [64] Mark H. Graeser, 493. [65] Rev 2.1, 8, 12, 18; 3.1, 7, 14. [66] See Gerry Schoberg, Perspectives of Jesus in the Writings of Paul (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2013), 280–81, 83. [67] Margaret Thrall, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, vol. 1, The International Critical Commentary, ed. C. E. B. Cranfield J. A. Emerton, G. N. Stanton (Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994), 423, 26–28. [68] J. Louis Martyn, Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1997), 122. [69] Martyn, 121. [70] Whether the old gods actually existed or not is a topic beyond the scope of this paper. Interested readers should consult Michael S. Heiser, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019). [71] “[D]ie in Christus gegebene echatologische Welt verwirkliche sich innerhalb der weiterhin existenten irdischen Schöpfung durch die Einbeziehung des Menschen in Christus, den Erhöhten, mittles Heilsverkündigung und Taufe. Das Eschaton setzt sic him Kerygma wetweit durch und wird Wirklichkeit, indem der Mensch durch die Taufe Christi Teil wird, d. h. in Einheit mit ihm dem Anspruch der στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου stirbt (2, 20) und mit ihm auferweckt sein eschatologisches Leben erhält. Die so dem erhöhten Christus eingegliederten Menschen bilden somit in ihm und mit ihm die neue Schöpfung der Eschata innerhalb der alten! Der Christusleib ist somit als sich weitende Kirche erkennbar. In ihr bildet himmlischer und irdischer Raum gewissermaßen eine Einheit.” Zeilinger, 179. [72] “Der neue Adam … Ausgangsort, in dem sich Neuschöpfung ereignete,” Zeilinger, 199. [73] Randy A. Leedy, The Greek New Testament Sentence Diagrams (Norfolk, VA: Bible Works, 2006). This is now available in Logos Bible Software.

My conversation with Dean starts at about 31 minutes but I have your headlines and clips first! Learn more about Farm Jam Sept 5-7 Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Dean Baker co-founded CEPR in 1999. His areas of research include housing and macroeconomics, intellectual property, Social Security, Medicare, and European labor markets. His blog, Beat the Press, provides commentary on economic reporting. His analyses have appeared in many major publications, including The Atlantic, The Washington Post, the Financial Times (London), and the New York Daily News. Dean received his BA from Swarthmore College and his PhD in economics from the University of Michigan. Dean has written several books, including Getting Back to Full Employment: A Better Bargain for Working People (with Jared Bernstein, Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2013); The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive (Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2011); Taking Economics Seriously (MIT Press, 2010), which thinks through what we might gain if we took the ideological blinders off of basic economic principles; and False Profits: Recovering from the Bubble Economy (PoliPoint Press, 2010), about what caused — and how to fix — the 2008–2009 economic crisis. In 2009, he wrote Plunder and Blunder: The Rise and Fall of the Bubble Economy (PoliPoint Press), which chronicled the growth and collapse of the stock and housing bubbles and explained how policy blunders and greed led to catastrophic — but completely predictable — market meltdowns. He also wrote a chapter (“From Financial Crisis to Opportunity”) in Thinking Big: Progressive Ideas for a New Era (Progressive Ideas Network, 2009). His previous books include The United States Since 1980 (Cambridge University Press, 2007), The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer (Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2006), and Social Security: The Phony Crisis (with Mark Weisbrot, University of Chicago Press, 1999). His book Getting Prices Right: The Debate Over the Consumer Price Index (editor, M.E. Sharpe, 1997) was a winner of a Choice Book Award as one of the outstanding academic books of the year. Among his numerous articles are “The Benefits of a Financial Transactions Tax,” Tax Notes 121, no. 4 (2008); “Are Protective Labor Market Institutions at the Root of Unemployment? A Critical Review of the Evidence” (with David R. Howell, Andrew Glyn, and John Schmitt), Capitalism and Society 2, no. 1 (2007); “Asset Returns and Economic Growth,” with Brad DeLong and Paul Krugman, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (2005); “Financing Drug Research: What Are the Issues,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2004); “Medicare Choice Plus: The Solution to the Long-Term Deficit Problem,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2004); “Professional Protectionists: The Gains From Free Trade in Highly Paid Professional Services,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2003); and “The Run-Up in Home Prices: Is It Real or Is It Another Bubble?,” Center for Economic and Policy Research (2002). Dean previously worked as a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute and an assistant professor at Bucknell University. He has also worked as a consultant for the World Bank, the Joint Economic Committee of the US Congress, and the OECD's Trade Union Advisory Council. He was the author of the weekly online commentary on economic reporting, the Economic Reporting Review, from 1996 to 2006.   Join us Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Bi-Weekly Happy Hour Hangout!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing

Joshua Mitchell, professor at Georgetown University, joins Timon and Josh for a wide ranging discussion about America, identity politics, and Protestantism.    Joshua Mitchell, PhD. is currently professor of political theory at Georgetown University. He has been Chairman of the Government Department and also Associate Dean of Faculty Affairs at SFS-Q. During the 2008-10 academic years, Dr. Mitchell was took Leave from Georgetown, and was the Acting Chancellor of The American University of Iraq - Sulaimani. His research interest lies in the relationship between political thought and theology in the West. He has published articles in The Review of Politics, The Journal of Politics, The Journal of Religion, APSR, and Political Theory. In 1993 his book, NOT BY REASON ALONE: RELIGION, HISTORY, AND IDENTITY IN EARLY MODERN THOUGHT, was published by the University of Chicago Press. A second book, THE FRAGILITY OF FREEDOM: TOCQUEVILLE ON RELIGION, DEMOCRACY, AND THE AMERICAN FUTURE, was published in 1995, also by the University of Chicago Press. In 2006, PLATO'S FABLE: ON THE MORTAL CONDITION IN SHADOWY TIMES, was published by Princeton University Press. His most recent book, TOCQUEVILLE IN ARABIA: DILEMMAS IN A DEMOCRATIC AGE, was published by the University of Chicago Press in 2013. More recently, he finished a book entitled, AMERICAN AWAKENING: IDENTITY POLITICS AND OTHER AFFLICTIONS OF OUR TIME, to be published shortly by Encounter Books (2020). His next book-length project will be called THE GENTLE SEDUCTION OF TYRANY.   Learn more about Dr. Joshua Mitchell's work: https://gufaculty360.georgetown.edu/s/contact/00336000014Rh8tAAC/joshua-mitchell   ––––––   Follow American Reformer across Social Media: X / Twitter – https://www.twitter.com/amreformer Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/AmericanReformer/ YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@AmericanReformer Rumble – https://rumble.com/user/AmReformer Website – https://americanreformer.org/   Promote a vigorous Christian approach to the cultural challenges of our day, by donating to The American Reformer: https://americanreformer.org/donate/   Follow Us on Twitter: Josh Abbotoy – https://twitter.com/Byzness Timon Cline – https://twitter.com/tlloydcline   The American Reformer Podcast is  hosted by Josh Abbotoy and Timon Cline, recorded remotely in the United States, and edited by Jared Cummings.   Subscribe to our Podcast, "The American Reformer" Get our RSS Feed – https://americanreformerpodcast.podbean.com/ Apple Podcasts – https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-american-reformer-podcast/id1677193347 Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/show/1V2dH5vhfogPIv0X8ux9Gm?si=a19db9dc271c4ce5

When Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States came out in 1980, it literally rocked the boat. Instead of starting where most histories of the Americas start — on the deck of Columbus's ship as it approached land — Howard Zinn flipped the script, focusing instead on what the people standing on the shore would have seen. In this episode, we look at the ripple effects of Zinn's radical take on history. You can read a transcript of this episode on our web page.Check out our booklist with titles related to A People's History of the United States.You can find Nick Witham's book Popularizing the Past at the University of Chicago Press.Learn more about the ReVisioning History series from Beacon Press, and visit the Zinn Education Project for tons of resources for teachers and students.History books are one of the subject areas targeted for censorship right now. Learn what you can do to help by visiting our Books Unbanned homepage, or listening to Borrowed and Banned, our previous series about the state of book banning in America.

In this exhausting deep dive, Matt and Chris take a break from counting their billionaire stipends to devote (what some might call) an inordinate amount of time to Gary Stevenson's recent appearance with a challenging interviewer: Tomás from Despolariza. They grapple with the indeterminacy of Schrödinger's Gary, who oscillates between being an economic and mathematical genius revealing what THEY don't want you to know on YouTube, and a pragmatic but selfless political activist who oversimplifies complex problems and sacrifices nuance (and himself) in the name of urgent reform.Despite insisting that he hates fame and has no desire to promote his best-selling book or be a popular YouTuber, Gary takes the time to remind us all of how often he's recognised on the street and precisely how many millions of views his channel racks up each month. These are depressingly familiar guru tropes, as are his sweeping claims that you can't trust politicians, economists, academics, journalists, the media, his old colleagues… or even graphs.Gary's core message that growing inequality is economically and politically unsustainable is an important one. And his ability to communicate the stakes of that problem to a large audience could be beneficial. So the criticism lies not with his stated goals but with the guru-tastic packaging and unwillingness to deal with complexity.Luckily, there is a solution... Gary. Only he and his YouTube channel can save your grandchildren from abject poverty and Nigel Farage. And if you doubt him, just look at how many millions he made for himself and the bank with his uncanny predictions… or those monthly viewer stats. Oh, and did we mention he has an elite education from LSE?Links#89 GARY STEVENSON - Economics, Trading, Inequality, Wealth, Populism, Tax, Depolarize.Zucman, G. (2015). The hidden wealth of nations: The scourge of tax havens. In The hidden wealth of nations. University of Chicago Press.Francis-Devine, B. (2025). Income inequality in the UK. House of Commons Library.Francis-Devine, B. (2025). Wealth in Great Britain. House of Commons Library.