Podcasts about freudian

The episode elucidates the transformative journey of a vocal coach who, through his collaboration with the artist Daniel Caesar, has garnered significant recognition within the music industry. Initially approached to provide vocal coaching, our speaker's involvement swiftly evolved into vocal production for Caesar's acclaimed album, "Freudian," which ultimately led to Grammy nominations. This pivotal experience not only catalyzed his ascent in the industry but also underscored the profound impact of music in transcending borders and fostering emotional connections among audiences globally. Throughout the discussion, we delve into the nuances of audience reactions across different cultures, the importance of community within the Toronto music scene, and the challenges faced by emerging artists in gaining recognition. The conversation culminates in a contemplative exploration of the necessity for a more interconnected musical community that champions collaboration over competition.Takeaways: The evolution of my career has been significantly influenced by my collaboration with Daniel Caesar, whose debut album, 'Freudian', has garnered notable recognition, including Grammy nominations. Experiencing a world tour allowed me to witness diverse audience reactions, highlighting the cultural differences in how people engage with music across various regions. The impact of music transcends geographic boundaries, serving as a universal language that fosters emotional connections and encourages positive change in listeners. In the music industry, there exists a challenging dynamic where emerging artists often struggle to gain visibility and support due to established hierarchies and perceived credentials. The development of a supportive music community in Toronto is crucial, as the current environment often fosters competition rather than collaboration among artists. I believe that fostering connections and collaborations among artists can enhance the creative landscape in Toronto, allowing for mutual growth and success. Companies mentioned in this episode: Daniel Caesar Freudian Kanye West

Join the Discord and read alongIn this very first From the Archives episode of Collecting Issues, we go back to where it all began with our 2022 discussion of Kraven's Last Hunt, the seminal Spider-Man story by J.M. DeMatteis and Mike Zeck. Originally published across The Amazing Spider-Man, Spectacular Spider-Man, and Web of Spider-Man in 1987, this dark, introspective arc sees Kraven the Hunter bury Spider-Man alive, assume his identity, and face off against the terrifying sewer-dweller Vermin.We look at the story's gothic almost Russian literature-esque tone, its place in the evolution of superhero comics, and its heavy literary and psychological themes—including a breakdown of its Freudian structure, Blakean symbolism, and bleak commentary on identity and mortality. Plus, we revisit how this tale reshaped Kraven as a complex villain—and how its impact still echoes today.Find out as we awkwardly stumble through one of Marvel's most unforgettable arcs—with all the chaotic podcast energy of our earliest recordings.Topics include:Fearful symmetry and William Blake's “The Tyger”The evolution of Kraven the Hunter1980s New York and its influence on comic storytellingThe black suit and its darker legacyInner monologues galoreCheek touching, grave digging, and sewer monsters00:00 Introduction and Overview03:56 Correcting the Record: Spider-Man Series Clarification04:22 The Unique Structure of Kraven's Last Hunt06:56 Reading Experience and Graphic Novel Format08:03 1980s Vibes and Comparisons to Batman11:46 Freudian Psychology in Spider-Man15:29 The Shocking Suicide in Comics16:36 Kraven's Return and Downgrade22:30 Kraven's Last Hunt: Themes and InspirationsApril's Comic Book Club Pick: Eight Billion Genies by Charles Soule and Ryan Browne!Join the Discord and read alongJoin the SubstackFollow us on InstagramFollow us on TiktokWatch us on Youtube Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Executive Director of the Presidential Council of Advisers for Digital Assets has Freudian slip and says America wants to buy infinite bitcoin?!► Bitcoin Well: bitcoinwell.com/simplybtc► Ledn: https://learn.ledn.io/simplySimply Bitcoin clients get 0.25% off their first loan► Coldcard: https://store.coinkite.com/promo/simplyPROMO CODE: SIMPLY for 5% OFF► Stamp Seed: www.stampseed.comPROMO CODE: SIMPLY for a 15% discount► HIVE Digital Technologies: hivedigitaltech.com► Casa: casa.io/simplyPROMO CODE: SIMPLY for 5% OFF your first year of Casa Standard or Premium ► Bitcoin Conference 2025: b.tc/conference/2025PROMO CODE: “SIMPLY” for 10% offFOLLOW US► https://twitter.com/SimplyBitcoinTV► https://twitter.com/bitvolt► https://twitter.com/Optimistfields► Nostr: npub1vzjukpr2vrxqg2m9q3a996gpzx8qktg82vnl9jlxp7a9yawnwxfsqnx9gcJOIN OUR TELEGRAM, GIVE US A MEME TO REVIEW!► https://t.me/SimplyBitcoinTVSUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE► https://bit.ly/3QbgqTQSUPPORT US► On-Chain: bc1qpm5j7wsnk46l2ukgpm7w3deesx2mdrzcgun6ms► Lightning: simplybitcoin@walletofsatoshi.com#bitcoin #bitcoinnews #simplybitcoinDISCLAIMER: All views in this episode are our own and DO NOT reflect the views of any of our guests or sponsors.Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. If you are or represent the copyright owner of materials used in this video and have a problem with the use of said material, please contact Simply Bitcoin.

It was wonderful to welcome back poet, teacher, writer, & scholar Elizabeth Cantwell this week to explore haunted houses both in film & real life, plus the existential, psychosexual, guilt-filled, Freudian, & supernatural realms of THE HAUNTING (1963), THE CHANGELING (1980), POLTERGEIST (1982), STIR OF ECHOES (1999), & more. I always learn so much when I talk to Elizabeth & we laughed far more than one would think going in given the topic, so this episode instantly became one of my favorites. Grab a flashlight & meet us at the top of the staircase, gang, we've got this!Originally Posted on Patreon (4/13/25) here: https://www.patreon.com/posts/126578705Shop Watch With Jen logo Merchandise in Logo Designer Kate Gabrielle's Threadless ShopDonate to the Pod via Ko-fiTheme Music: Solo Acoustic Guitar by Jason Shaw, Free Music Archive

Emma calls in concerned for her son, you tell us the ickiest ick you've gotten, and more!

Emma calls in concerned for her son, you tell us the ickiest ick you've gotten, and more!

In this thought-provoking video, Nathan and Cameron delve into the intersection of theology, myth, and current cultural trends, with a special focus on C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien's perspectives on myth within Christianity. They explore how myths, often seen as mere stories, can point to deeper truths, especially in the context of the Christian faith. Drawing on Lewis's conversion and Tolkien's insights, they examine the role of myth in understanding reality, contrasting it with modern secular myths like those found in Freudian psychology. This conversation challenges viewers to think critically about how Christianity fits into the broader narrative of human experience and invites Christians to engage with cultural and theological questions in a deeper, more reflective manner. Perfect for those seeking a deeper theological discussion on how ancient truths intersect with modern life.DONATE LINK: https://toltogether.com/donate BOOK A SPEAKER: https://toltogether.com/book-a-speakerJOIN TOL CONNECT: https://toltogether.com/tol-connect TOL Connect is an online forum where TOL listeners can continue the conversation begun on the podcast.

Join Klaudia and Ollie for a stroll through Supernatural S5E17: "99 Problems" and S5E18: "Point of No Return." Points of Interest: The Official Mystery Spotcast Playlist, WHEN Buddie becomes canon, Hibachi Chef Dean Winchester, Conclave brainrot, for those with the yaoi goggles on, copius Ethel Cain references, Sam's out of control sideburns, a W*ncest Freudian slip, a request for feedback from our straight listeners, the Revelations to Omegaverse pipeline, Into the Benedictverse, Castiel's Diva Cup, “Never kill yourself pookie,” Michael or Muppet, textbook omega poses, and an inappropriately timed Doctor Who joke.---Send a song (with reasoning) to our email, Tumblr ask box, or Bluesky for the Mystery Spotcast Official PlaylistCheck out Fight For the Future's frontline organizations list---Resources for Palestine:BDS: Act Now Against These Companies Profiting From the Genocide of the Palestinian PeopleBDS: What you can do about Israel's escalated crimes across the occupied West BankDecolonize Palestine: A collection of resources for organizers and anyone who wants to learn more about Palestine.Follow BDS: Instagram / Bluesky / TikTok---Follow us @MysterySpotcast on Bluesky / TikTok / Instagram / Tumblr---Contact us:- Send us a question to our  Tumblr ask box or email us at themysteryspotcast@gmail.com- Submit your favorite Destiel fic for us to read

Emma calls in concerned for her son, you tell us the ickiest ick you've gotten, and more!

The Oedipus complex, Freudian slip, repression, the ego and the id – Sigmund Freud's ideas have become part of everyday language. He opened up the world's mind to the idea of the subconscious. He also pioneered the idea that our childhood shapes who we are. But what are the secrets of his own early years? And what started him on the path towards, literally, changing our minds about everything?Listen to Legacy on the Wondery App or wherever you get your podcasts. You can binge episodes early and ad-free on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Start your free trial by visiting wondery.com/links/legacy now.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome to PsychEd, the psychiatry podcast for medical learners, by medical learners. This is our inaugural book club episode centered around the novel Mind Fixers by Anne Harrington.Mind Fixers is by the Harvard historian Anne Harrington, and came out from Norton in 2022. It reframes the “biological turn” in later twentieth century psychiatry with a history of the discipline from the later nineteenth century forward. Harrington argues that the biological turn had relatively little to do with new scientific advances, and came instead from a need to separate psychiatry from the increasingly unpopular public image of the discipline's previous, “Freudian” age. To make this argument, she starts with the anatomic research of turn-of-the-century figures like Kraepelin, and how this generally failed to explain important mental illnesses. She traces the emergence of “Freudian” or psychological approaches to mental illness to the high point of their dominance in the mid twentieth century, and then their decline, as their inadequacy with respect to things like bipolar disorder and schizophrenia became increasingly clear, and their emphasis on childhood experience stigmatized families. Biological psychiatry is then a way to restore the fields's respectability as as branch of medicine, but according to Harrington, there is not much transformative innovation to go along with this rebrand; and she emphasizes that the psychopharmacology revolution which gave us the first antipsychotics, MAOIS, tricyclics, and the receptor model of mental illness, actually happened during the heyday of psychoanalysis.The members of our team involved in this discussion are:Sara Abrahamson - MS2 at the University of TorontoDr. Kate Braithwaite - Medical Doctor from South AfricaDr. Wendy MacMillan-Wang - PGY4 psychiatry resident at the University of ManitobaDr. Alastair Morrison - PGY1 psychiatry resident at McMaster UniversityDr. Gaurav Sharma - Staff psychiatrist working in Nunavut, CanadaThis episode was edited by Dr. Angad Singh - PGY1 psychiatry resident at the University of Toronto Our discussion was structured around four themes:(03:15) - Psychiatry and Economic Incentives(19:33) - Psychiatry and Parenting(28:40) - Biological Psychiatry and its Alternatives(52:05) - Psychiatry and Social ControlIf you enjoyed this episode, consider listening to our episodes about:History of Psychiatry with Dr. David CastleCritical Psychiatry with Dr. Elia Abi-Jaoude and Lucy CostaFor more PsychEd, follow us on Instagram (⁠@psyched.podcast⁠), X (⁠@psychedpodcast⁠), and Facebook (⁠⁠PsychEd Podcast⁠⁠). You can provide feedback by email at ⁠psychedpodcast@gmail.com⁠. For more information, visit our website at ⁠psychedpodcast.org⁠.

The gang tries some black cherry faygo, and keep talking about A6A6I5 of Homestuck, now with Muse!Calliope and Jasprosesprite^2. Calliope returns to the land of the living. Karkat and Kanaya visit the queen of monsters. The Freudian slips continue. This episode covers pages 7561 - 7671 of Andrew Hussie's Homestuck, which is best read on the Unofficial Homestuck Web Archive.Get in touch!Leave us a message at our tumblr: https://seriousbusinesspod.tumblr.com

From the blog - https://0x5.uk/2025/01/31/why-is-reading-bad-code-so-painful/David's  just-five-mins podcast - https://www.justfivemins.com/ps, when I said "Increased heart attack" I meant to say "Increased heart rate"

Question: I am a registered psychotherapist and I reject Freudian and Jungian beliefs. However, I did find that when you remove these demonic influences and stick with the "science" behind psychology and filter it through the Bible that it's a powerful tool. Proverbs in particular along with New Testament scriptures encourage us to guard our heart and mind, renew our mind with God's Word, and find peace of mind. The Bible is actually the BASIS of TRUE Psychotherapy if you study the subject biblically. What do you say?Response: It's instructive that just in the last week we have been contacted by Christian psychologists who insist that "psychotherapy" by name has been discarded by Christians who limit themselves to being called Biblical Counselors. Further, secular psychologists have also gone down this path. We appreciate your "rejection" of Freudian and Jungian beliefs. It is clear that your heart is for those you seek to help. With that in mind, the pertinent question to ask, however, is how thorough that process has been? We say that because some of these counselors are still using the teachings of those you correctly label as "demonic influences."Other psychologists have "come out" with the same concern for how they have been trained, and what they have learned in practices that span several decades.More recently, the Transgender movement has shown that "science" has very little to do with an utterly emotional, anti-science practice. So, we have to make sure we've gutted the structure of psychology/psychotherapy.There is, however, the often seen reference to the “Science” of psychology. There's a fascinating article entitled The Puzzle of Paul Meehl: An intellectual history of research criticism in psychology (i.e., checking them out from the perspective of real science [https://bit.ly/4ihy1qX]).Professor Andrew Gelman writes, "There's nothing wrong with Meehl. He's great. The Puzzle of Paul Meehl is that everything we're saying now, all this stuff about the problems with Psychological Science and PPNAS and Ted Talks and all that, Paul Meehl was saying 50 years ago. And it was no secret. So how is it that all this was happening, in plain sight, and now here we are?"Meehl concluded his 1967 article by saying, "Some of the more horrible examples of this process would require the combined analytic and reconstructive efforts of Carnap, Hempel, and Popper to unscramble the logical relationships of theories and hypotheses to evidence. Meanwhile our eager-beaver researcher, undismayed by logic-of-science considerations and relying blissfully on the ‘exactitude' of modem statistical hypothesis-testing, has produced a long publication list and been promoted to a full professorship. In terms of his contribution to the enduring body of psychological knowledge, he has done hardly anything."We will pray that as you devise your way, the Lord will direct your steps further.

This week we psychoanalyze Spellbound, Hitchcock's 1945 film noir mystery dominated by Freudian psychotherapy. Gregory Peck plays an amnesiac doctor and psychiatrist Ingrid Bergman races to unlock his past as z murder investigation threatens to derail his progress.***SPOILER ALERT*** We do talk about this movie in its entirety, so if you plan on watching it, we suggest you watch it before listening to our takes.A Selznick International Picture. Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Produced by David O. Selznick. Written by Angus MacPhail, based on the novel The House of Dr. Edwardes by Hilary Saint George Saunders and Francis Beeding. Starring Ingrid Bergman, Gregory Peck, Michael Chekhov, Leo G. Carroll, Norman Lloyd.. Cinematography by George Barnes. Music by Miklos Rozsa.Ranking: 18 out of 52. Ranking movies is a reductive parlor game. It's also fun. And it's a good way to frame a discussion. We aggregated over 70 ranked lists from critics, fans, and magazines Spellbound got 1,989 ranking points.

Beau Is Afraid is not a movie that wants to be understood in a traditional sense—it's designed to be an overwhelming, anxiety-ridden odyssey where meaning is entirely subjective. Ari Aster crafts a surreal, often nightmarish world that feels both deeply personal and universally unsettling. The film taps into the psyche of its audience, mirroring their own fears, relationships, and insecurities, particularly surrounding themes of guilt, maternal control, and existential dread. Whether you see it as a tragic comedy, an absurdist horror, or a Freudian fever dream depends on what you bring to it—your own relationship with your mother, your personal anxieties, and how much you're willing to surrender to its chaos. This is a movie that refuses to give answers but thrives on interpretation, making it an experience that lingers long after the credits roll.Beyond its complex themes, Beau Is Afraid is also a masterclass in filmmaking. The cinematography is striking, shifting between claustrophobic close-ups and vast, unsettling dreamscapes that make you feel trapped inside Beau's mind. The soundtrack amplifies the tension, seamlessly weaving between eerie orchestrations and unexpectedly playful melodies, reinforcing the film's tonal instability. At the center of it all is Joaquin Phoenix, delivering a raw and deeply vulnerable performance that keeps the audience tethered to Beau's unraveling psyche. His performance is so committed that, even when the film descends into complete absurdity, his fear and confusion feel painfully real. Whether you love it or hate it, Beau Is Afraid is an ambitious, one-of-a-kind cinematic experience that challenges its audience to sit with discomfort and find meaning in the madness.Stick around until the end of the episode for a round of Movie 20 Questions.Safe travels, nomads.

If you're an oh I never cry kind of person, if nothing seems to touch you or move you that deeply, this is for you.Few things might be more impactful — and more challenging — than giving space to what has been avoided for a long, long time.Because that was me. With the exception of brief outbursts, I didn't allow myself a lot of emotions. It was difficult (and expensive!?) to re-connect with my heart and body. Every week I stepped into a bland office with tired carpets and waited for the dreaded words: “How does that make you feel?”I was not feeling anything.If anything, my body felt empty. There was a void. And tension. Like someone holding a door from bursting open.The head was my safe space. I wanted to think about my life, not feel it. Kudos to my therapist who gently prodded me back to my body when I tried to divert and tell a story.Anger might have been the hardest to access.Hot flashing anger. Boiling anger. Stewing anger. Even today, anger is a tough one. I still push it away. If I get angry, I may feel a short pull, a hint at something happening. Then it gets bottled up and placed in the toxic waste storage somewhere down in my guts. Anger does not feel safe. I had to learn, like a toddler, that experiencing anger was not the same as being an angry person. I had to teach myself not to feel guilty for anger simply arising. I had to grasp that being angry at someone I loved did not threaten to break our bond. Don't get me wrong: I don't want to act from a place of anger. I don't want my life to be filled with anger. No, like all feelings and thoughts, it arises and vanishes. The anger burns off. The better my overall state, the more centered I am, the less interesting it is. (This was where meditation changed my life profoundly.) But the self-denial, I found, leads to a dissociated existence, to a disconnect from my truth.It creates tension and numbness in my body. It leads to behavior that is hard to explain — like suddenly avoiding a person or place. It leads to the willful destruction of the gift of time to experience distraction and release.Then I climb down the ladder and open the anger barrel. Ah. That's what's going on…“Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.” ― Carl JungI have found different ways to access that space. What seems to work best is movement, movement that lets the body express and release without the mind as an intermediary. Workouts, dance, TRE, breathwork all seem effective. And, yes, even writing — which has the advantage of being available for free to anyone at any time (well, provided some privacy).It's dead simple, but not easy.I learned this technique from the books of the late Dr. John Sarno (I shared it here with other notes on journaling). Years ago, Jim O'Shaughnessy mentioned Sarno to me, but I was not listening. Sarno focused on chronic pain, particularly back pain, and that was not a major issue for me.Last year, one of my stepbrothers used Sarno's method to overcome long COVID. The way he described it was very moving, as if he was dropping the weights he had been carrying by communing with his heart. It blew my mind.Strange as it may seem, people with an unconscious psychological need for symptoms tend to develop a disorder that is well known, like back pain, hay fever, or eczema. — The Divided Mind“John Sarno was a rehabilitation-medicine specialist at N.Y.U.,” writes Sam Dolnick at the New York Times. A doctor frustrated with his tools which didn't seem to be effective. His encounter with psychology made him see “his own physical ailments — an irritable stomach, itchy skin, shrieking headaches — as manifestations of his emotional well-being.” Mind and body appeared to him as one system and chronic pain often as a psychosomatic phenomenon — a physical symptom caused by psychological factors (he called it TMS).I don't know whether he is right about pain being a ‘distraction' but I don't doubt the connection between mental and physical health.As with Freud's patients, I found that my patients' physical symptoms were the direct result of strong feelings repressed in the unconscious. — The Mindbody PrescriptionThe medical community thought Sarno, who called himself ‘a heretic', went too far. “Because his colleagues wouldn't listen,” writes Dolnick, “he bypassed the journals and instead wrote best-selling books, conversational in tone, that detailed the link he saw between emotional distress and physical pain; he sold more than a million copies.”I didn't suffer from chronic pain, but I was familiar with the issue of bottled-up emotions. How else could they manifest? What issues was I risking down the road?Sarno focused on rage perhaps because that was his predicament (“I am furious!” he said. “It's there all the time! I'm in a rage!”). What about the other stuff we push away? The sorrow, shame, guilt, envy, fear, all the hurt and judgment and nasty stuff we would rather avoid.What if Sarno didn't go far enough?“It is perfectly acceptable to have a physical problem in our culture, but people tend to shy away from anything that has to do with the emotions.” — Healing Back PainI wanted to know the truth about how I felt — the embodied truth, not the story my mind would come up with. And I wanted to drop the weight. I needed to know how Sarno had helped people.For some patients, knowledge was enough. That's why Sarno's books analyze the condition, the treatment methods, and (Freudian) psychology. Unfortunately, Sarno buried a key idea among his many pages (kudos to his student Nicole Sachs for re-surfacing it): if knowing about the connection between psyche and body is not enough, you can choose to face and release whatever you are holding.The best description I've found is in the chapter ‘treatment' in The Divided Mind. Barely five pages of a “daily study program.” It's that simple.* Make three lists with all the sources of your emotional pain:* One list for your past: “Anger, hurt, emotional pain, and sadness generated in childhood will stay with you all your life because there is no such thing as time in the unconscious.”* One list for your current life circumstances: “List all the pressures in your life, since they all contribute to your inner rage.”* And one list for your personality traits, whatever contributes “to the internal emotional pain and anger.” For example: being a people pleaser, self-critical, a perfectionist, very driven, shy, self-sacrificing etc. — “The child in our unconscious doesn't care about anyone but itself and gets angry at the pressures to be perfect and good.” * Set aside time and “write an essay, the longer the better, about each item on your list. This will force you to focus in depth on the emotional things of importance in your life.” I called it write Until the Heart Catches.* Ideally, do this daily. More realistically, commit to it as an experiment, say for a month, then regularly to check in. This is done by hand. With pen and paper. I know you all want to type it and have AI analyze it. Or speak it into a transcription app and avoid typing altogether. That may be effective in different ways, but in this what matters is not insight but to have an emotional experience that was previously avoided.The point of the pen is movement. We need to move from head to body and stay with discomfort. We need to see the words take shape and be able to stare at them. We need to feel the emotional charge. It's work. If you stay at the level of trivial chatter, your experience will likewise be trivial.Yes, your hand may cramp in the beginning. It gets better.Yes, it may be illegible. That does not matter. We're not writing to share.This is about healing, growing, and a chance to get closer to your essence.What happens on that page is for your eyes only. It may be effective to destroy the pages later on. I haven't tried that yet, but I know it can be useful to ‘release' written statements — say a letter of forgiveness — to the ocean, fire etc.Occasionally, this writing yields creative sparks. Ideas and insights, songs and poetry, maybe waiting for you. There is gold in your shadow. When that happens, you just write the spark up somewhere else. Keep the mindbody writing between yourself and the universe.A few things I've learned doing this many times:* Turn off the phone. Practice discipline. You may feel the urge to go to the kitchen, the bathroom, to text someone, check the apps, to do work, to do anything but experience what has been avoided for so long.* Set a timer. It can take a while to go deep. I often start at the level of story with my gaze outward (“my problem is [person] is [doing]”). Give yourself enough space to go beyond the surface. Keep writing until you find the trail of feeling, then discomfort. Look for I feel [X] and, frankly, I'd rather not…* Stay with the body. The mind will try to distract you. For the purpose of this exercise what happened is irrelevant. The story does not matter. All that matters is whether you can give yourself permission to feel what your unconscious is holding.* Privacy. This is about experiencing emotions that don't feel safe to feel, let alone express around others. Even with my therapists and my IFS coach I censored myself. The more privacy you have for this work, the better.* Mindbody experience. I've broken pens, punched through pages, sobbed, cried, yelled, and cursed. I tend to shift back and forth between writing auf deutsch and in English. Many of my pages are illegible. Sometimes the letters get very large, at other times the writing is tiny. Allow yourself a full body experience. Give your parts the space to express themselves the way they want to.* Try speaking. Try reading the emotionally difficult/juicy stuff out loud. Don't think or dictate but rather let the hand write and then say out loud what appeared.* Let go. We're not trying to make this our reality. The goal is to visit the dragon's cave and return to the village. Say what needs to be said, cry if you feel like crying, and when you're done, close the notebook and leave it behind on the page. * End with soothing. Things might get loud and wild and you might feel raw and upset after. Give yourself time to calm down and comfort yourself. I'm not joking. Don't do this and hop on a work call right after.* Find a couple of self-care rituals as rewards for doing the work — a walk in nature, yoga nidra, a nap, hot bath, soothing music or guided meditation..* Add self-love and forgiveness. We're looking to meet ourselves on the page as honestly as we can. You might bump into shadow that can be difficult to face. That's valuable, but we also need to make sure we don't stay in that mindset. Aside from soothing self-care, end with an affirmation to love and forgive yourself. Perhaps find someone to share that love with. Share a hug.* The weirder this sounds, the more important it is. If everything love and forgiveness gives you the ick, try something like Love Yourself Like Your Life Depends on It by Kamal Ravikant.I've used mindbody writing for life circumstances like money or writing, for relationship and family issues, for hang-ups like my avoidance of intimacy, and for the big leaps I have not allowed myself. I could easily find dozens more for which I haven't explored with it yet.Like my reluctance to ask for help. Gotta be independent! Can't rely on others… oh. Is that so. I wonder what feelings are hiding in that space. Or my teeth clenched at night. I wonder what wants to be expressed there… Still, I've found it very effective already. I feel lighter and less tense. My story has been changing. I find peace and bliss on the other side of broken pens and mad pages.It is simply one way I meet my darkness and stuckness to release it, one page at a time.Maybe it's time to start the work?I hope this helps.— Frederik This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.frederikwrites.com/subscribe

In another special episode dedicated to the how, what and why of memory, Gyles talks to his long-time friend and colleague Professor Brett Kahr. Professor Kahr is a practising psychotherapist and an expert on Sigmund Freud, the father of psychotherapy and the inventor of the "talking cure". In this fascinating conversation, Gyles and Prof. Kahr take a detailed look at the power of childhood memories, particularly traumatic ones, to effect our adult lives, and the benefits to be had from examining them and learning from them. Brett also tells Gyles about Freud himself, how he developed his ideas and how he escaped the Nazis and came to London. Gyles talks to Brett about some of the memories we've heard from our guests on Rosebud, and Brett talks about some of the common themes which come up in psychoanalysis - such as dreams and sex. This is a wide-ranging and thought-provoking conversation, we hope you enjoy it. Professor Kahr's book: Coffee with Freud, is available from major bookshops online. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

RU335: DR VANESSA SINCLAIR ON RENDERING UNCONSCIOUS, THE BOOK SERIES: https://renderingunconscious.substack.com/p/ru335-dr-vanessa-sinclair-on-rendering Join Rendering Unconscious at Substack: https://renderingunconscious.substack.com Rendering Unconscious episode 335. In this episode, I discuss my recent trip to the London, the highlight of which was my pilgrimage to the Freud Museum, where my husband, Carl Abrahamsson, gave a lecture on the films "Seconds" (1966) and "The Substance" (2024) with Freudian cinephile Mary Wild as discussant. I am happy to say my visit to the Freud Museum gave me renewed enthusiasm for the field. The museum's existence is so significant for psychoanalysis, especially during these times of rising fascism, as it was where Freud when fellow psychoanalyst Marie Bonaparte helped him and his family escape Vienna. I then delve into my book series Rendering Unconscious: Psychoanalytic Perspectives, detailing its origins, contributors, and themes. The 2019 edition featured artwork by Alison Blickle, while the 2024 edition includes collages by Sinclair. The books cover diverse topics like violence, racism, and political issues, and are dedicated to the memory of queer poet and dear friend, Andrew Daul. Get both volumes of Rendering Unconscious: Psychoanalytic Perspectives here: https://amzn.to/4bHrdRp News & updates: Join me on March 15 – Book launch event and seminar for The Queerness of Psychoanalysis: From Freud and Lacan to Laplanche and Beyond (Routledge 2025) with co-editors Elisabeth Punzi and Myriam Sauer, Malmö Konstmuseum, Malmöhusvägen 6, Malmö, Sweden. Visit https://www.drvanessasinclair.net/events/ The Queerness of Psychoanalysis: From Freud and Lacan to Laplanche and Beyond (Routledge 2025) has incredible cover art by trans icon Val Denham. Get yours now: https://amzn.to/3QYFlw6 Links to all my books can be found at: https://www.drvanessasinclair.net/books/

Here are the 4 KEEN ON AMERICA take-aways in our conversation about the dysfunctional American immigration system with Felipe Torres Medina1) Background & Immigration Journey* Felipe Torres Medina is a comic writer for "The Stephen Colbert Show" and author of the new book America Let Me In about the US immigration system* Born in Bogotá, Colombia, Medina moved to the US at 21 on a student visa to pursue a master's in screenwriting at Boston University* Medina received an "alien of extraordinary ability" visa (talent visa for artists) after graduation, and eventually got a green card after marrying2) On the US Immigration System* Medina describes the immigration process as expensive (costing "tens of thousands of dollars" in legal fees) and filled with bureaucratic challenges* He emphasizes that legal immigration requires "tremendous privilege and money" that most people don't have* The book takes an interactive "choose your own path" format to highlight the maze-like nature of the immigration system* He points out that there hasn't been comprehensive immigration reform since the Clinton administration (nearly 30 years ago)3) Comedy as Commentary* Medina uses humor to process his experiences and create community around shared frustrations* He was inspired by writers like Julio Cortazar, George Saunders, Tina Fey, and Carrie Fisher* The book aims to educate Americans who "have so many opinions about immigration" but "don't know what it entails"* He mentions that making the book interactive and game-like adds "levity" to a tense topic4) How to Fix the System* While critical of Trump's immigration policies, Medina says the book isn't specifically about Trump but about a "flawed and messy" system created by multiple administrations* He suggests moving US Citizenship and Immigration Services out of the Department of Homeland Security to change the narrative that immigration is a security threat* His proposed reforms include creating better pathways for educated immigrants and hiring more USCIS staff to reduce backlogs FULL TRANSCRIPT* Andrew Keen: Hello everybody. It is Sunday, March the 9th, 2025. Interesting piece in the times. A couple of days ago, The New York Times, that is about the so-called British flame thrower who is a comic best suited to taking on Trump. They're talking about a man called Kumar. Nish Kumar looks very funny, and apparently he's very angry too. I have to admit, I haven't seen him. It's an interesting subject. It suggests that at the moment, even in spite of Trump and outraging many Americans, the state of American humor could be amped up a bit. My guest today is a writer on The Stephen Colbert Show and a comic, or certainly a comic writer in his own right, Philippe Torres Medina. He has a new book out on Tuesday. It's called America Let Me In, and I'm thrilled that he's joining us from Harlem in Manhattan today. Congratulations, Phillip, on the new job. What do you the new book? I was going to say job. That's a Freudian error here. What do you make of the Times's observation that American humor isn't in its best state when it comes to Trump?Felipe Torres Medina: Oh, wow. That's that's an interesting question. First of all, I love Nish Kumar. I think he's a wonderful, wonderful comedian. He's very funny. He has a level of wit and his observations are just wonderful. I hadn't seen this article, but I really appreciate that the times recognized him because he's been working very hard for a lot of years. I think more than American humor not being fit for the moment. I think at least personally for me, a little bit of addressing Trump again began. And addressing Trump in general is, you know, jokes have to be new. And after basically ten years of Donald Trump every day, all the time, it's certainly hard to continue to find new angles. Now, the dysfunction of the administration and perhaps sometimes the cruelty and whatever they're doing does provide you with material. But I think it can cause you as a writer to be like, oh God, here we go again. More Trump stuff. You know, because that's what we're talking about.Andrew Keen: Do you see your book, Philippe, as a Trump book? America? Let me in. It's about immigration. I mean, obviously touches on in many ways on Trump and certainly his hostility to immigration and immigrants. But is it a Trump book, or is it a broader kind of critique or observation about contemporary America?Felipe Torres Medina: Yeah, I never set out to write a book about Trump or a Trump book. My goal is to write a book about the immigration system, because I went through it, and as a comedian, I encountered in it many contradictions and absurdities that just kind of became fodder to me for comedy. So I try to write this book about the system, but the system was caused by many administrations in many parties, you know, now, the current hostility or the current everythingness of immigration, you know, immigration being kind of in the forefront of the national discourse certainly has been aided by Republican policy in the past ten years and by Donald Trump's rhetoric. But that doesn't mean that this is a book about Trump or as a response to Trump. It's actually a book responding to a system that is flawed and messy, but it's the one we have.Andrew Keen: Yeah. You described the book as a love letter to immigrants, but it's not a love letter to the system. Tell me your story. As you say. You went through it so you have firsthand experience. Where were you born?Felipe Torres Medina: So I was born in Colombia. I was born in Bogota, Colombia, which is the capital of Colombia. I lived there most of my life. I moved to United States when I was 21 on a student visa, because I came here to do my masters. I did my master's in screenwriting at Boston University. And after that, you know, I started working here as a comedian, but also as a writer. And I was able to get an alien of extraordinary ability visa, which is a very pretentiously named visa, kind of makes you sound like you're in the X-Men, but it it's just what they call talent visas for artists, athletes, entrepreneurs, educators, whatever. And so I got one of those and then several renewals of those. And then, you know, thanks to my work as a writer, as a comedian, initially as a copywriter in advertising, I was able to I bought I met the love of my life, got married, and then I have a green card and that's why I'm here.Andrew Keen: Yeah. As and quoting here, it sounds rather funny. An alien of extraordinary ability. Do you think your experience is typical? I mean, the even the fact that you came for grad school to to Boston puts you in a, in a kind of intellectual or professional elite. So is your experience in any way typical, do you think?Felipe Torres Medina: I wouldn't say typical. I would say my experience is the experience of many people who come here. And I think it's the experience of the people who are, quote unquote, the immigrants we want. Right. And, you know, if we're going to dive into the rhetoric of the of immigration these days, I came the right way and did everything, quote unquote, the right way. You know, but what this book and also this journey that I took to immigrate here proves is that it's it's only possible with tremendous amount of privilege and tremendous, tremendous amount of money. You know, it's a very expensive process for the majority of people.Andrew Keen: How much did it cost you?Felipe Torres Medina: Oh, I think in total since I started. I mean, when you count the fact that for most, like master's programs, you don't get any sort of financial aid unless you get, like a scholarship from your own country or a sort of like Fulbright or something like that. There's already the cost of a full master's program.Andrew Keen: But then you weren't coming. I mean, you didn't pay for your master's program in order to get immigration papers, you know.Felipe Torres Medina: Of course, that, but I, I had to pay for my master's program to be able to study here. You know, I didn't have I didn't have my any sort of aid. But, you know, discounting that in terms of immigration paperwork, I've spent tens of thousands of dollars because you have to hire immigration lawyers to make sure that everything's fine. And those are quite expensive.Andrew Keen: Was it worth it?Felipe Torres Medina: Well, yeah. You know, I met the love of my life. I live a.Andrew Keen: Very. I mean, there are lots of loves of. You could have met someone else, and that's true. Or you might have even you might have even met her or him at an airport somewhere else while they were on vacation.Felipe Torres Medina: That's that's possible. But yeah, I mean, I live a I live a good life. I do what I wanted to do, you know, I, I took got my master's because I wanted to write comedy professionally and I get to do that. And I do think when I set out to do this, I was like, well, the place with the best film and television industry in the world is and was then and still is the United States. So I was like, well, I have to go there, you know, and I was able to become a part of this industry and to work in this art form.Andrew Keen: You didn't get any job. You You got the combat job? Yes. I believe you drew the the short straw, right? I bet nobody else was right. Just Stephen Colbert.Felipe Torres Medina: Yeah, I'm very lucky. And but again, it's a mix of luck and hard work and all those things. So yeah, I don't I don't regret moving.Andrew Keen: So some people might be watching this maybe some some MAGA people. I'm not sure if MAGA people really watch this, but if they were they might be thinking, well, Philippe Torres Medina, he's a good example. He's the type of person we want. He jumped through many hoops. He's really smart. He's really successful. He brings value to this country. Is now a full time writer on the Colbert's show he came from it came from Latin America. And he's exactly the kind of person we want. And we want a system that's hard, because only guys like him have the intellectual and financial resources to actually get through it. Well, how would you respond to them?Felipe Torres Medina: I would say that I appreciate the compliment, but I wouldn't necessarily say that that's the best way to move forward on immigration now. I will say this book is a humorous take on the whole immigration journey. And so what? Like I tell different stories of different people coming here made up or inspired by real life. And one of the paths that you can take in this book, because this is kind of an interactive choose your own path book, is mine. But I think what this book tries to prove is that even if you do everything right, even if you, you know, have the money, sometimes it's very, very hard. And that, I think, does put us at a disadvantage when it comes to having a workforce that could be productive for the country, especially as birthrates are declining. You know, we are headed toward a but, you know, people have described as a barrel economy. If we don't simply up the population and the people who are upping the population and actually having children are immigrants.Andrew Keen: One other piece of news today, there's obviously a huge amount of news on the immigration front is apparently there's a freeze on funding to help green card holders. You've been through the process. You write about it in the new book. But how much more difficult is it now?Felipe Torres Medina: You mean under the current administration? Yeah. I wouldn't know. I you know, I think that.Andrew Keen: This idea of even freezing green card. Yeah. That holidays, even if you have a green card, you get frozen.Felipe Torres Medina: Yeah, exactly. And I think that that, you know, I think that that's what Trump did in his first term, more or less with legal immigration, was to create roadblocks and freezes and these kinds of things to kind of just like stymie the process and make it slower, make it harder, even for people who, again, are doing everything right to be able to remain in the country.Andrew Keen: And I'm guessing also some of the DOJ's stuff about laying off immigration judges and court stuff, they're taking office to leave. Apparently 100 immigration court staff are retiring. This adds to it as well.Felipe Torres Medina: Yeah. Yeah, exactly. I mean, Citizenship and Immigration Services, USCIS is a very particular part of the government because it is one of the few parts of the federal government that funds itself. Again, going back to cost the fees that they make are so big, they make so much money that if there's a government shut down, actually, USCIS does not shut down. It's one of the few parts of the government that didn't need to shut down, because they make so much money out of the immigrants trying to come here. So it's a really, really strange part of the government. It kind of doesn't know where it belongs. So seeing like the the DOJ's cuts that arrive into the and that may be implemented into USCIS. Kind I'm not familiar with any Dodge cuts recently on USCIS, but I suspect that they would be strange because it's a it's a very strange division of the federal government. It's not like the Department of Education or the like the Forestry Service. It's it's it's own kind of like little fiefdom.Andrew Keen: Are you wrote an interesting thing or you were featured recently on Lit Hub, where this show actually used to get distributed about how to write a funny book about American immigration. Of course, it's it's a good question. I mean, it's such a frustrating bureaucratic mess at the best of times. I do write anything funny, Philippe, about it.Felipe Torres Medina: Well, I think the, the to me, the, the finding a format to be able to explore this, this chaotic system. It's so, so complicated. It's like a maze. So to me, having this kind of interactive format allowed me to have some freedom to be like, okay, well, you know, one of the things that they taught me in my comedy education, when I was training at a theater here in New York, the Upright Citizens Brigade is the premise of if this is true, then what else is true? You know, so if this absurd thing is reality, then what? How can you heighten that reality? And for me, you know, the immigration system is so absurd. It's it's so Byzantine and chaotic that I was like, okay, well, I can heighten this to an extra level. And so when I keyed in on, on this format of like allowing the person who's reading it to be the many characters to inhabit the, the immigrants and also to be playing with the book, you know, going out and going to one page, making their own choices. It allowed me to change the tone immediately of the conversation because you say immigration and everyone's like, oh, you know, it gets tense. But if you're saying like, no, no, this is a game, you know, we're playing this game. It's about immigration, but it's a game. All of a sudden there's a levity to it, and then you take the real absurdities and the real chaos of the system and just heighten it, which is basically what you do with comedy at all times.Andrew Keen: Who are the the fathers or perhaps the mothers of this kind of comedy? The person who comes to my mind is is Kafka, who found his own writing very funny. Not, and I'm not sure everyone necessarily agrees. He, of course, wrote extensively about central mid European bureaucracy and its darkness and absurdity. Who's inspired you both as a comic writer and particularly in terms of this book?Felipe Torres Medina: Well, actually, Kafka also has a great book called America.Andrew Keen: Yeah. Which is a wonderful first paragraph about seeing this. Seeing the Statue of Liberty.Felipe Torres Medina: Yes. Which is also kind of about this. But I would say my inspirations comedically are, you know, I don't think I would have written this book without, like, the work of Tina Fey. I think Bossy Pants was a book where I was like, oh, you can be funny in writing. And Carrie Fisher is a big Star Wars nerd, you know, to like great, funny writer writers who are just, like, writing funny things about their lives. But I think the playfulness of it all, actually, I was inspired by this Argentine writer, Julio Cortazar, who wrote a novel that in English just translated as hopscotch. And this novel is a huge, like, structural disrupter, you know, in the like, what we call the Latin American boom of writing in the 60s, 70s and 80s. And he wrote this novel that is like a game of hopscotch. You're jumping from chapter two chapter. He's directing you back and forth. So I read a lot of that. And I, you know, I read that in my youth, and then I read it. I reread it as I was older. And then there are writers like George Saunders, who can be very funny while talking about very sad or very poignant things. And so that was also a big inspiration to me. But, you know, I am a late night writer, so I was interested in actually making it like, ha ha, funny. Not just, you know, sensible chuckle funny, you know, kind of like a very, like, intellectual kind of funny. So I was also inspired by, you know, my job and like Colbert's original character in Colbert's book, America, I am American. So can you the writing of The Onion and, you know, the book, The Daily Show Book America, which is just kind of like an explanation of what the federal government is and what the country is written in the tone of the correspondents or the the writers for The Daily Show back in the original Jon Stewart iteration. So those books kind of like informed me and made me like, realize, oh, I can you can make like a humorous guy that's jokey and funny, but also is actually saying something isn't just like or teaching you something. Because the biggest reason I started writing this book is that Americans don't know their own immigration system, and they have so many opinions about immigration, particularly now, but no one knows what what it entails. You know? And I don't just mean like conservatives, you know, I don't just mean like, oh, MAGA people. Like, I was living in New York in the Obama years or like the late Obama years, and none of my liberal Brooklyn, you know, IPA and iced matcha drinking friends had any idea what I was going through, you know, when I was trying to get my visas.Andrew Keen: The liberals drink IPA. I didn't know that I drink IPA, I mean, I have to change my. Yeah. It's interesting you bring up in the first part of that response, the, the the Argentine novelist. There's something so surreal now about America. An interesting piece in the times about not being able to pin Trump down because he says one thing one day, the next thing the next day, and everyone accepts that these are contradictions. Now, the times describes these contradictions as this ultimate cover. I'm not quite sure why they're a cover. If you say one thing one day, in the next something the opposite the next day. But is there a Latin American quality to this? I mean, there's a whole tradition of Latin American writing observing the, the cruel absurdities of of dictators and wannabe dictators.Felipe Torres Medina: Yeah. I mean, it's it's part of our literary tradition. You know, the dictator novel you have. But again, just as the feast of the goat, and you have Garcia marquez, my my compatriot, you know, like that.Andrew Keen: Was one of my favorite magnificent writing.Felipe Torres Medina: It's it's possibly, I hesitate to say, my favorite writer because it creates ranking, but.Andrew Keen: Well amongst your.Felipe Torres Medina: Favorite, among my favorite writers, 100 Years of Solitude. Obviously that is possibly my favorite novel, but he has also, I believe it's the Autumn of the Patriarch, which is his novel about. Exactly. Yeah. I mean, there is a there is. I wouldn't say it's a South American or Latin American quality to it. I think it's just once you encounter it, it is so absurd that art does have to come out and talk about it, you know, and, you know, you see the in a book like the Autumn of the Patriarch. That is a character full of contradictions. That is a character who, in chapter one, hates a particular figure because they he they think that they're against him and then is becomes friends with them and then hires him to be his personal bodyguard. You know, that is what dictators are, and that is what authoritarians do. It is the cult of the person. It is the whims of the person, and the opinion of the person are the be all and the end all to the point where the nation is. It is at the whims of, of of a a person, of those of those persons contradictions. So I wouldn't say it's necessarily a Latin American nature to this, but I think Latin America, because we experience dictatorship in many times supported or boosted by the United States. Latin Americans were able to find a way to turn this into art. And quite good art is what I would say.Andrew Keen: Yeah, and of course, it's the artists who are best able to respond to this. As you know, it's not just a Latin American thing. The Central Europeans, the Czechs in particular. Yes.Felipe Torres Medina: Milan Kundera.Andrew Keen: Yeah. Written a series of wonderful books about this. But the only way to respond to someone like Trump, for example, who says one thing one day, the next thing the next day when he talks about tariffs, he says, well, I'm going to have 25%. And the next day, oh, I've decided I'm not going to have 25%. Then the following day he's going to change his mind again. The policy people, I'm not very helpful here. We need artists, satirists of one kind or another humorist like yourself to actually respond to this, don't we?Felipe Torres Medina: I think so. I think that that that is what. Helps you? I mean, it's the emperor has no clothes, right? That's how you talk. And it's about all kinds of government, obviously. Autocracy or dictatorship is one thing, but at all in all systems of government, these are powerful people who think they have they know better and who think that they are invincible. And you know what? What satire or humor and art does is just point out and say like, wait, that's weird. That thing they just did is weird. And being able to point that out is, is a talent. But also that's why people respond to it so well. People say like, yeah, that is weird. I also notice that. And so you create community, you create partnership in there. And so all of a sudden you're punching up, which is something you want to do in comedy. You want to make fun of the people who have more power, and you're all punching up and laughing at the same thing, and you're all kind of reminding each other. You're not crazy. This is weird.Andrew Keen: Yeah. I mean, the thing that worries me. I was on Kolber on the Colbert Show a few years ago in the original show. I mean, it's brilliant comic, very funny. But him and Jon Stewart and the others, they've been going so long, and they. I'm not saying they haven't changed their shtick. I mean, writers like you produce very high quality work for them, but it's one of the problems that these guys have been going for a while and America has changed, but perhaps they haven't.Felipe Torres Medina: I mean, it's an interesting thing to bring up, particularly with with Stephen, because his show was completely different. Ten years ago, it was a completely different show. He was doing a character. Yeah, right. And now he's doing a more traditional late night show. I think I think the format of late night is a very interesting beast that somehow has become A political genre. You know, it didn't used to be with Letterman. Didn't you see with Conan O'Brien, Jay Leno? You know, they would dabble in politics. They would talk about politics because it's what people are talking about. But now it's become kind of like this world. It all has to be satire. And there's some there's some great work. And I do think people keep innovating and making, like, new things, even though the shows are about ten years old. You know, you have Last Week Tonight, which my wife writes for, but it's a show that does more like deep dive investigations and stuff like that. So it's more like end of the week, 60 minutes, but with jokes kind of format. But I do think, yeah, maybe like the shows, can the shows in the genre in general, like there's genre I could do with some change and some mixing it up and.Andrew Keen: Well, maybe your friend Kumar could.Felipe Torres Medina: Yeah. Well, what? Let us get.Andrew Keen: A slot to his own late night show. And I wonder also, when it comes to I don't want to obsess over Trump or that course it's hard not to these days, but because he himself is a media star who most people know through his reality television appearance and he still behaves like a reality television star. Does that add another dimension of challenges to the satirical writers like yourself, and comics like or satirical comics like Colbert and Jon Stewart?Felipe Torres Medina: I think it's just a layer of how to interpret him as a person. At least for me, it's like, okay, well, you have to remember that he is a show man, and that's what he's doing.Andrew Keen: Yeah. So they're coming back to your your metaphor of the air and power and not having any clothes on. He kind of, in his own nodding wink way, acknowledges that he's not pretending to wear any clothes.Felipe Torres Medina: Yeah, and, well, sometimes he is and sometimes he isn't. And that is. That's the challenge. And that's why writing jokes about him every day is hard. But, you know, we we.Andrew Keen: And the more I know I watched Saturday Night Live last week that Zelensky thing and it was brilliant. Zelensky and Musk and Trump. But I'm very doubtful it actually impacts in any way on anything. Well, and I.Felipe Torres Medina: Think that that's also a misconception people have about comedy. You know, comedy is there to be funny. You know, comedy isn't there to change your mind if it does that, great. But the number one impetus for For Comedy should be to make you laugh. And so the idea that, like, a sketch show is going to change the nation. I don't know. Those are things that I think are applied on to comedy. They're kind of glob down to comedy. I don't necessarily think that that's what it the, the people making the comedy set out to do so. I think if if it made you laugh and if it works. The comedy has done its job. Comedy, unfortunately, can't change the world, you know. Otherwise, you know, I'm sure there would have been a very. There are many good Romanian comedians who could have done something about it has.Andrew Keen: You know, time to time. I mean, Hava became Czech president for a while. You, you, you know, that you sometimes see laugh, laughter and comedy as a kind of therapy when it comes to some of the stuff you do with Kovat. Are you in in America? Let me in. Are you presenting the experience, the heartbreaking experience? So certainly an enormously frustrating experience of the American immigration system as a kind of therapy, both for people who are experiencing it And outsiders, Americans in general.Felipe Torres Medina: And for myself, I think.Andrew Keen: And of course, yes. So self therapy, so to speak.Felipe Torres Medina: I think so, I mean, it is for me a way to like comedy is a way to process things for me. It comes naturally to me, and it is inopportune at times when dealing with things like grief and things like that. But I mean event, anyone who's gone through grief, I think, can tell you there's one moment when things are going really bad and one of the people grieving with you makes one joke and you all laugh and you're like, this. This somehow fixed for one second. It was great. And then we're back to sadness. So I think comedy, you know, as much as again, I go back to what I said a second ago, it's about making you laugh and that making you laugh can create that partnership, can create that empathy and that that that community therapy, I guess, of people saying like, oh wait, yeah, this is weird, this is strange. And I feel better that someone else recognized it, that someone else saw this.Andrew Keen: It certainly makes you saying, hey, you wrote an interesting piece for The New Yorker this week. In times like these, where you, you write perhaps satirically about what you call good Americans. Is the book written for good or bad Americans or all Americans or no Americans? Who do you want to read this book?Felipe Torres Medina: Oh my God. I want everyone to read it and everyone to buy a copy so that I've got a lot of money. All right. No, I think it's written for most Americans and and immigrants as well. People living here. But I do think, yeah, it's written for everyone. I don't think I wrote it with particular like, kind of group in mind. I think to me, Obviously with my background and my political affiliations, I think liberals will enjoy the book. But I also think, you know, people who are conservative, people who are MAGA, people who don't necessarily agree on my vision of immigration, can learn a lot from the book. And I purposely wrote it so that these people wouldn't necessarily be alienated or dismissed in any way. You know, it's a huge topic, and I think it was more of a like, I know you have an opinion. I'm just showing you some evidence. Make with it what you will, but I'm just showing you some evidence that it might not be as you believe it is, both for liberals and conservatives. You know, wherever you are on the spectrum, liberals think it's super easy. Conservatives that think it's super easy but in a bad way to move here. And I'm here kind of saying like, hey, it's actually this super complicated thing that maybe we should talk about and we should try to reform in some way.Andrew Keen: Yeah. And I think even when it comes to immigration, often people are talking about different things. Conservatives tend to be talking about quote unquote, illegal immigration and progressives talking about something else, too. You deal with people who try to get into America illegally, or is that for you, just a subject that you're not touching in this book?Felipe Torres Medina: I address it very lightly toward the final pages of the book. I first of all, I can, like, claim ownership on all immigrant narratives. And I wrote this about the legal immigration system because it's what I've navigated. Again, I am not an immigration lawyer. I am not an activist. I'm a comedy writer who happened to go through the immigration like system, so I but I did feel like, you know, okay, well, let's talk for a second. You've seen how hard it is because I've shown you all this evidence in the first couple stories in the book. And again, I say in the last pages because because of the interactive nature of the book, this could there is potentially a way for you for this to be the first, one of the first things you read in the book, but to where the last pages of the book, I say, okay, let's talk about you. We've seen how hard it is. Let's talk about the people who do so much to try and come here and who go even harder because they do it in the like, in the unauthorized way, you know, or the people who come here seeking asylum, which is a legal way to come to the United States, but is very difficult. So I do present that, but I do think it is not necessarily the subject of a comedy book, As I said earlier, when you're dealing with comedy, you want to be punching up. You want to be making fun of people in authority figures or in a sort of status position that is above the general population or the the voice of the comic. And with with undocumented immigrants and people trying to come here in irregular ways. It's it's very hard to find the humor there because these people are already suffering very much. And so to me, the line is threading the line of comedy there. It can very quickly turn into bullying or making fun of those people. And I don't want to do that because a lot of people are already doing that, and a lot of people who are already doing that work on this in this administration. So I don't I don't really want to mess with that.Andrew Keen: Philip, I'm not sure if you've got a a Spanish translation of the book. I'm sure there will be one eventually.Felipe Torres Medina: Hopefully.Andrew Keen: If people start reading this in Colombia, where you're from, Bolivia or Argentina, Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, they think themselves, this is so hard to get in, even legally. Even if you have money to pay for lawyers, they might think, well, f**k it, I'll just try and get over the border illegally. And do you think in a way, I mean, it's obviously designed as a humor book, but in a way this would encourage any sane person to actually give up. I mean, go try and try and go somewhere else or just stay where you are.Felipe Torres Medina: I think, I think the book has a tone of I'm I'm a pretty optimistic person. So I think the book does have a tone of optimism and love for America. I do love the United States, where I, while presenting it as a difficult thing, I am also saying, like it? It's pretty good. You're going to have a good time if you make it here. So I don't think it will be a deterrent. Whether it's some sort of Trojan horse to create more people, to try and go through the border. I don't know, it'd be pretty funny if a funny book tended ended up doing that, but.Andrew Keen: It'd be great if we just got hold of the book and blamed you for for for all the illegal immigrants. But in all seriousness, it was been a lot of pieces recently about, according to the New York Times, people going silent for fear of retribution. As a comic writer and someone clearly on the left, the progressive in American politics. Do you think that there is a new culture of fear by some of your friends and colleagues in the comedy business? Are they fearing retribution? Trump, of all people, doesn't like to be laughed that some people say that he he only wanted to be president after Obama so brilliantly and comically destroyed him a few years ago.Felipe Torres Medina: I think in comedy, you know, I think people are tired of talking of Trump because, again, as I said, ten years of writing about him. I don't think anyone is necessarily afraid of talking about him or making fun of him. I think that is or his administration. I think that is proven like this past week with explosion of memes, making fun of J.D. Vance, his face, you know, to the point where J.D. Vance has tried to hop on the meme and be like, ha ha! Yes, I enjoy this very much too. Good job members. So like, obviously, first of all, he doesn't like it, but I think everyone is. And I think this is something that America does so well. Americans like to make fun of politicians, period. And even though I think in certain spaces of, you know, politics and activism, there might be fear of retribution that is much more marked. I think the let's make fun of of the Emperor for having no clothes that make fun of them is an instinct that that it's not going away and it won't go away any, anytime soon.Andrew Keen: Philip, finally, you've written a funny book about immigration. But of course, behind all the humor is a seriousness. Lots of jokes. It's a very entertaining, amusing, creative book. But it also, I think, suggests reform. You've given a great deal of thought. You've experienced it yourself. How can America improve its immigration story so that we don't have in the future more satirical books like America Like Me and what are the the reforms, realistically, that can be made that even conservatives might buy into?Felipe Torres Medina: Well, I think one of the biggest things is, if you look at it historically, there hasn't been comprehensive immigration reform since Clinton. Which is ridiculous. You know, we're nearing on 30 years there, and we're. We're basically 30 years since. And, you know, I'm 33, so it's a whole lifetime for a lot of people with no changes to a system, no comprehensive changes to a system. And that just means that, like it is going to become outdated. So obviously it's very hard right now with the tenor, but what we really need is for people to sit down and talk about it as a normal issue. And this is not an invasion. This is not a national emergency. It is simply an issue, an economic issue. And I think one of the biggest things, and one of my personal suggestions is that. The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has always been, as I said, this kind of strange ancillary part of the government. It started as part of the Department of Labor, eventually joining the Department of Justice. Then it goes back to labor. It kind of always bounces around. They don't know where it fits. And in after 911, it became part of the Department of Homeland Security. And I think that creates a an aura around immigration as something that is threatening to homeland security. You know, which is not true.Andrew Keen: Yeah. I see what you're saying. It's become the the sex when it comes to, in the context of Victorian something that we don't talk about, and we use metaphors and similes to, to, to describe. And I take your point on that. But what about some and I take your point on the fact that the system hasn't been reformed since Clinton. But let's end with a couple of final, just Doable reforms, Philippe, that can actually make the experience better. That will improve that. That might be cheaper that the the Doge people might buy into that both left and right will accept and say, oh, that's fair enough. This is one way we can make immigrating to America a better experience.Felipe Torres Medina: I think, rewarding if we're talking about this idea of like, we want the best immigrants, educated people. I think actually rewarding that because the current system does not do that for most people trying to get a work visa. They're subjected to a lottery where the chances are something like 1 in 16 of getting a work visa to be here, and that is really bad for companies in general. It's something that the big tech firms have been lobbying against for years, and because there's no consensus in Congress to actually do something. We have been able to address that. So I think actually rewarding the kind of like higher education, high achievement immigrants. In a way that isn't just like if you have $5 million, you can buy a gold car. Yeah, and.Andrew Keen: That's what Trump promised.Felipe Torres Medina: Right? Actually rewarding it in a way that's like, okay, well, if you have a college degree, maybe you don't just get a one year permit to work here, you know, maybe you can. There is a path for you to if you made your education here, if you start your professional life here, if you are contributing because all these immigrants are paying taxes or contributing, maybe there's a path that isn't as full of trapdoors and pitfalls. I would say that that that's one of the biggest things. And honestly, higher up, like I, I do think maybe this is my progressive side of me, but it's like get more people working in USCIS so that these waits aren't taking forever and getting more immigration judges, you know, hire people who are going to make this system efficient, because that is, I think, unfortunately, what Dodge thinks that the, you know, we're going to slim it down so it doesn't cost that much. Yeah. But if you slam it down, you don't have enough people. And there's a lot of people are still trying to come here and they're still trying to do things. And if you don't have enough people like working those cases, all you're creating is backlogs.Andrew Keen: Yeah. I'm guessing when those transforms the American immigration system through AI, you'll have another opportunity for you to write a book. Yeah. I mean, I let me in an important book, a very funny book, but also a very serious book by one of America's leading young comic writers full time, writing for Stephen Colbert, Philippe Torres Medina. Philippe, congratulations on the book. It's out next week. I think it will become a bestseller. Important book. Very funny too, and we can say the same about you. Thank you so much.Felipe Torres Medina: Thank you so much for having me.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Geoff, Gavin and Andrew talk about morning DJ, midnight bathroom nightmare, Mario Party March bribery, Andrew's clip, pickled gopher feet, psych outs, travel bags, Gavin's collection, Gurplid, Gurpler Silencer, ball news, flamingo kick, Disneyland, Geoff's absolutely disgusting stories, the night plunger, Geoff's new tattoo, Freudian snap, Survivor, faked vacations, floor donut fiasco, and phone text problems. Sponsored by Factor. Thanks Factor! Go to FACTORMEALS.com/FACTORPODCAST and use code FACTORPODCAST to get 50% off your first box plus free shipping on your first box. Support us directly at https://www.patreon.com/TheRegulationPod Stay up to date, get exclusive supplemental content, and connect with other Regulation Listeners. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You've got questions. We've got answers. Let's make a podcast!Yes, this week we're once again opening up a big bag of mail to do some listener questions! Which listeners, you might ask? Our Patreons, of course, because they're awesome and you should really consider joining them. Then you, too, might ask questions like: Who takes the blame when a slow rider has a fast teammate? Will the future be electric, or is it running on biofuels? How much can a bikeframe bend if bikes was build to bend? Will we ever see a return of the mighty 2 stroke? And should riders seek out help from sport psychologists, or might that accidentally give a whole new (and very literal!) meaning to the words 'Freudian slip'? We've got the answers to these and more, so come get 'em!Want more? Visit our website or support us on Patreon. With big thanks as always to Brad Baloo from The Next Men and Gentleman's Dub Club for writing our theme song. Check out The Nextmen for more great music! 

Today I spoke to Dr. Carl Waitz about his new book Youth Mental Health Crises and the Broken Social Link: A Freudian-Lacanian Perspective (Routledge, 2024). “The kids are not ok” blurbs Patricia Gherovici in her endorsement of Dr. Waitz' necessary new book. We know this. On the weekend we recorded this interview (February 9, 2025) the New York Times published research[1] showing national trendlines from 1990-2024. Rates of depression and suicide; up. Life expectancy and satisfaction; down. Dr. Waitz cites data from 2015-2020 showing suicide as the second leading cause of death for youth ages 10-14. In discussion with colleagues at other hospitals they recognize that these numbers are “striking”. The topic of youth mental health has been on Dr. Waitz' mind for a long time starting “as far back as when I first started working with adolescents. Even before I and went to graduate school for psychology.” Dr. Waitz' clinical experience with this material over the years is evident in this thoughtfully researched book. When he and his wife were expecting their “first kid” he realized that “this was starting to be a personal topic in addition to a professional one.” This is a deeply felt book. So was this interview. No matter where we were in our talk I associated to my current cases. Cases of youth in crisis. They cannot be discussed here. So we weaved in and out of the text. Sometimes exploring theory broadly. Sometimes specifically. All our discussion leading to the clinical question, what does psychoanalysis have to offer? We addressed this by discussing two passages near the end of the book. “Without the fantasy of a sexual rapport any longer, there is no easily available limit on jouissance and this is precisely why the panoply of solutions called the youth mental health crisis (suicide, self-injury, depression, identification with the stigma of diagnosis, and political polarization are substitutionary, if not contrary to the formation of a social link.” (p.180) “The challenges of psychoanalysis are greater than merely navigating its own exigencies. If it is to have anything to say about the youth mental health crisis, it must find a way of engaging with a non-psychoanalytic society. With this in mind, how can psychoanalysis a practice focused on a singular subject approach a problem of desire - itself a consequence of a loss of initiation rites at a social level while maintaing it's "non desire to cure" (p.175) As readers of clinical and theoretical literature recognize, analysts tend to shy away from declarative statements preferring to swim in the open waters of the unknown. I was pleased to end the interview by asking Dr. Waitz about his bold declaration, “There is no question more revealing of one's worldview then why one conceived a child one's religion or economics hold no candle to this question.” (p.100) [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/0... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychoanalysis

Today I spoke to Dr. Carl Waitz about his new book Youth Mental Health Crises and the Broken Social Link: A Freudian-Lacanian Perspective (Routledge, 2024). “The kids are not ok” blurbs Patricia Gherovici in her endorsement of Dr. Waitz' necessary new book. We know this. On the weekend we recorded this interview (February 9, 2025) the New York Times published research[1] showing national trendlines from 1990-2024. Rates of depression and suicide; up. Life expectancy and satisfaction; down. Dr. Waitz cites data from 2015-2020 showing suicide as the second leading cause of death for youth ages 10-14. In discussion with colleagues at other hospitals they recognize that these numbers are “striking”. The topic of youth mental health has been on Dr. Waitz' mind for a long time starting “as far back as when I first started working with adolescents. Even before I and went to graduate school for psychology.” Dr. Waitz' clinical experience with this material over the years is evident in this thoughtfully researched book. When he and his wife were expecting their “first kid” he realized that “this was starting to be a personal topic in addition to a professional one.” This is a deeply felt book. So was this interview. No matter where we were in our talk I associated to my current cases. Cases of youth in crisis. They cannot be discussed here. So we weaved in and out of the text. Sometimes exploring theory broadly. Sometimes specifically. All our discussion leading to the clinical question, what does psychoanalysis have to offer? We addressed this by discussing two passages near the end of the book. “Without the fantasy of a sexual rapport any longer, there is no easily available limit on jouissance and this is precisely why the panoply of solutions called the youth mental health crisis (suicide, self-injury, depression, identification with the stigma of diagnosis, and political polarization are substitutionary, if not contrary to the formation of a social link.” (p.180) “The challenges of psychoanalysis are greater than merely navigating its own exigencies. If it is to have anything to say about the youth mental health crisis, it must find a way of engaging with a non-psychoanalytic society. With this in mind, how can psychoanalysis a practice focused on a singular subject approach a problem of desire - itself a consequence of a loss of initiation rites at a social level while maintaing it's "non desire to cure" (p.175) As readers of clinical and theoretical literature recognize, analysts tend to shy away from declarative statements preferring to swim in the open waters of the unknown. I was pleased to end the interview by asking Dr. Waitz about his bold declaration, “There is no question more revealing of one's worldview then why one conceived a child one's religion or economics hold no candle to this question.” (p.100) [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/0... 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 I spoke to Dr. Carl Waitz about his new book Youth Mental Health Crises and the Broken Social Link: A Freudian-Lacanian Perspective (Routledge, 2024). “The kids are not ok” blurbs Patricia Gherovici in her endorsement of Dr. Waitz' necessary new book. We know this. On the weekend we recorded this interview (February 9, 2025) the New York Times published research[1] showing national trendlines from 1990-2024. Rates of depression and suicide; up. Life expectancy and satisfaction; down. Dr. Waitz cites data from 2015-2020 showing suicide as the second leading cause of death for youth ages 10-14. In discussion with colleagues at other hospitals they recognize that these numbers are “striking”. The topic of youth mental health has been on Dr. Waitz' mind for a long time starting “as far back as when I first started working with adolescents. Even before I and went to graduate school for psychology.” Dr. Waitz' clinical experience with this material over the years is evident in this thoughtfully researched book. When he and his wife were expecting their “first kid” he realized that “this was starting to be a personal topic in addition to a professional one.” This is a deeply felt book. So was this interview. No matter where we were in our talk I associated to my current cases. Cases of youth in crisis. They cannot be discussed here. So we weaved in and out of the text. Sometimes exploring theory broadly. Sometimes specifically. All our discussion leading to the clinical question, what does psychoanalysis have to offer? We addressed this by discussing two passages near the end of the book. “Without the fantasy of a sexual rapport any longer, there is no easily available limit on jouissance and this is precisely why the panoply of solutions called the youth mental health crisis (suicide, self-injury, depression, identification with the stigma of diagnosis, and political polarization are substitutionary, if not contrary to the formation of a social link.” (p.180) “The challenges of psychoanalysis are greater than merely navigating its own exigencies. If it is to have anything to say about the youth mental health crisis, it must find a way of engaging with a non-psychoanalytic society. With this in mind, how can psychoanalysis a practice focused on a singular subject approach a problem of desire - itself a consequence of a loss of initiation rites at a social level while maintaing it's "non desire to cure" (p.175) As readers of clinical and theoretical literature recognize, analysts tend to shy away from declarative statements preferring to swim in the open waters of the unknown. I was pleased to end the interview by asking Dr. Waitz about his bold declaration, “There is no question more revealing of one's worldview then why one conceived a child one's religion or economics hold no candle to this question.” (p.100) [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/0... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

Today I spoke to Dr. Carl Waitz about his new book Youth Mental Health Crises and the Broken Social Link: A Freudian-Lacanian Perspective (Routledge, 2024). “The kids are not ok” blurbs Patricia Gherovici in her endorsement of Dr. Waitz' necessary new book. We know this. On the weekend we recorded this interview (February 9, 2025) the New York Times published research[1] showing national trendlines from 1990-2024. Rates of depression and suicide; up. Life expectancy and satisfaction; down. Dr. Waitz cites data from 2015-2020 showing suicide as the second leading cause of death for youth ages 10-14. In discussion with colleagues at other hospitals they recognize that these numbers are “striking”. The topic of youth mental health has been on Dr. Waitz' mind for a long time starting “as far back as when I first started working with adolescents. Even before I and went to graduate school for psychology.” Dr. Waitz' clinical experience with this material over the years is evident in this thoughtfully researched book. When he and his wife were expecting their “first kid” he realized that “this was starting to be a personal topic in addition to a professional one.” This is a deeply felt book. So was this interview. No matter where we were in our talk I associated to my current cases. Cases of youth in crisis. They cannot be discussed here. So we weaved in and out of the text. Sometimes exploring theory broadly. Sometimes specifically. All our discussion leading to the clinical question, what does psychoanalysis have to offer? We addressed this by discussing two passages near the end of the book. “Without the fantasy of a sexual rapport any longer, there is no easily available limit on jouissance and this is precisely why the panoply of solutions called the youth mental health crisis (suicide, self-injury, depression, identification with the stigma of diagnosis, and political polarization are substitutionary, if not contrary to the formation of a social link.” (p.180) “The challenges of psychoanalysis are greater than merely navigating its own exigencies. If it is to have anything to say about the youth mental health crisis, it must find a way of engaging with a non-psychoanalytic society. With this in mind, how can psychoanalysis a practice focused on a singular subject approach a problem of desire - itself a consequence of a loss of initiation rites at a social level while maintaing it's "non desire to cure" (p.175) As readers of clinical and theoretical literature recognize, analysts tend to shy away from declarative statements preferring to swim in the open waters of the unknown. I was pleased to end the interview by asking Dr. Waitz about his bold declaration, “There is no question more revealing of one's worldview then why one conceived a child one's religion or economics hold no candle to this question.” (p.100) [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/0... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

So what to J.D. Vance's highly controversial speech at the Paris AI Summit this week? According to That Was The Week's Keith Teare, it was “a breath of fresh air”. Others will argue it was just more MAGA putridity designed to alienate our European friends. Some tech notables, like Union Square Ventures partner Albert Wenger, take both views simultaneously, acknowledging on the one hand that Vance was correct to push back against “regulatory capture”, but on the other that Vance was “mistaking jingoism and wishful thinking for true global leadership”. Here are the 5 KEEN ON takeaways from this weekly tech round-up with Teare:* J.D. Vance's Paris AI Summit speech marked a potential turning point in US-Europe AI relations. His message prioritizing AI opportunity over safety prompted European regulators to pull back on some restrictions, with the EU dropping its AI liability directive and the UK rebranding its AI Safety Institute.* Anthropic's growth is accelerating, with projections of $34.5 billion in revenue by 2027. They're currently outperforming OpenAI in some areas, particularly coding, and are expected to release a major new AI model soon.* The Musk-OpenAI conflict has intensified, with Musk's $100 billion bid for OpenAI's non-profit arm being rejected. Meanwhile, OpenAI is planning to incorporate its Q* (Q-star) model into a new GPT-5 release that will combine reasoning, operational capabilities, and multimedia functions.* The AI industry is seeing rapid advancement in humanoid robotics, with companies like Apptronics and Figure receiving significant valuations. Figure's valuation jumped from $2 billion to $39 billion after securing a major automotive partnership.* Traditional political alignments are becoming less relevant in tech policy, with Teare arguing that economic growth and technological progress are transcending traditional left-right divisions. This is exemplified by some progressives like Reid Hoffman embracing AI optimism while traditional conservatives champion technological progress. FULL TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello everybody. It is Saturday, February 15th, 2025, a day after Valentine's Day. It's been a day or a week dominated by a certain J.D. Vance. Yesterday, he made a very controversial speech in Munich, which apparently laid bare the collapse of the transatlantic alliance. He attacked Europe over free speech and migration. So he's not the most popular fellow in Europe. And a couple of days before that, he spoke in Paris at the AI Summit, a classic Parisian event talking about summits. Macron, of course, also spoke there. According to The Wall Street Journal, Vance's counts were good. The German, of course, being a conservative newspaper. According to The Washington Post, which is a progressive newspaper, he pushed the "America First" AI agenda. Others, like Fast Company, ask what to make of Vance's speech at the Paris AI conference. According to my friend Keith Teare, the author of That Was The Week newsletter, the speech was a breath of fresh air. I was going to call you Marx, Keith. That would have been a true Freudian error. What do you admire about Vance's speech? Why is it a breath of fresh air?Keith Teare: Well, it's in the European context that it's a breath of fresh air. I think from an American perspective, he didn't really say anything new. We already think of AI in the way he expressed it. But in Europe, the dominant discussion around AI is still focused on safety. That is to say, AI is dangerous. We have to control it. We need to regulate it. And as a result of that, most of the American developments in AI are not even launched in Europe, because in order to be made available to citizens, it has to go through various regulatory layers. And that slows everything down. So in the context, Vance stood up on the platform in front of all of the people doing that regulation and told them basically, rubbed their noses in it, saying how self-destructive their approach was for European success. His opening lines were, "I'm not here to talk about AI safety. I'm here to talk about AI opportunity." And in the days since, there's been quite a big reaction in Europe to the speech, mostly positive from normal people and adjusting policy at the regulatory level. So it's quite a profound moment. And he carried himself very well. I mean, he was articulate, thoughtful.Andrew Keen: Yeah. You say his speech marks a crucial inflection point. I wonder, though, if Vance was so self-interested as a MAGA person, why would he want even to encourage Europe to develop? I mean, why not just let it be like social media or the Internet where American companies dominate? Is there anything in America's interest that the Trump-Musk alliance would benefit from strong European AI companies?Keith Teare: Well, from strong European AI openness, yes. I don't think Vance thinks for a minute there are any European companies that will be able to compete in that open environment. And so most of his purpose is economic. He's basically saying open up so that our guys can sell stuff to you and the money will flow back to the U.S. as it has done with Amazon and Google and every other major tech innovation in recent years. So it's basically an economic speech masquerading as a policy speech.Andrew Keen: I wonder if there's an opportunity for Europe given the clear divisions now that exist between the U.S. and Europe. I wonder whether there's an opportunity for Europe to start looking more sympathetically at Chinese AI companies. Did Vance warn in his speech, did he warn Europe about turning to the Chinese, the other potential partner?Keith Teare: Yeah. There are two parts of his speech I didn't really incorporate in the editorial. The first was a subplot all around China, which he didn't name, but he called "dictatorships." We don't want dictatorships leading in AI. And then there was another subplot, which was all about free speech and openness and not censoring, which was aimed at the Europeans, of course, and the Chinese.Andrew Keen: Discussion of their free speech, or at least it's their version of free speech, isn't it?Keith Teare: I think the funny thing is in order to be consistent, they're going to have to allow all free speech. And they will, because they know that. And so, weirdly, the Republicans become the free speech party, which makes no sense historically. But it is happening. And I thought there were a lot of interesting things in that speech that symbolized a very confident America. However, the reason America is doing this is because it's weak, which is a paradox.Andrew Keen: Politically weak or militarily weak or economically weak?Keith Teare: Not militarily - it's super strong, but economically it's relatively declining against China. It's the next Europe. America is the next Europe. China is the next America. And in that context, America's brashness sounds positive to our ears and to mine as well, because it's pro-optimism, pro-progress. But actually, it's coming from a place of weakness, which you see in the tariffs and the anti-Chinese stuff.Andrew Keen: And I want to come to the Munich speech where Vance was pretty clear. Trump's always been clear that if there is an opportunity for Ukraine, Ukrainians have to work for American access to its raw materials, minerals, etc. Whether America's foreign policy now is becoming identical to that of China, helping other countries as long as they provide them with essential resources.Keith Teare: Yeah, exactly. By the way, one of our commentators, David John William Bailey on LinkedIn, is saying we need to explain this. He says he's also attempting "$1 trillion mob-style shakedown." Anyone defending this is either deluded or only reads hard-right propaganda.Andrew Keen: Well, but Keith, you've always claimed to be a progressive. You always claim to be a man of the left. You have a background in left-wing communist activism. Now you're on board with Vance. You were on board the week before with Musk. You're ambivalent about Trump. What does this say to you? What does this suggest about you personally, or is the reality of politics these days that the supposed conservatives like Vance are actually progressive in their own way and the supposed progressives in the Democratic Party are actually conservative?Keith Teare: Well, as you know, I don't like those labels anymore because I think they're trying to fit a modern narrative into an old set of boxes. I think, broadly speaking, Vance is an economic progressive. He wants the economy to grow. He wants GDP to grow.Andrew Keen: Some people say everyone's a progressive in that sense if they want GDP to grow.Keith Teare: Yeah, but not very many people can do it. So I think they really are serious that they believe innovation in tech and GDP are correlated. And I believe GDP and social good are correlated. And so if you really want to be a progressive that wants people to have a good life, you have to support economic growth. And I think Vance does. And I think that's what his narrative is about. He's basically telling Europe that they're going to get the opposite, which has been true, by the way, now for a decade. European GDP per capita is as low as $35,000 a year. American is $85,000 a year.Andrew Keen: That's an astonishing shift. And this is going to be remembered, I think, as an important week in the American-European relationship. You said that the aftermath of the Vance speech has been remarkable and telling. The EU dropped its AI liability directive. The UK rebranded its AI Safety Institute. OpenAI removed diversity commitments. So a speech is now having an impact, particularly this Paris speech when it comes to AI policy, both in Europe but also in the US as well.Keith Teare: Yeah, I wouldn't give too much credit just to the speech. I think the speech is symptomatic of a lot of zeitgeist change and everyone is getting in line with the new zeitgeist, which is tech is good, AI is good, censorship is bad.Andrew Keen: Well, I don't know if that's - I'm not sure I would call that the zeitgeist, Keith. I mean, you're talking in Palo Alto, where that's always been the zeitgeist. I think if anything, in universities and book publishing, the reverse is true.Keith Teare: Yeah. So I'm an avid MSNBC watcher. I watch Morning Joe every morning with Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough. And so I'm kind of imbued with the liberal narrative compared to what's going on. And what's happened is a very rapid change from the days after the election when the liberal narrative was "we need to look at ourselves" has now become a narrative that "the judges have to save us from the administration." The administration is not democratic, even though it was elected, and we've got to rely on judges because there's no one else to rely on.Andrew Keen: That doesn't mean the zeitgeist has shifted. It just means that the people on one side have shifted their focus, but they still are not sympathetic to Trump, Vance, Musk.Keith Teare: I think there is increasing sympathy. I think you're going to be surprised. I think if an election was held today, Trump would win by more.Andrew Keen: Well, he would certainly win by more if he was running against Harris. That's another question. So it's been another remarkable week for AI content. One piece that you pick out, which I thought was interesting, is from somebody called Elizabeth Yin. Nice to have a female author - too many of our authors are male. Maybe I'm being too woke. But the AI takeover, according to Yin - no one's jobs are safe. This isn't exactly news, is it?Keith Teare: No, she's really summarizing what we've been talking about in That Was The Week for quite a while. But I thought it was a good summary. And she gives some kind of prioritization. There's a section that talks about regulated professions, human-centric jobs, creative and entrepreneurial jobs, energy and infrastructure and distribution. And she then breaks down what she thinks the main impact of AI is going to be. She kind of leaves it where you kind of want more from her because she doesn't thoroughly go through all of these. But she's a VC, she does early-stage investing. She's very good. And the one thing she says, which I don't think anyone's going to disagree with, is "fewer workers more." I was at an event this week in San Francisco where there was a panel with some VCs and entrepreneurs on exactly the same questions she's asking - where the cuts are going to come first or what sectors are going to be most dramatically affected in the short term. And people weren't entirely clear. But the one area that comes up is healthcare - that's the lowest hanging fruit at the moment.Keith Teare: Yeah, there's a funding event this week from a company that applies AI to biology, specifically cancer programming - anti-cancer cells. So you're going to see AI in everything. And it's that will lead to an acceleration of invention for sure, because the individual is still really important. By the way, there's another article about that this week. The individual now has an army of talent in AI, able to help them make progress. It just speeds everything up.Andrew Keen: Yeah. So what other AI news in the summary? There's a couple, 2 or 3 pieces on Anthropic. I use Anthropic. I like it. Their growth soars to 34.5 billion in 2027 revenue. That's of course, speculative. And they announce their next major AI model could arrive within weeks, Anthropic competitive with OpenAI.Keith Teare: Yes, and they're better than OpenAI at some things. They're already better than OpenAI at coding. If you put it in context, those three Anthropic pieces sit alongside the Google piece and the OpenAI pieces. And what it tells you is we've seen a major acceleration of product roadmaps and plans in the last couple of weeks, mainly in response to the DeepSea news, I think.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's interesting that DeepSea was a one-week wonder, but there are no headlines at least from you on DeepSea. It seems to have stimulated change as you suggest, rather than change things in its own way. And then your Google pieces - interesting that they're rolling out a new memory feature for Gemini AI, allowing recall of past conversations, which is increasingly getting to the point where these AIs, if not human or sentient, certainly are able to remember things and have conversations.Keith Teare: Yeah, and that becomes much easier once you go from LLMs to other LLMs with agents. An agent is a piece of software that speaks to another LLM to complete a task. And so you could have in software a memory agent or a recall agent whose only job is to say, "Is this question been asked recently and what did I look at the last time?" and bring it into the context for whatever the current question is. And I think we're going to see more and more of this. I've spent most of my week building a multi-agent system for my company, Single Rank. I have a question taker agent that you ask a question of. It then farms out to a database agent or a chart drawing agent or an expert reasoning agent. They all have different jobs and they come back and give their answers to the original agent, and then it gives the answer to the user. So this collaborative agents concept is becoming very real now. And memory is one of those - I think Perplexity is the most advanced.Andrew Keen: Yeah. We were talking about Perplexity before we went live. You convinced me - I use Anthropic but you said for me it's probably wiser to use Perplexity where I still have all the access to Anthropic, but it adds a layer and some more intelligence. As I said, I was at an event this week where one of the venture people from OpenAI was there who talked about Sam Altman's projection that in the not too distant future there'll be billion-dollar individual startups. Are you suggesting, Keith, that's not that far on the horizon, given the power of AI that individuals can do all and do the entire startup without needing the help of anybody else?Keith Teare: Depends on the startup. If the startup is mainly software, that's probably true. But if it needs account management and billing and all the others...Andrew Keen: But eventually all that stuff will get - that's the easy part, isn't it? You can always get that done.Keith Teare: It's the hard bit right now, like reconciling invoices to receipts. I'm not very good at that. So I think it's coming with two things: rising agents and then agents that can use tools to follow, do actions, if you will. So it's coming and it's probably coming this year and it'll accelerate. So, yes, it will get there. I think the headline of a single founder of $1 billion company is just a headline. But it's directionally correct.Andrew Keen: It does. And it does reiterate Elizabeth Yin's point that no jobs are safe - in finance, in HR, in coding, in content. I mean, I'm using it more and more to summarize these conversations. I don't need a large editorial staff. So clearly dramatic change. And in fact, your startup of the week, Keith, the robotics startup Apptronics, is in talks for new funding at an almost $40 billion valuation - a hardware company. Does this speak of the reality of this new AI revolution? That it's not just theory, it's practice now?Keith Teare: Yeah. Well, Figure has gone from 2 billion to 39 billion in less than a year. And why? Because one of the major car companies signed an agreement with it to have these robots on production lines in its factories. And the start of the week, by the way, is Apptronics, which is a different humanoid robotics company, also raising a lot of money but slightly earlier in its journey than Figure.Andrew Keen: It's my mistake - I have to admit I thought it was Figure so that's my error. I'm going to add an Apptronics image to this content. I'm rather embarrassed.Keith Teare: You've probably already got one. That said, they both speak to the same truth, which is AI is going to manifest itself in the physical world in the form of humanoid robots sooner rather than later.Andrew Keen: And that was another of Tim Draper's - he was one of the speakers at this event I went to in San Francisco. I know he's an investor in your firm. That was his big prediction. So Apptronics is building robots for humans. Are they just a kind of earlier version of Figure in some ways?Keith Teare: An earlier version, possibly more advanced in concept because they started later when the software gets better by the week. So the later you start, the more advanced the software is that you can leverage. And so we're not going to see an end to this. There's going to be a lot more of it. I think humanoid robots are really interesting because the physical world is built for humans. You know, steps, ladders, everything.Andrew Keen: But I'm not sure that would be the case, especially when it comes to, say, self-driving cars and roads. That's going to change as well, isn't it?Keith Teare: Well, you still have roads because they still are...Andrew Keen: You still have roads. But I'm saying the roads themselves will become more and more suited to self-driving cars as opposed to human-driving ones.Yeah. You would hope the roads would become more intelligent and communicate to the cars, but that seems to be much further off.Andrew Keen: But I'm sure the Chinese will do that. Not the Americans, not even in San Francisco. Meanwhile, there is still lots of tech news. There's this open feud between Sam Altman at OpenAI and Elon Musk. Musk this week had a bid to buy OpenAI for around $100 billion. Is this just sensational, meaningless stuff? Is this froth or is it meaningful in the long run? The Musk-Altman fight?Keith Teare: Well, the specifics of this are super interesting because it's very clever of Musk. What Musk is offering to buy is not OpenAI. He's offering to buy the not-for-profit part of OpenAI. Now Altman is trying to put a value on that not-for-profit because he wants it to go away, or at least be subsumed. And he's trying to do it at a very low valuation so that the stakeholders in the not-for-profit don't get much. So Musk put a super high price on the not-for-profit to force the board of OpenAI to put a proper value on it as it transitions or to stop transitioning - one or the other. And I think if I was on the board of OpenAI now, I'd be very worried. They rejected his offer yesterday, by the way, but that will not be the end.Andrew Keen: What is Musk doing? Is it just because he hates Altman and he's annoyed that he was one of the co-founders and he's no longer involved? Because if he does indeed do what he seems to want to do, which is weaken, even undermine OpenAI - I mean, the real winners are probably Anthropic and Google then rather than Musk.Keith Teare: Well, and Grok - he has his own Grok xAI.Andrew Keen: But is xAI a real player? I mean, he can get massive valuations, but how does it compare with Anthropic or Gemini?Keith Teare: It's good. I mean, it's very good. And the next version, rumors are that it's going to be a top performer.Andrew Keen: Certainly not a top - you said it's good, but it's not...Keith Teare: It depends on what for. But it's certainly as good or better than DeepSea already.Andrew Keen: So there is a method to Musk's madness. It's not just about hating Altman and OpenAI.Keith Teare: Well, because it's Musk, there's more than one thing going on. He has economic interests in xAI, for sure. He's also really pissed off with Altman because he considers that Altman basically stole the OpenAI idea from him, which is not really true when you get into the facts. But he believes that. And not only that, but lied by making it not-for-profit and then turning it into a for-profit when he promised he wouldn't. So Musk basically feels like he's got the moral high ground and that gives him the energy to fight. Altman is clearly tired of the whole thing. He's just trying to do what he's trying to do, you know, and having a light shone on it.Andrew Keen: So it's the first time you have articulated some concern about OpenAI. You've always been quite bullish. Are you suggesting that your bullishness in the past is changing a little bit?Keith Teare: I don't think so, because I think this is a bit of a sideshow. The biggest news this week about OpenAI is the decision to abandon the Q* model - not abandon it, but incorporate it into a new GPT-5 later this year.Andrew Keen: So how would a unified next generation release work? Which would be what? Everything together?Keith Teare: It would do reasoning, operational stuff, actions, and it would do what other LLMs do, including being capable of video and image production all in one, and probably will retain its position as the best across all of those different things. So I don't see that anything bad is going to happen to OpenAI. I do think Musk can be an irritant and it could force them into corporate decisions about valuation and merging their different components that aren't to their liking. That could happen.Keen: My interview of the week, which you were kind enough to include in this week's newsletter, is with Greg Betta. Most people won't be familiar with Greg Betta. He's a tech writer, journalist based in the North Bay San Francisco, but he's also the coauthor with Reid Hoffman, who everybody knows, of a new book called "Super Agency: What Could Possibly Go Right With Our AI Future?" And from a progressive point of view, it's optimistic about AI. So I guess Hoffman is one of the few progressives, Keith, who actually is optimistic about AI. Is that fair?Keith Teare: Yeah. He really represents that part of the liberal spectrum that was in the New York Times article last week suggesting the Democrats should embrace technology and innovation. And the book is symptomatic of that. I didn't have a chance to listen to the interview - give us a flavor of what he said.Andrew Keen: It's standard - it's like listening to you. He believes that this progress will ultimately benefit. He distinguishes himself a bit too, I thought, created some light between him and Hoffman. I think he sees Hoffman as being slightly more optimistic than him. But it's about super agency - you and I have talked endlessly about agency, about humans being able to shape their lives. And of course, that's the big debate. For the critics, it's the AI that will shape us. For the optimists, AI will enable us to shape the world. It's an age-old argument, and it's not going away.Another figure on the left, if that's still a term that means anything, is Albert Wenger. He's your post of the week and he comes back to the Vance speech. He says praising this speech by Vance is mistaking jingoism and wishful thinking for true global leadership with a real vision of AI and humanity. I'm assuming you don't agree with Albert on this issue.Keith Teare: I do agree with him. I think I wanted to take a positive view of Vance's speech for his optimism in the context of Europe. It was a great speech. Albert's right that the American framing is entirely jingoistic. And AI isn't - AI is entirely global and humanistic. So there is a contradiction between a declining superpower being a champion of progress for its own nation versus what Albert would prefer, which is leadership that is truly global in nature.Andrew Keen: It's interesting that the first comment on Albert's tweet was from someone called "e/acc" who says this may be the most e/acc speech of all time. I didn't know what that meant - it meant effective accelerationism. Are you familiar with this term, Keith?Keith Teare: Yeah, this is the Marc Andreessen Peter Thiel framing against the philanthropists.Andrew Keen: So are you an effective accelerationist? Do you believe in...Keith Teare: Effective altruism versus effective acceleration? This is interesting. You say they're the same thing - I don't think anyone thinks that. But I think you might be right. But as long as you put them in the right order, I think if you get acceleration and growth and value, you're going to get a better life.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's a play on effective altruism, but it's thinking in the same way that the world can become a better place.Keith Teare: Yeah. And the altruists wanted it to be done by good deeds as opposed to by economic progress.Andrew Keen: And even Albert acknowledges, like you, that there are aspects of the speech which in your language are a breath of fresh air. He said the only good point was the clear pushback against regulatory capture. Is it going to be effective? I mean, is it clear that the days of Lina Khan are over? Are we at the end of the period of regulatory capture, whether it's in Europe or the U.S.? As you say, one of the consequences of the speech was that the Europeans have taken a step back from regulation.Keith Teare: I would say the new Lina Khan is Elizabeth Warren. Lina Khan's gone. She's a sideshow. But Elizabeth Warren is still mainstream.Andrew Keen: Yeah, but a much, much older and perhaps less powerful figure, especially in Trump's America. I mean, Warren, she can talk a lot and get people annoyed, but she can't actually do anything. Whereas Lina Khan actually controlled regulatory capture - I mean, she was the head of the FTC.Keith Teare: Exactly. But I find Warren intensely irritating. It's amusing to me that Musk is asking how her net worth went from $200,000 to double-digit millions. And it's because she got subsidized by pharma, because she's pro-vax. And she's plugged into that.Andrew Keen: That's a controversial observation. You're saying anyone who gets supported by big Pharma is pro-vaccine? Does that mean that anyone who's anti-vax is not going to get the money? Most of us are pro-vax.Keith Teare: I'm totally pro-vax. But I'm just saying politicians like her typically get high net worth through serving stakeholders. And she is very against the credit card industry, for example. But she's not against pharma. So she's found her niche.Andrew Keen: Well, that's not a very generous interpretation, although it does suggest that when you give Elon Musk the keys to the Treasury and the IRS, then all these things are going to get revealed. And we should end with another interesting X from Albert, which I think gets to a lot of this. He said, "If you're young and capable and care about democracy, you should work for Doge." What do you make of that? I tend to think he's right.Keith Teare: I can't fully understand his meaning. In my brain, I'll interpret it the way I would, which is what I said last week.Andrew Keen: And to add to the quote, he said, "Offense is the best defense."Keith Teare: Yeah. The main threat to democracy is unelected bureaucrats blocking progress. I mean, if you think about it...Andrew Keen: Like Elizabeth Warren, in your view, at least.Keith Teare: No, I'd use the Obama example. Obama wanted to get a really good healthcare plan. And as soon as he was in office, he made speeches saying, "I won't be able to achieve what I want to achieve unless you, the people, are on the streets." Because Washington is averse to change. And it turned out that he had to make all kinds of compromises. And he ended up with what we today call Obamacare. But his experience was an experience of being blocked. And Trump basically has been through that himself. We're probably mostly thankful for that based on his first administration. He now is older, and he's not prepared...Andrew Keen: Suddenly older. I don't know about wiser.Keith Teare: He's not prepared to let the bureaucracy stand in his way. And Musk is his weapon. And there is something positive about a better, cheaper state and more democratic if the elected people can do what they said they were going to do.Andrew Keen: Yeah. And bring the expenses down. "If you're young and capable and care about democracy, you should work for Doge" - wise words from Albert Wenger. We will return to all these themes, Keith, in the future. Have a good week and we will see everybody again next week. Thanks so much.Keith Teare: Everyone. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode, Mike and Doc explore the origins of our favorite lump of animated clay, the GOLEM (pronounced GOAL-EM, not GAUL-UHM)! Protector of Jewish communities, the golem is a powerful ally, but you have to be very specific with your instructions, as it will carry out the task you give it with lethal literality. Enter, if you dare, and learn about the history of the golem, the monster's ties to Freudian psychoanalysis, and how the monster carries on its legacy in today's fantasy and science fiction.      About this podcast: MONSTERS! They haunt our days and chill our dreaming nights, to paraphrase Emily Dickinson. There's not a population on earth that does not have its own unique monster stories to tell to frighten, but also to instruct on the nature of good and evil, right and wrong. But what happens when monsters get out of control, when the monstrous imagination starts to bleed over into the real world? What are the effects of monsters on real people's real lives? This podcast examines the histories and mysteries of some of our favorite monsters to unlock their secrets and expose their influence on our lives.   About the hosts: Michael Chemers (MFA, PhD) is a Professor of Dramatic Literature in the Department of Theater Arts at UC Santa Cruz. His work on monsters includes The Monster in Theatre History: This Thing of Darkness (London, UK: Routledge 2018). Dr. Chemers is the Founding Director of The Center for Monster Studies. Formerly the Founding Director of the Bachelor of Fine Arts in Dramaturgy Program at Carnegie Mellon University, he joined the faculty of UCSC in 2012. He is also the author of Ghost Light: An Introductory Handbook for Dramaturgy (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2010) and Staging Stigma: A Critical Examination of the American Freak Show (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007). Dr. Chemers is also an actor, a juggler, and a writer of drama. Mike Halekakis is an entrepreneur, business owner, internet marketer, software engineer, writer, musician, podcaster, and hardcore situational enthusiast. He is the co-founder of What We Learned, a company that specializes in compassionate training courses on complex adult subjects such as caregiving for people who are sick, planning for death, and administering after the loss of a loved one. He is also the CEO of Moneyfingers Inc., a company that trains people on how to successfully create, market, and sell products on the internet. When not burning the candle at both ends with a blowtorch, Mike loves video games, outdoor festivals, reading comics and novels, role-playing, writing and playing music, hanging out with the world's best cats, and spending time with his amazing wife and their collective worldwide friend-group.

Hosts Josh and Jamie and special returning guest critic and author Violet Lucca discuss a double feature inspired by her new book "David Cronenberg: Clinical Trials" with one of his earliest inspirations in sci-fi paperback cover artist turned experimental filmmaker Ed Emshwiller's RELATIVITY (1966) and one of Cronenberg's more unloved and forgotten passion projects, the psychological drama SPIDER (2002) starring Ralph Fiennes as a Freudian schizophrenic whose subjective mind provides Cronenberg with dreamy and depressed experimental form of the film. Next week's episode is a patron-exclusive bonus episode on 90s Stephen King adaptations by horror legends: THE DARK HALF (1993) + THE MANGLER (1955), you can get access to that episode (and all past + future bonus episodes) by subscribing to our $5 tier on Patreon: www.patreon.com/sleazoidspodcast Intro // 00:00-15:53 RELATIVITY // 15:53-1:01:07 SPIDER // 1:01:07-1:56:36 Outro // 1:56:36-1:59:38 BUY VIOLET'S DAVID CRONENBERG BOOK: https://bookshop.org/p/books/david-cronenberg-clinical-trials-violet-lucca/21170132?ean=9781419771910 MERCH: www.teepublic.com/stores/sleazoids?ref_id=17667 WEBSITE: www.sleazoidspodcast.com/ Pod Twitter: twitter.com/sleazoidspod Pod Letterboxd: letterboxd.com/SLEAZOIDS/ Josh's Twitter: twitter.com/thejoshl Josh's Letterboxd: letterboxd.com/thejoshl Jamie's Twitter: twitter.com/jamiemilleracas Jamie's Letterboxd: letterboxd.com/jamiemiller

We're going for a threepeat! Join Anthony as he sees if he can keep his streak alive. Here are today's clues:  1. complete, I heard you're from Helsinki?, what gives a surface its appearance, wine quality.  2. candy, place to learn how to work?, chop, emporium.  3. what comes after the point?, darn, fire, opposite of work in wrestling.  4. part of a Freudian trio, caller, meteoric suffix, contraction. 

The #1 Super Bowl ad? Snickers in 2010… because Snickers acted like a Freudian therapist.Waffle House is charging a 50-cent-per-egg fee… but we tell ya who to blame for Egg-flation is.New tariffs just hit Shein and Temu… hand it can all be explained with Barbie dolls.Plus, the newest job in America is “TikTok Coach”... because there is an “i” in “viral.”$CALM $MAT $SPYWant more business storytelling from us? Check out the latest episode of our new weekly deepdive show: “The Best Idea Yet” — The untold origin stories of the products you're obsessed with. From the McDonald's Happy Meal to Birkenstock's sandal to Nintendo's Super Mario Brothers to Sriracha. New 45-minute episodes drop weekly.Subscribe to The Best Idea Yet: Wondery.fm/TheBestIdeaYetLinks to listen.—-----------------------------------------------------Subscribe to our new (2nd) show… The Best Idea Yet: Wondery.fm/TheBestIdeaYetLinksEpisodes drop weekly. It's The Best Idea Yet.GET ON THE POD: Submit a shoutout or fact: https://tboypod.com/shoutouts FOR MORE NICK & JACK: Newsletter: https://tboypod.com/newsletter Connect with Nick: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicolas-martell/ Connect with Jack: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jack-crivici-kramer/ SOCIALS:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tboypod TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tboypodYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@tboypod Anything else: https://tboypod.com/ Subscribe to our new (2nd) show… The Best Idea Yet: Wondery.fm/TheBestIdeaYetLinksEpisodes drop weekly. It's The Best Idea Yet.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Dr. Joel Sneed, a psychologist and dedicated adult chess improver, discusses the challenges of learning chess later in life, his struggles with perfectionism and obsession over openings, and how psychological techniques like ACT and CBT can help manage chess-related anxiety. Get ChessDojo's first book, How to Analyze Your Games, here: https://amzn.to/3Ds5r78 Watch Live - https://twitch.tv/chessdojo  Join the Training Program - https://chessdojo.club  Play Chess - https://go.chess.com/chessdojo  Merch - https://www.chessdojo.club/shop  Want to support the channel? Patreon - https://patreon.com/chessdojo  Donate - https://streamelements.com/chessdojo/tip  Find all of our chess book & supplies recommendations (& more!) on our Amazon storefront: https://www.amazon.com/shop/chessdojo Shopping through our link is a great way to support the Dojo. We earn a small affiliate % but at no cost to you. Website: https://chessdojo.club  Twitch: https://twitch.tv/chessdojo  Discord: https://discord.gg/sUUh8HD  Twitter: https://twitter.com/chessdojo  Patreon: https://patreon.com/chessdojo  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chessdojo  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/chessdojo  Podcast: https://chessdojotalks.podbean.com  TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@/chessdojoclips  #chess #chesstraining  Chapters: 00:00 – Introduction to Dojo Talks; guest Dr. Joel Sneed's background in psychology and chess. 00:38 – Discussion on Sneed's chess journey, starting late and reaching a 2000+ rating. 01:54 – Sneed's transition from Freudian psychoanalysis to cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and ACT therapy. 03:49 – Adapting to new technology as an older adult and learning struggles. 05:57 – Comparison between changes in psychology and changes in chess over time. 13:54 – Sneed's crisis moment: forgetting opening prep in a Blitz game and quitting chess. 17:11 – The frustration of learning but failing to apply knowledge in real games. 33:15 – Dealing with an "action crisis"—considering quitting chess and reevaluating goals. 53:16 – Focusing on process-oriented goals instead of rating-based goals. 1:16:35 – Sneed's new goal: playing more tournament games and prioritizing enjoyment over rating.

Evolutionary psychologist, Doug Lisle, PhD discusses listener questions with co-host, Nathan Gershfeld.  In today's show, Dr. Lisle discusses a listener's question about transference and counter-transference.    0:00 Intro 0:57 Question #1 2:46 A synopsis of psycho-dynamic thinking 9:36 Psycho-dynamic thinking is naïve and bizarre 11:21 What is a therapeutic relationship 20:10  Attraction can occur in a therapeutic relationship 26:50 ‘Transference' from therapist's past experiences 33:43 Therapeutic dynamic is usually not a burden or threat 37:36 Warning sign that something is out of line 45:38 What drew Dr. Lisle to be a psychologist   X: @BeatYourGenes Web: www.beatyourgenes.org Doug Lisle, PhD www.esteemdynamics.com Nathan Gershfeld, DC www.fastingescape.com Intro & outro song: City of Happy Ones • Ferenc Hegedus Licensed for use Copyright Beat Your Genes Podcast

Anyone, as Freud tells us in Reflections on War and Death, forced to react against his own impulses may be described as a hypocrite, whether he is conscious of it or not. One might even venture to assert—it is still Freud's argument—that our contemporary civilisation favours this sort of hypocrisy and that there are more civilised hypocrites than truly cultured persons, and it is even a question whether a certain amount of hypocrisy is not indispensable to maintain civilisation. When this travesty of civilisation, this infallible state that has regimented and dragooned its citizens into obedience, goes to war, Freud is pained but not surprised that it makes free use of every injustice, of every act of violence that would dishonour the individual, that it employs not only permissible cunning but conscious lies and intentional deception against the enemy, that it absolves itself from guarantees and treaties by which it was bound to other states and makes unabashed confession of its greed and aspiration to power. For conscience, the idea of right and wrong, in the Freudian sense, is not the inexorable judge that teachers of ethics say it is: it has its origin in nothing but "social fear," and whereas in times of peace the state forbids the individual to do wrong, not because it wishes to do away with wrongdoing but because it wishes to monopolise it, like salt or tobacco, it suspends its reproach in times of war. The suppression of evil desires also ceases, and men, finding the moral ties loosened between large human units, commit acts of cruelty, treachery, deception and brutality the very possibility of which would have been considered incompatible with their degree of culture.Translated by Abraham A. Brill and Alfred B. Kuttner.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Anyone, as Freud tells us in Reflections on War and Death, forced to react against his own impulses may be described as a hypocrite, whether he is conscious of it or not. One might even venture to assert—it is still Freud's argument—that our contemporary civilisation favours this sort of hypocrisy and that there are more civilised hypocrites than truly cultured persons, and it is even a question whether a certain amount of hypocrisy is not indispensable to maintain civilisation. When this travesty of civilisation, this infallible state that has regimented and dragooned its citizens into obedience, goes to war, Freud is pained but not surprised that it makes free use of every injustice, of every act of violence that would dishonour the individual, that it employs not only permissible cunning but conscious lies and intentional deception against the enemy, that it absolves itself from guarantees and treaties by which it was bound to other states and makes unabashed confession of its greed and aspiration to power. For conscience, the idea of right and wrong, in the Freudian sense, is not the inexorable judge that teachers of ethics say it is: it has its origin in nothing but "social fear," and whereas in times of peace the state forbids the individual to do wrong, not because it wishes to do away with wrongdoing but because it wishes to monopolise it, like salt or tobacco, it suspends its reproach in times of war. The suppression of evil desires also ceases, and men, finding the moral ties loosened between large human units, commit acts of cruelty, treachery, deception and brutality the very possibility of which would have been considered incompatible with their degree of culture.Translated by Abraham A. Brill and Alfred B. Kuttner.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Send us a text*content warning for self-harm and sexual assault imagery*The Animorphs survive a fruity, Freudian hellscape  and infiltrate a mental institution. Meanwhile Miranda, Eddy, and Chris try to figure out what, if anything, in Rachel's past led to her self-destructive tendency to throw herself into harm's way. What do you mean the nail is as tall as a tall woman? Are the chefs union-approved to help carry the boxes from the truck to  the kitchen? Miranda wonders if sweet and sticky banana goo is ever just sweet and sticky banana goo. Eddy enters his Zordon era. Chris stumbles upon three kids, each smaller than a slightly larger child.Support the showSupport us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/anidorks@anidorkspod on twitter! Send questions to anidorkspod@gmail.comHey! For real though: Leave us a 5 star review and we'll read it on the air! New episodes every Wednesday!!!

Power week ahead

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comJohn Gray is a political philosopher. He retired from academia in 2007 as Professor of European Thought at the London School of Economics, and is now a regular contributor and lead reviewer at the New Statesman. He's the author of two dozen books, and his latest is The New Leviathans: Thoughts After Liberalism. I'd say he's one of the most brilliant minds of our time — and my first podcast with him was a huge hit. I asked him to come on this week to get a broader and deeper perspective on where we are now in the world. He didn't disappoint.For two clips of our convo — on the ways Trump represents peace, and how heterosexuals have become more like gays — pop over to our YouTube page.Other topics: this week's inauguration; the peaceful transfer of power; the panic of the left intelligentsia; the contradictions in the new Trump administration; Bannon vs Musk; Vivek's quick exit; the techno-futurist oligarchs; Vance as the GOP's future; tariffs and inflation; the federal debt; McKinley and the Gilded Age; Manifest Destiny; Greenland; isolationism; the neocon project to convert the world; Hobbes and “commodious living”; Malthus and today's declining birthrates; post-industrial alienation; deaths of despair; Fukuyama's “End of History”; Latinx; AI and knowledge workers; Plato; Pascal; Dante; CS Lewis' Abolition of Man; pre-Christian paganism; Puritans and the woke; Žižek; Rod Dreher; Houellebecq; how submission can be liberating; Graham Greene; religion as an anchor; why converts are often so dangerous; Freudian repression; Orwell and goose-stepping; the revolution of consciousness after Christ; Star Wars as neo-Christian; Dune as neo-pagan; Foucault; Oakeshott's lovers; Montaigne; Judith Shklar; Ross Douthat; the UK's rape-gangs; Starmer and liberal legalism; the Thomist view of nature; the medieval view of abortion; late-term abortions; and assisted dying.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Sebastian Junger on near-death experiences, Jon Rauch on “Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy,” Evan Wolfson on the history of marriage equality, Yoni Appelbaum on how America stopped building things, Nick Denton on the evolution of new media, and Ross Douthat on how everyone should be religious. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Lauren is joined by fashion designer Bella Freud, host of the fabulous podcast Fashion Neurosis. They discuss working at Vivienne Westwood's shop Seditionaries, why she doesn't stage runway shows, John Malkovich, being human, and a lot more. Lauren also weighs in on Simone Bellotti's expected exit from Bally, the Kardashian beauty complex, a little bit of Vuori by popular demand. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Who is Kim?Kim Morgan is a dynamic individual driven by a profound desire to facilitate change in people's lives. Through introspection and thoughtful inquiry, she discovered a unifying theme among those she engages with: a shared aspiration to transform aspects of their lives, careers, and relationships. Kim is passionate about helping others break free from repetitive patterns and Groundhog Day scenarios that hinder personal growth. Whether it's boosting confidence, altering behaviors, or achieving health and well-being goals, Kim is committed to empowering individuals to make meaningful, lasting changes. Her insightful approach inspires others to break the cycle and embrace a renewed sense of self as they strive for improvement.Key Takeaways05:33 Insightful analysis of targeting business offerings effectively.09:08 Unintended consequences complicate scientific research processes.12:50 Self-consistency theory explains resisting personal change.17:22 Discussed reluctance to chase clients for payment.20:18 Choose between unchanged future or transformation chair.23:00 Properly planning takes time, also benefits business.24:50 Visualize failure to prevent project mistakes._________________________________________________________________________________________________Subscribe to our newsletter and get details of when we are doing these interviews live at https://TCA.fyi/newsletterFind out more about being a guest at : link.thecompleteapproach.co.uk/beaguestSubscribe to the podcast at https://link.thecompleteapproach.co.uk/podcastHelp us get this podcast in front of as many people as possible. Leave a nice five-star review at apple podcasts : https://link.thecompleteapproach.co.uk/apple-podcasts and on YouTube : https://link.thecompleteapproach.co.uk/Itsnotrocketscienceatyt!Here's how you can bring your business to THE next level:If you are a business owner currently turning over £/$10K - £/$50K per month and want to grow to £/$100K - £/$500k per month download my free resource on everything you need to grow your business on a single page :It's a detailed breakdown of how you can grow your business to 7-figures in a smart and sustainable wayhttps://scientificvaluebuildingmachine.online/————————————————————————————————————————————-TranscriptNote, this was transcribed using a transcription software and may not reflect the exact words used in the podcast)SUMMARY KEYWORDSKim Morgan, coaching journey, personal development, NLP, Freudian psychotherapy, Carl Rogers, humanistic therapy, coaching course, Nancy Cline, Time to Think, active listening, team communication, family estrangement, research, podcast, Stuart Webb, It's Not Rocket Science, client transformation, CEO coaching, relationship change, confidence building, behavior patterns, mindset shift, technical difficulties, payment reluctance, leadership style, vision chairs exercise, premortem technique, business planning, neurobiological patterns.SPEAKERSKim Morgan, Stuart WebbStuart Webb [00:00:31]:Hi, and welcome back to It's Not Rocket Science 5 questions over coffee. I better not show you the logo on this particular mug it's advertising. Kim, have you got something refreshing in front of me or isKim Morgan [00:00:43]:it just I'm sorry. I forgot it was meant to be coffee.Stuart Webb [00:00:48]:Oh, wellKim Morgan [00:00:48]:water. It's 5 questions over water.Stuart Webb [00:00:52]:It's 5 questions over water or any other drink, gin, is also acceptable, I'm sure. But anyway, I'm really delighted to be today in front of Kim Morgan. Kim is an exceptional, coach. She has over 25 years of experience in working in coaching, and and she believes that, that her using the coaching methods that she's been working, she's she's worked with CEOs. We've worked with parents. She's worked with families, and she believes in the power of coaching. It has a unique, insight into coaching. So, Kim, I'm really delighted to to be here in front of you today talking to you about this.Stuart Webb [00:01:28]:So thank you for make making a few minutes to come onto It's Not Rocket Science, 5 questions over whatever drink you have in front of you.Kim Morgan [00:01:37]:Thank you, Stuart. I'm thrilled to be here. We made it after a coupleStuart Webb [00:01:42]:of boardKim Morgan [00:01:42]:starts, didn't we?Stuart Webb [00:01:43]:We did. We did. Pim, let's start with let's start with that coaching. Let's start with, who it is you're trying to help. We've mentioned CEOs. We've mentioned families. We've mentioned parents. You know, what is the sort of the the thing that that brings those people? What's the the problem they have, the the issue that they have that that you are looking to help them to to resolve?Kim Morgan [00:02:08]:Do you know, Stuart, this is such a good question. Yeah. I, yeah, I had advanced warning of this question, and and it just threw me actually because I immediately went to you're right. We provide coaching in so many contexts. We provide it in house. We provide it to individuals. We we teach coaches how to coach. So I was like, well, there isn't a client.Kim Morgan [00:02:33]:But it was just a really good business question because it forced me to think, yeah, what do they all have in common? What do they all share that brings us? So so thank you for that. It was it was really helpful. So I I came to the conclusion that it is they all want to make a change. But, you know, it's it's as general as that, but they all want to make a change which will improve their lives, their career, their relationships, how they feel about themselves. And those changes include, you know, anything you could think of, but confidence changed their behaviors, their repeating patterns, those things that go, oh, here I I am again. You know? It's Groundhog Day. I thought I sorted this, but I'm back again in this familiar place. Might be health, well-being, that sense of, you know, every new year, we write those resolutions that we aren't gonna walk 10,000 steps a day, and then it's the 31st December and we haven't.Kim Morgan [00:03:39]:So, finances, levels of assertiveness, their leadership style, how they manage, their business performance. It can be anything, but they want to change it for the better. That's what Kim,Stuart Webb [00:03:52]:I love that.Kim Morgan [00:03:53]:Unifies all of them.Stuart Webb [00:03:55]:I'm so glad you've done that. Thank you. I'm so glad you were able to clarify it.Stuart Webb [00:05:33]:I'm delighted you can hear me again. Let me just go back to what you're saying, Kim, because I think it's brilliant insight. And it's one of those things that I I spent I spent a lot of my time with business owners who who tell me they can they can work with anybody or they tell me their their product is absolutely, appropriate for everyone. And they don't do what you've just done, which is actually truly drill down and think of the one thing that they're trying to do to understand exactly therefore how they can make their pitch, make their service or product really, appropriate for the person they're trying to fit people. Yeah. And so glad that you you were able to show how effective a question that one was by actually sort of doing that analysis.Kim Morgan [00:06:20]:So thank you. I'm nothing if not obedient. I take questions very seriously.Stuart Webb [00:06:27]:I like that very much. Okay, Kim. So let's get back on track. You've done a great job of of identifying what it is that who it is that you're trying to to talk to. So let me just understand now. You've got this this this person. What is it they've tried to do, before coming to an expert like you to try to, understand what it is that you can do to help them?Kim Morgan [00:06:52]:So I think they've tried to change. I think they've tried all the usual things. You know, maybe they've bought a self help book or a business book. Maybe they've been on some training courses. Maybe they've just set themselves some goals and bought a journal, and and I'm not knocking any of those things. Those things are all valuable things to do in the process. But I think what they don't know is just how complex and sophisticated and challenging making real lasting change particularly to our very ingrained sort of beliefs and behaviors can be. And I I think most people kind of assume that if we decide to make a change, we follow the required steps, and the change will follow.Kim Morgan [00:07:50]:But you know what we know, and this is where I think coaches really come in, and certainly, I hope most coaches operate in this way. I know barefoot coaches do because this is what we really sort of major on, a deep understanding of how change happens and how it doesn't happen. So the factors that bring about change and also the complexity of our kind of neurobiological, psychological, familial, physical, historical patterns of behavior that just become entrenched. And despite the best of intentions, like I said before, we just, like, find ourselves reverting in, like, simp you know, in the most simplest ways, trying to brush our teeth with the other hands is almost impossible. So think about trying to completely change your leadership style from, like, very people pleasing to slightly more authoritative or vice versa. It's really hard to do without knowing everything you need to do to be able to do it. So that I think that's where we come in.Stuart Webb [00:09:08]:And I think that's a really great summary of what some most people find themselves in because, you know, the the the problem that we all face, of course, is as you've said. You know, I look back at my history, my history as a a scientist. When I think about some of the experiments that I was trying to do when I was still a simple simple scientist working my way through the the various bits of the the cell that I was working on and the the interactions, you can never see quite what the unintended consequences of certain actions are, can you? No. You you make one simple change and it was the basis of sort of scientific research. You make a change and you go, well, I didn't expect that. That's just completely, completely blown me. And now I've got to think of a reason why that's happened then, test whether that's going to happen again. And that's quite a complicated thing when you're dealing with just, you know, what I was dealing with, which was simple bits of cells and DNA and viruses.Stuart Webb [00:10:02]:But Yeah. But you're dealing with an entire human being and the way that they interact internally and with the whole of the world.Kim Morgan [00:10:08]:Yeah. And it it's really huge. You've just made me remember a client years ago who had, a strong regional accent, and this was a long time ago back in the day when organisations used to say, if you want to get on around here, young man, you're gonna have to get some elocution lessons. So he did. He trotted off to get some elocution lessons and gradually sort of practiced and came home, to his family and started speaking in a really plummy voice. But, actually, they all fell about laughing. They didn't support it at all. None of his friends did.Kim Morgan [00:10:48]:A simple example like that, made him just give up because he didn't want his family treating him in that way. You know, even something that was quite easy to change, there are external forces that oppose it, but there are also so many internal forces. As a scientist, you probably know the term homeostasis, do you? I do. Which you can probably explain it better than I can, but it's been adopted by coaching, which is any kind of systems' tendency to revert to a set state. So is that about right?Stuart Webb [00:11:31]:That's about right. That's about right.Kim Morgan [00:11:33]:Thank you. So my best example is our temperature. Whether it is boiling hot outside or in the Arctic, our body will be looking to maintain our temperature at at, you know, that, ideal temperature. And exactly the same happens with our behaviors. In spite of all the kind of actions that we do, we will find ourselves reverting to what's familiar. And I've worked as a therapist. I've worked with families. I've worked with families where there have been year long kind of interventions to stop the patterns of behaviors in the families where they all have their role, you know, the placator, the the kind of aggressor, the person who just sits there and doesn't participate in it all.Kim Morgan [00:12:25]:Lots of work. Lots of times after all that intervention, they go home and almost as if by magic, they slot back into those places that are so familiar. So this is what we're battling against, really. It's often also called self consistency theory. And if I can just, like, share a few more examples fromStuart Webb [00:12:49]:research Please do.Kim Morgan [00:12:50]:Research from self consistency theory. There's there, are, you know, there are lots of studies of people who've won the lottery. Not all of them do this, but there's a real been a real tendency for people who've come into lots of money to suddenly, you know, go about losing it, almost unconsciously wanting to get back to what they know, the world that they know. I there was a study out recently about, weight loss in, weight loss programs, and there's a 97% recidivism rate. So after doing all that, 97% of people go back to where they once were, and some and some even put on a bit more weight than that too. Couples and family therapy, you know, the same thing. I've already mentioned it. So so this is what we're battling against, and that's why even if you're trying to make a change, you you just don't know that all this stuff is going on inside you, and a coach will be able to help you.Kim Morgan [00:13:55]:I I often say that a coach when people say, how do you describe coaching? There's lots of there's lots of sort of, you know, fairly dry, explanations of coaching. But the one that I landed on years ago was, like, being a business book or a self development book that's come to life that actually holds your feet to the fire. That tells you, you know, and makes you do those exercises.Stuart Webb [00:14:22]:Yes. And it's so important, isn't it? And you you talk about weight loss. I mean, it there are so many factors which actually begin to sort of play into that space. You you know, there's evidence that it's not only your psychology, but your body. There are so many things which are fighting against you making that progress. So you you can you you need to you need to have some some way of reflecting on that. You need to have somebody who's helping you to see the unseen. There's a concept that you'll probably know but far better than me, the Johari window, which is where you don't see your own behaviors unless somebody actually sort of points them at you because they're hidden to you.Stuart Webb [00:15:00]:And and and it's that where I think so often there's people who are sort of saying, well, don't worry about we we can get through, but we don't actually see, the the the sort of the thing the impacts we have. And I was saying about, you know, the unintended consequences. So much of what we do have these unintended consequences that we don't even notice, and we do need somebody to help us find them. We do need help somebody to help us work back towards how those, impact upon not only yourself, but on the people that you're hoping to affect.Kim Morgan [00:15:28]:Yeah. Definitely. Definitely. And, you know, these play out too. I I was thinking about coming on to this, podcast today. I was thinking about something that's happened really recently in my own business, actually. Because I would say that, generally, we at, therefore, are people pleasers. We have really strong people pleasing traits.Kim Morgan [00:15:52]:I guess that's why we got into this business. We wanna make people feel better, and we want people to feel good. And that has tremendous advantages in our business because, you know, we build rapport and empathy easily, I hope. But it has downsides too. And this week, the downside really hit me because our, accountant sent me the usual kind of monthly management accounts. And I and for the first time, I really looked at our accounts payable, and our accounts receivables. And I've noticed that we pay people really quickly, and we get paid really slowly. And and and that's not you know, that that's a great example.Kim Morgan [00:16:43]:That's really nothing to do with knowing about accounting because we do. Our own sort of desire to kind of put other people's needs before ours is even showing itself in that way. And and and in addition to that, I noticed that my accountant had mentioned that, you know, quite a few people have owed us money, and she'd said, I I've given them a gentle nudge. And I thought, gentle nudge? Isn't that telling that here we are, our sort of beliefs and behaviors manifesting themselves even in that organizational context?Stuart Webb [00:17:22]:Kim Kim Kim, you you've you've hit up on a you've hit up on a spot that we could spend the rest of this this this week discussing, but I had a discussion with a client recently who turned around to me and said, almost exactly what you've said, which is one of those, oh, I do hate chasing people for money. And I said, would you prefer to just put a note at the bottom of your invoice with keep your money, I don't really want it. And they went, oh, good grief. No. I don't mean that. And I said, you've just told me that's exactly what you've said. You basically said you don't chase them. You would prefer to let them keep the invoice and just not pay it.Stuart Webb [00:17:55]:And and I have to ask the question, where would your business do if everybody did that? And they looked at me as if to say, well, you're just being silly now. But it's exactly what people do, isn't it? They they turn around and go, I've given you my time. I've given you my skills. I've given you my expertise, but I don't really want to charge you for it because that feels dirty. Yeah. I it's nice. Somehow that money is dirty.Kim Morgan [00:18:16]:Yeah. It's really rife, particularly in the sort of helping professions. But but that point that point is really valid for what we're talking about here in terms of, you know, just changing a behavior, doing some training, or reading a book about how to run a business isn't enough unless unless you have somebody help you examine the beliefs and the patterns that are driving your behaviors. And that's where the challenge really happens.Stuart Webb [00:18:48]:Let's turn, I hope, to the thing where we can give some people some, some some free advice. Now, I've put on here a a link to your your podcast and webinars where I believe you've got some fantastic free webinars. That's on barefootcoaching.co.ukforward/podcasthyphen and hyphen webinars. But I believe you've got other giveaways that you are keen to sort of talk to people about. So tell us about the exercise that you are hoping to walk people through.Kim Morgan [00:19:20]:Great. Thank you. So first of all, I'm gonna talk you through this exercise as as sort of carefully and as quickly as I can given the time limitations. But if you want to contactStuart Webb [00:19:33]:I will I will cut I will cut you off when eventually I get bored of listening to you. So I'll try and wrap it up by, try and wrap it up within an hour.Kim Morgan [00:19:42]:Alright. I'll do the same. But, yeah, if people want me to send them the instructions for this, kim@barefootcoaching.co.uk. Well, just write to me. I'll I'll send you a free sort of download of how to do this. But this is one exercise that you can use for yourselves, you can use for others that just really, really works and then and sort of engages you with the consequences of your everyday decisions and behaviors. We call it vision chairs. It's as simple as this.Kim Morgan [00:20:18]:You put I like to put 2 actual chairs in front of myself at some distance away. 2 chairs, and you have in your mind the change that you'd like to make. And you, determine which of those chairs represents a chair of no change. A chair where in 3 or 5 years' time, actually, you never got around to it and things are just as they are today, or a chair of change. The chair that says, I did it. I'm somewhere else. I'm do I'm behaving differently. And you simply look, you know, you first of all, you look at that future chair in 3 years' time where there's no change, and you see what you see.Kim Morgan [00:21:04]:You notice what you notice. Very often, you know, some people go, that'd be okay. You know, I'm fine. But very often, people will go, actually, it hasn't stayed the same. It's got worse. It's got worse because I haven't done anything about my fitness, and therefore, it wouldn't stay the same. If I want to be really kind of brutally challenging to people, I'll keep putting another chair behind that one and another chair behind that one. So, okay, let's look at 10 years' time what the impact will be.Kim Morgan [00:21:35]:I I want to say I've used this really successfully with, sort of things like smoking cessation, and I've also used it highly successfully when working with police forces who wanted women victims of domestic abuse to actually go to court. Because it's challenge it can be challenging in those situations to see where I might be if I don't do anything. But, you know, coaching is about empathetic provocation. It's about ruthless compassion. It's no good going, oh, you're doing really well. It's sometimes we have to, like, show people where their behaviors might take them. So do that. You know, whatever it is, you might go, you know what? It doesn't matter that much or actually, I don't wanna be there.Kim Morgan [00:22:22]:Then come back, look at the other chair, the chair of where you want to be. Not exactly sort of, you know, a a chair of dreams, but a a chair of what could be really possible. See what's different about that future you, go and sit in it, and talk back to yourself today about the steps that you took to get there. So what did you do? Who helped you? What resources did you need? What support? How much, you know, extra learning did you have to do? And how does it feel to be there?Stuart Webb [00:23:00]:Mhmm.Kim Morgan [00:23:00]:And then and and, basically, you know, it takes a long time to do it properly, but the the the you know, that's what you do. You come back to the chair. You look at the 2 chairs and go, what am I gonna do? You know? What am I gonna do? Because I'm kind of seeing my future a bit here. And, it also it doesn't just necessarily work for a change. Can I tell you one more thing? I don't know how much time we've got. But it also works for business planning really beautifully. There was one occasion when I went to exhibit, one of these sort of learning and development conferences early in Barefoot's history. And I just had a few of bits of, like, 84 papers stuck to the stuck to the sort of screen behind us.Kim Morgan [00:23:49]:You know? The I can't remember what it's called. You know, that exhibition stand. And and everyone else had all these products, and it was so colourful. And I was just mortified. And when I came back, I said, I don't wanna be I don't wanna be in that situation next year. Actually, my, at yeah. The my PA at the time did this with me and said, come on then. You know, do your own exercise.Kim Morgan [00:24:16]:And and I said, and when I sat in that chair, I said, we've got products set about £10 because people, they don't wanna spend a lot. They want something small that they can pick up, something that's colorful. And that gave rise to a whole range of, little boxes of coaching cards that we sell, that whole exercise. So I I will send you downloadable instructions to do it if you want to. It's just something I do every year to go, am I going in the right direction as the years tick by in my life?Stuart Webb [00:24:50]:That's a very interesting exercise, and it reminds me of one that I do with clients, which is what I call the pre mode premortem, which is when you're embarking upon a project, you actually ask yourselves, okay. Let's imagine it's gone horribly wrong because we're all very capable of catastrophizing. So you imagine just how horribly it's gone wrong, and now now you've got yourself to that. What happened to make it go so horribly wrong? Tell me everything which could possibly have gone wrong to get you to this mindset of where everything's gone so horribly wrong and people will come out with all sorts of things. And you just put all of those on a list and you go right those are all the things we're not going to do, now let's talk about the things we will. You do have to put yourself in a different mind, don't you? You have to get into a different mindset in order to actually explore those possibilities and work out what you need to do.Kim Morgan [00:25:32]:You do. In my experience, people do it really easily. First of all, they go, oh, I'm talking to chairs now. Yeah. Exactly what I feared would happen when I came to see a coach. But, actually, it's it's, it's so powerful. And many years ago, I can remember watching a television program where it was about, parents whose children were obese, and they they actually did something like this. They sort of, did a sort of reconstruction of the a construction of the future where they had what their child would look like and be like and feel like in 10 years' time if they hadn't done something about their diet and it hadn'tStuart Webb [00:26:17]:Oh, what a lovely example.Kim Morgan [00:26:20]:Powerful powerful impact. KimStuart Webb [00:26:24]:Kim, let me come come come to my 4th question before, before I let you go back to your world of helping people who really need it. What is it that brought you here? What's what is the what is the one book or or course or or program or whatever that that truly brought you from who you were to to where you are today?Kim Morgan [00:26:49]:That's a that's a really good question. And I don't I I don't think there was one that brought me to coaching because I because I was just on a journey of devouring everything I could about personal development. I was a therapist, and then I did every course and book available. And then I I think back now, and I was I was only young, and I, obviously, had a lot of confidence. And I just thought, you know what? I think I can write a coaching course based on everything I've done. So it was a a whole mix of lots of different people. I studied NLP. I studied Freudian psychotherapy.Kim Morgan [00:27:30]:I studied Carl Rogers' humanistic person's sense of therapy, and I thought took what I thought were the best bits of all of it and created this course. The book that has made the biggest impression on me and on, students on our coach training program is called Time to Think, And it's written by a wonderful woman called Nancy Cline who I I had the privilege of getting to know really well, and she actually taught on our course for many, many years. She stopped teaching because she won't work online because she's so much about that humans human interaction. But I think everyone should read this book, time to think, which is just about the power of listening actually and giving people your really full attention.Stuart Webb [00:28:26]:I love it.Kim Morgan [00:28:28]:Have you read it?Stuart Webb [00:28:29]:I have. You have. It's it's lovely.Kim Morgan [00:28:32]:It's an amazing book, isn't it?Stuart Webb [00:28:34]:And And it does make it does make you realize the importance of being present, because you are so much more able to affect things if you're truly present. And I think that's that's a lesson that we all need to learn.Kim Morgan [00:28:50]:Yeah. And and also sitting in it is like the mind that holds the problem also holds the solution. And if you give people the right conditions to think, not be interrupted, Somewhere inside, they'll come up with the right solution for them. And it, you know, it seems to be a really, really powerful philosophy. In our team, we sometimes just do everyone has, like, 5 minutes each to say something, go around the team, and no one and we all have to keep our eyes on them, and we all have to listen intently. And every time we do that, we're sort of mind blown by how in those 5 minutes we we've learned so much more about that person than we have in the previous, like, month Yeah. Of chitchat.Stuart Webb [00:29:45]:Active listening. Kim, I'm gonna come to my 5th question and this is the question which is, which is the one that I I enjoy asking the most actually if I'm gonna be honest with people, and that is what is the question that I haven't asked you that you wanted me to ask? And this is obviously the where I really learn about, what it is that's currently on your mind and how you're thinking about what you're trying to do to affect those people that really resonate with what you're talking about at the moment.Kim Morgan [00:30:14]:I, yeah, I had so many thoughts about this, but I think the question that I would like you to ask is, yeah, what's next? You know? What's next? I was a kind of pioneer. I was a pioneer of of coaching, and I'm still passionate about it. But I'm really always looking for the next thing that's gonna help people.Stuart Webb [00:30:44]:And so, Kim, what is the next thing for Barefoot Coaching and for Kim Morgan?Kim Morgan [00:30:49]:I think it's more for Kim Morgan than Barefoot Coaching. It's, I I I I think I said, I do a lot of work with grief and loss. And it's a kind of offshoot of grief and loss that I'm really noticing in in clients and people in the world, and that is like family estrangement. There are more and more children divorcing their parents and parents divorcing their children. And I just think it's something that is, you know, people is gonna need a lot of help with.Stuart Webb [00:31:29]:Yeah. SoKim Morgan [00:31:29]:that's the I'm doing a bit of research into that right now.Stuart Webb [00:31:34]:Kim, I wish you every success with that. I love to hear the fact that you're gonna address that. And that's the father of a current 23 year old who still seems to be clinging on like a limpet, showing no signs of divorcing me. I'm sure he won't need your help, but he'll need help from people like you to do so much, in his life. Kim, it's been an absolute pleasure. I mean, a real, real pleasure to have you spend a few minutes with us, and thank you so much for sharing so much intimate knowledge of what you do. I'm just gonna I'm just gonna do the, the quick outro, which is, look, if you would like to get an email so that you actually know who's coming on to these things and gonna spend some time listening to people like him, giving huge amounts of value and and, and wisdom. Just go to this link, which is link dot the complete approach dotco.ukforward/newsletter.Stuart Webb [00:32:28]:That's link dot the complete approach dotco.ukforward/newsletter. It's a simple form. You'll get an email once a week, which basically says this week coming up is whoever it is. Tune in and watch the Wisdom Roll. Kim, thank you so much for spending some time with us. I appreciate this is, we had a little technical difficulty, but but we got through the technical difficulty, and we heard you brilliantly throughout it. And and you've really poured wisdom, and I really appreciate the time you spent with us. So thank you so much indeed.Kim Morgan [00:32:59]:I really appreciate you inviting me here. Thank you. I've really loved talking to you. And whoever else is here, thank you for being here.Stuart Webb [00:33:06]:Yeah. We've had we've had some wonderful people, like, and I know Therese Baptist has been here. She's a fantastic fantastic person. I love I love I love Therese. Sally Sally Alou Richards, Andy Chandler. We've had people listening to you, and I know they're gonna enjoy listening back to this, and and hearing what you've been having to say. So thank you so much for spending some time with us.Kim Morgan [00:33:30]:It's been a real pleasure. Thank you. Get full access to It's Not Rocket Science! at thecompleteapproach.substack.com/subscribe

Seth and Sean discuss the referee problem in Saturday's game in Kansas City, why that was big but far from the only issue the Texans had, go through the day's Headlines, re-live the Texans' Divisional loss in KC via the voice of Marc Vandermeer, give credit where it's due in Acknowledge Me, discuss Cal & Hannah McNair's message to fans after this season and assess if CJ Stroud had a Freudian slip in mentioning Stefon Diggs.

HOUR 2 - Seth and Sean re-live the Texans' Divisional loss in KC via the voice of Marc Vandermeer, give credit where it's due in Acknowledge Me, discuss Cal & Hannah McNair's message to fans after this season and assess if CJ Stroud had a Freudian slip in mentioning Stefon Diggs.

Seth and Sean discuss Cal and Hannah McNair's final message to fans this season from the postgame show and if CJ Stroud had a Freudian slip in his presser talking about Diggs. Could something be happening behind the scenes to bring Diggs back?

Guest host Richard Syrett (Twitter) was joined by researcher Stephen Sakellarios to discuss reincarnation, his past life experience, and a conspiracy theory regarding 19th-century author Charles Dickens. According to Sakellarios, Dickens did not originate "A Christmas Carol" but instead adapted it from the works of Mathew Franklin Whittier and his wife, Abby. He argued that elements of mysticism and spiritualism in "A Christmas Carol" are inconsistent with Dickens' other works. Sakellarios highlighted evidence such as Mathew's affiliation with spiritualist organizations and Abby's mystic poetry, arguing that Dickens, a materialist and skeptic, could not have authentically incorporated such themes.Sakellarios referenced instances in Dickens' career that suggest a pattern of appropriation, such as his involvement with illustrator Robert Seymour, whose work on The Pickwick Papers he believes Dickens manipulated and claimed credit for, driving Seymour to despair. Similarly, he cited a letter Dickens wrote with a Freudian slip that implies he "fastened on" rather than created "A Christmas Carol." The Whittiers likely sought to inspire social change through the story, but after Abby's death, Mathew entrusted the manuscript to Dickens, who reworked it under financial pressure, he suggested.Sakellarios described an intriguing connection to what he believes is a past life as Mathew Franklin Whittier, centering on an architectural detail in a house believed to be tied to Mathew and Abby. The story begins with a vision of Abby leading Mathew up the stairs of a house and into a small, hidden room resembling a linen closet. This unique feature—a door seemingly cut into the wall, leading to a nine-by-nine room midway between floors—turned out to exist in two houses linked to Abby's family property. The architectural detail, which Sakellarios had never encountered before, matched his vision and was corroborated during research. This and other details solidify Sakellarios's belief that he is the reincarnation of Whittier.TOTO, The Beatles, & Yacht RockIn the first hour, musician Steve Lukather reflected on his extraordinary career with a mix of humility and gratitude, emphasizing the milestones that have defined his journey. As a founding member of TOTO, he experienced global success, including Grammy-winning albums and hit singles like "Africa" and "Rosanna". Lukather talked about his work as a session guitarist on numerous iconic projects, including Michael Jackson's Thriller, where he contributed to tracks "The Girl Is Mine" and "Beat It". He described working with legends Paul McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr as surreal, particularly given his lifelong admiration for The Beatles, who inspired his love for music after he saw them perform on The Ed Sullivan Show. Lukather also discussed his participation in the recent Yacht Rock documentary.

Subscribe to get access to the full episode, the episode reading list, and all premium episodes! www.patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappinessAbby and Patrick sit down with religious studies scholar and Reformation historian Nathan Rein to discuss Freud's “Obsessive Actions and Religious Practices” (1907). This is Freud's first extended treatment of religion as such, with a particular emphasis on ritual, and, in classic Freudian style, sees him provocatively linking individual symptoms with broader cultural formations. But what does Freud mean by “religion” anyway, in relation to his Jewish heritage on the one hand and his overwhelmingly Catholic Austrian milieu on the other? What can looking at the nuances of Freud's German reveal about his understanding of what we would today call obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD)? What are we to make of his account of individual “obsessional neuroses” as a kind of “private suffering” versus the collective work done by shared public rituals, and how does that bear on Freud's ideas about the origins of our beliefs and, per Freud, our “ignorance” about them? And what is the character of Freud's feelings about religion – is his just a stance of disillusionment, or is it tinged by a more personal ambivalence, perhaps even one that's particularly recognizable this holiday season? Plus: Martin Luther's bowel troubles, the importance of respecting Melusine's boundaries, and objections to Christmas standards at church dances from an unexpected source.Texts discussed include:Sigmund Freud, “Religious Actions and Obsessive Practices.”Donald Capps, Freud and Freudians on Religion: A Reader. Yale University Press, 2001.Christopher Alan Lewis and Kate M. Loewenthal, editors. “Religion and Obsessionality: Obsessive Actions and Religious Practices,” a special volume of Mental Health, Religion & Culture, February 2018, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13674676.2018.1481192.Have you noticed that Freud is back? Got questions about psychoanalysis? Or maybe you've traversed the fantasy and lived to tell the tale? Leave us a voicemail! (646) 450-0847A podcast about psychoanalysis, politics, pop culture, and the ways we suffer now. New episodes on Saturdays. Follow us on social media:Linktree: https://linktr.ee/ordinaryunhappinessTwitter: @UnhappinessPodInstagram: @ordinaryunhappinessPatreon: patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappinessTheme song: Formal Chicken - Gnossienne No. 1 https://open.spotify.com/album/2MIIYnbyLqriV3vrpUTxxO Provided by Fruits MusicClosing song:Track: Baby It's Cold Outside (With TNTVictory)Artist: C.J. Ezell -     / cjezellBaby It's Cold Outside (With TNTVictory) - by C.J. Ezell is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (http://bit.ly/CreativeCommons3-0)

Jesse Eisenberg (A Real Pain, The Social Network, Now You See Me) is an Oscar-nominated actor, writer, and producer. Jesse joins the Armchair Expert to discuss not being cool enough to smoke, receiving a cease and desist letter as a kid from Woody Allen, and how community theater was his outlet for being an incredibly anxious child. Jesse and Dax discuss their saddest film wardrobe experiences, the Parmesan cheese version of Cyrano, and where movie roles rank on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Jesse explains the very strange economy of promoting a movie, the Freudian breakdown of his characters in A Real Pain, and the solace of writing.Follow Armchair Expert on the Wondery App or wherever you get your podcasts. Watch new content on YouTube or listen to Armchair Expert early and ad-free by joining Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Start your free trial by visiting wondery.com/links/armchair-expert-with-dax-shepard/ now.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Does not having a penis make you feel inferior due to a bad case of penis envy? Do you or have you ever wanted to have sex with your mother? Or your father? When most people think of Freud they think of his more extreme notions and theories, stuff like his Oedipus and Electra complexes. But he also really helped us understand our unconscious mind and how it interacts with our conscious mind. How the id, ego, and superego shape our personalities and desires. A fascinating blend of important science and insanity today as we explore the life and ideas of Sigmund Freud! Merch and more: www.badmagicproductions.com Timesuck Discord! https://discord.gg/tqzH89vWant to join the Cult of the Curious PrivateFacebook Group? Go directly to Facebook and search for "Cult of the Curious" to locate whatever happens to be our most current page :)For all merch-related questions/problems: store@badmagicproductions.com (copy and paste)Please rate and subscribe on Apple Podcasts and elsewhere and follow the suck on social media!! @timesuckpodcast on IG and http://www.facebook.com/timesuckpodcastWanna become a Space Lizard? Click here: https://www.patreon.com/timesuckpodcast.Sign up through Patreon, and for $5 a month, you get access to the entire Secret Suck catalog (295 episodes) PLUS the entire catalog of Timesuck, AD FREE. You'll also get 20% off of all regular Timesuck merch PLUS access to exclusive Space Lizard merch. 

Gus Johnson was less than excited about calling the Ohio State/Purdue game. Nick has been calling some college basketball games. Brent Key couldn't hear Kris Budden. The deep discussion of postgame interviews. Steve Sipple with a horrible analogy. Crazy soccer call that sounded like someone dying. Larry Puteney pun. Bilingual NFL official. Remembering Roddy Beaubois. The Utah AD says the game was stolen from them. Matt Rhule with the deepest sigh. What a college football season! Mitch Sherman with a Freudian slip. Recapping the polls.   Connect with us! SchickandNick.com Facebook, Twitter, or email  We would hate it if you missed an episode! So PLEASE subscribe, rate the pod, and throw us a review. It helps us out so much! We'd likey that.  This is another Hurrdat Media Production. Hurrdat Media is a podcast network and digital media production company based in Omaha, NE. Find more podcasts on the Hurrdat Media Network by going to HurrdatMedia.com or Hurrdat Media YouTube channel! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SERIES 3 EPISODE 55: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: The obvious problem with John Kelly going on the record and saying yes, I heard Trump say quote “I need the kind of generals that Hitler had” is that a huge number of his supporters will applaud it. And the obvious problem with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic quoting those who were there as Trump was told the cost of the funeral he'd offered to pay for, for a murdered U-S soldier named Vanessa Guillen, and Trump screamed “It doesn't cost 60-thousand bucks to bury an effing Mexican!” is that even MORE of Trump's supporters will applaud THAT. Because the real, disgusting, nauseating truth behind the revelations in the Goldberg Atlantic piece is that it touches the third and FOURTH rails of Donald Trump's America: many of his people believe whoever is in charge SHOULD be supported by and in fact kept in power by “the kind of generals Hitler had.” The antisemites in the Trump cult love it. And the ones who aren't antisemites just authoritarians love it even if they're queasy about the antisemitism. And the ones who aren't antisemites or authoritarians but have always secretly believed the word “Democracy” was just another brand name or FLAVOR love it because it posits a kind of America not just where MIGHT makes RIGHT, but where ONLY might makes right. And if there is anybody missing from the Trump Coalition of Evil, anybody who ISN'T inspired by “I need the kind of generals that Hitler had” they are certainly covered by “It doesn't cost 60,000 bucks to bury an effing Mexican” because if violence and militarism are the Trumpian third rail, racism and specifically anti-Hispanic racism are the FOURTH rail. MEANWHILE:19% of Republicans think if Trump loses he should just seize power (28% of Mormon Americans). The latest great polling numbers for Kamala Harris? In July she was getting less than half of voters under 35. She's now getting 60% And it sounds ridiculous: Ex-Flamenco Correspondent and Trump concierge judge Aileen Cannon as Attorney General?  Honestly - how much more could she do for Trump than Merrick Garland has? B-Block (26:29) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Jeremy Peters of The New York Times says on MSNBC (with help from Katy Tur) that Kamala Harris is not as clear in her speaking as is Trump. Newsweek Magazine isn't certain if that photo of Trump in a Pittsburgh Steelers 100 pounds lighter and 40 years younger MIGHT BE A FAKE. And Trump's own campaign can't spell "Steelers" - and in a very Freudian way. C-Block (36:05) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: More of my atypical World Series previews: Why I'm adopting ex-Yankees manager Ralph Houk's attitude towards the team he, like I, grew up with: "Piss on the Yankees."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Details emerge surrounding the latest assassination attempt on President Donald Trump following a Secret Service press conference yesterday, Hillary Clinton joined the mainstream media in downplaying the event, leftists are politicizing the passing of Georgia mother Amber Nicole Thurman due to abortion complications, they say the “Trump abortion ban” enabled her death, we've got the truth, National Review Editor in Chief Rich Lowry apparently said the N word with a hard R in what appears to have been a Freudian slip, which brings to mind a Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett classic, Barstool Sports Founder Dave Portnoy is pleading for Floridians to legalize marijuana, the King of Voter Registration Scott Presler joins the show, and much more!GUEST: Scott Presler | Josh Firestine$50 OFF 4-WEEK KIT / www.PrepWithCrowder.comSOURCES: https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/sources-september-17-2024Join MugClub to watch this show every day! http://louderwithcrowder.com/mugclubNEW MERCH! https://crowdershop.com/Subscribe to my podcast: https://rss.com/podcasts/louder-with-crowder/FOLLOW ME: Website: https://louderwithcrowder.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/scrowder Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/louderwithcrowder Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/stevencrowderofficialMusic by @Pogo