Podcasts about freudian

Welcome to hoe! No, the name of the podcast hasn't changed, rather Dane had an unfortunate Freudian slip this episode! Daniel has been getting ghosted in his dating life, so this week the infernal aunties discuss romance manifestations! Plus, terrible gym music and The Nostril Hut! Produced by podcasthouse.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Part 1 Anti-Oedipus by Gilles Deleuze Summary"Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" is a foundational text in post-structuralist thought, co-authored by French philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, published in 1972. The work critiques traditional Freudian psychoanalysis and incorporates concepts from Marxism, anthropology, and philosophy. Here's a summary of its main ideas:Rejection of Oedipus ComplexDeleuze and Guattari challenge the centrality of the Oedipus complex in understanding human psychology and social dynamics. They argue that this Freudian concept narrows the complexity of desire and reduces it to familial and sexual determinants.Desire as ProductiveThe authors propose that desire should be seen as a productive force rather than simply a lack or deficit. They coined the term "desiring-production" to describe the way desires create social and economic realities. Instead of repressing desires, societies channel and structure them through various institutions (family, state, capital).Capitalism and SchizophreniaThe title itself suggests a link between capitalism and schizophrenia as systems that disrupt conventional forms of organization. They argue that capitalism liberates desire by breaking down traditional social bonds but simultaneously re-imposes new forms of control. This paradox creates a schizophrenic state where individuals oscillate between freedom and constraint.Assemblages and MultiplicityDeleuze and Guattari introduce the concept of "assemblages"—a collection of heterogeneous elements that come together to form a whole. They emphasize a multiplicity of identities and desires that exist outside rigid categorizations, arguing against essentialist views of human nature.Anti-AuthoritarianismThroughout the text, there's an anti-authoritarian sentiment. They encourage a radical rethinking of societal structures and promote the idea of reforming anything that confines desire—ranging from family units to the state and capitalist economies.SchizoanalysisInstead of psychoanalysis, they propose "schizoanalysis" as a method for understanding desire and social relationships. Schizoanalysis aims to liberate desire from societal constraints and explore how it interacts with broader social and economic forces. Conclusion"Anti-Oedipus" serves as a manifesto for rethinking desire, identity, and power in contemporary societies. It challenges readers to consider how psychoanalysis can be expanded beyond family dynamics to encompass a broader understanding of desire's role in shaping both individual subjectivity and societal structure. This work laid the foundation for further exploration of these themes in their subsequent collaboration, "A Thousand Plateaus." Overall, "Anti-Oedipus" invites a radical rethinking of how desire functions within capitalism and opens the door to new ways of conceptualizing human interaction and social organization.Part 2 Anti-Oedipus AuthorGilles Deleuze was a French philosopher born on January 18, 1925, and he passed away on November 4, 1995. He is widely known for his work in philosophy, particularly his contribution to postmodernism and post-structuralism. Deleuze's collaborative work with psychoanalyst Félix Guattari significantly influenced various fields, including philosophy, literature, film, and cultural studies. Anti-OedipusRelease Date: "Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia," co-authored with Félix Guattari, was first published in French in 1972.This book is a foundational text of their two-volume series titled "Capitalism and Schizophrenia" and is often regarded as a seminal work in the fields of philosophy, psychoanalysis, and social theory. Other Notable WorksGilles Deleuze wrote several influential books, some of which include:Difference and Repetition (1968) This book offers a...

Freudian slips: when your subconscious really wants the mic.

The "gospel" of perilous times

The "gospel" of perilous times To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/549/29

This podcast contains explicit language, adult themes and discussions that may not be suitable for all listeners. In Here Comes The Guillotine The Mailbag, award winning Scottish comedians Frankie Boyle, Susie McCabe and Christopher Macarthur-Boyd answer your emails...If you have a dilemma, issue or problem you need solved, email hctg@global.com

Secretary of the Army Dan Driscol mentioned in a recent interview that he had spoken to a former soldier currently stationed on the moon! Slip of the tongue or of the Freudian type? Listen in and decide for your self.

In this episode, Robin Carhart-Harris, PhD joins to elucidate the intersection of psychedelics and neuroplasticity. Dr. Carhart-Harris is the Ralph Metzner Distinguished Professor in Neurology and Psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco. Robin founded the Centre for Psychedelic Research at Imperial College London in April 2019, was ranked among the top 31 medical scientists in 2020, and in 2021, was named in TIME magazine's ‘100 Next' – a list of 100 rising stars shaping the future. Dr. Carhart-Harris begins by discussing the impact of psychedelics on neuroplasticity and mental health. He explains neuroplasticity as the brain's ability to change, emphasizing its role in mood disorders and substance use and describes how stress atrophies the brain, leading to mental illness. Dr. Carhart-Harris differentiates between neuroplasticity and neurogenesis, noting that while neurogenesis is limited in adults, neuroplasticity can be influenced by psychedelics like ketamine, psilocybin, and MDMA. In closing, he also discusses the entropic brain hypothesis, suggesting that increased brain entropy leads to richer subjective experiences.    In this episode, you'll hear: The relationship between neuroplasticity and “canalization”  Why homeostatic neuroplasticity may promote mental wellbeing Differences between ketamine, MDMA, and serotonergic psychedelics in terms of neuroplasticity The details of the entropic brain hypothesis Psychedelics' effect on the default mode network The frontiers of research into psychedelics and neuroplasticity  Quotes: “So changeability is what plasticity is. And neuroplasticity—that's the ability of the brain to change. Okay, and how is neuroplasticity related to mood disorders like depression and anxiety or substance use disorder or something like that? Well, that's a great question cause we don't have it entirely nailed down. But one of the most reliable findings in biological psychiatry is that stress atrophies the brain.” [2:47] “The main thing with ketamine is that the window of increased plasticity is brief… That makes sense because that reflects how ketamine seems to work therapeutically—that it provides relief somewhat short-term, unless it is twinned with, say, psychotherapy or you do repeat administration and get someone out of the rut they were in.” [22:15] “We've seen in people with depression, brain networks can become quite segregated from each other—they are ordinarily, they're quite functionally separate and distinct—but that modularity might be a bit elevated in depression. But what we've seen with psilocybin therapy is that separateness between systems, that segregated quality of organization of brain networks, brain systems actually decreases after psilocybin therapy for depression. I'll put it another way: the brain looks more globally interconnected after psilocybin therapy for depression and the magnitude of that… correlates with improvements.” [39:19]   Links: Carhart-Harris Lab website Dr. Carhart-Harris on X Dr. Carhart-Harris' 2025 article: “Neuroplasticity and psychedelics: A comprehensive examination of classic and non-classic compounds in pre and clinical models” Dr. Carhart-Harris' 2012 article: “Neural correlates of the psychedelic state as determined by fMRI studies with psilocybin” Dr. Carhart-Harris' 2010 article with Karl Friston: “The default-mode, ego-functions and free-energy: a neurobiological account of Freudian ideas” Psychedelic Medicine Association Porangui

Donate to our charity partner Baitulmaal here: http://btml.us/thinkingmuslim - Please do remember that charity never reduces our rizq and gives Barakah to our wealth. Help us expand our Muslim media project here: https://www.thinkingmuslim.com/membershipFrancesca Bocca-Aldaqre holds a MSc in Neuro-Cognitive Psychology & a PhD in Systemic Neuroscience (both from Ludwig-Maximilians Universität Munich, Germany) and a Diploma in Islamic Psychology (Cambridge Muslim College). She works as a counsellor in Islamic Psychology worldwide. She authored several books in poetry as well as essays on the relationship between Western thought and IslamHere is her profile if you wish to find out more about her: https://linktr.ee/francescaboccaWestern psychology is limited by its focus on the material aspects of human existence. My guest today is Dr. Franchesca Bocca-Aldaqre, an Islamic psychologist and neuroscientist, who asserts that much of what preoccupies Western psychology—such as the emphasis on the egotistical self, the fixation on Freudian concepts of repressed childhood trauma, and the tendency toward over-medicalization—does not only undermine healing but can also be detrimental to individuals in the long run. Islamic psychology, according to her, is a field that has been overlooked, overshadowed by a modernity that fails to recognize human beings as holistic living souls. Dr. Franchesca offers a thoughtful critique of the maladies of capitalist life and also outlines a path towards a more balanced approach to living.You can find Dr Francesca Bocca-Aldaqre here:X: https://x.com/AzzamTamimiIG: https://www.instagram.com/francescaboccaYou can also support The Thinking Muslim through a one-time donation: https://www.thinkingmuslim.com/DonateListen to the audio version of the podcast:Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7vXiAjVFnhNI3T9Gkw636aApple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-thinking-muslim/id1471798762Purchase our Thinking Muslim mug: https://www.thinkingmuslim.com/merchFind us on:X: https://x.com/thinking_muslimLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-thinking-muslim/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/The-Thinking-Muslim-Podcast-105790781361490Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thinkingmuslimpodcast/Telegram: https://t.me/thinkingmuslimBlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/thinkingmuslim.bsky.socialThreads: https://www.threads.com/@thinkingmuslimpodcastFind Muhammad Jalal here:X: https://twitter.com/jalalaynInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/jalalayns/Sign up to Muhammad Jalal's newsletter: https://jalalayn.substack.comWebsite Archive: https://www.thinkingmuslim.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From genius discovery to UFO battles: The man who found trauma in the body Wilhelm Reich made one of psychology's greatest discoveries: The body remembers what the mind forgets. Trauma doesn't just live in thoughts and memories - it's held in muscle tension, breathing patterns, and physical armor that protects us from unbearable feelings. Then he went completely insane. This episode follows Reich's journey from Freud's most promising student to a paranoid exile shooting orgone energy at alien spacecraft. But here's the twist: His early insights about somatic trauma were revolutionary. They laid the foundation for every body-based therapy that actually works. https://gettherapybirmingham.com/the-weird-history-of-psychotherapy-part-3-wilhelm-reich/ https://gettherapybirmingham.com/what-are-wilhelm-reichs-character-styles/ https://gettherapybirmingham.com/wilhelm-reichs-analysis-of-fascism-enduring-wisdom-and-controversial-reception/ https://gettherapybirmingham.com/the-curious-case-of-wilhelm-reich/ https://gettherapybirmingham.com/john-c-lilly-when-dolphins-drugs-and-the-deep-end-of-consciousness-collided-in-the-psychedelic-70s/   You'll learn about: Character armor: how the body holds emotional pain The knife incident that got him expelled from psychoanalysis Orgone energy, cloudbusters, and weather control experiments Einstein's basement test that debunked Reich's cosmic theories The FBI raid that destroyed his life's work How his somatic discoveries live on in modern trauma therapy Discover the untold story of how trauma therapy evolved from Freudian analysis to revolutionary body-based healing approaches that preceded "The Body Keeps the Score" by decades. This evidence-based deep dive explores the pioneering work of Wilhelm Reich, Carl Jung, and Fritz Perls who discovered that trauma lives in the body long before modern neuroscience proved them right. Learn why your physical symptoms might be stored emotional memories and how the therapeutic revolution of the 1960s changed psychology forever. What You'll Learn: Why Reich was expelled from psychoanalytic institutes for discovering "character armor" How Jung's archetypal psychology laid groundwork for modern therapy approaches The real story behind Fritz Perls and the birth of Gestalt therapy Why America abandoned somatic approaches for cognitive behavioral therapy How trauma gets trapped in muscles, creating chronic tension and pain The scientific evidence behind body-based trauma treatment Perfect for: Mental health professionals, trauma survivors, psychology students, anyone interested in the history of psychotherapy, and those seeking alternatives to traditional talk therapy. Evidence-Based Content: Drawing from peer-reviewed research, historical documents, and the foundational texts of somatic psychology, this episode traces the scientific evolution from Freudian psychoanalysis through modern neuroscience-backed trauma therapy. Keywords: trauma therapy, somatic therapy, body keeps the score, Wilhelm Reich, Carl Jung, Fritz Perls, PTSD treatment, psychology history, mind-body connection, character armor, nervous system healing, experiential therapy, depth psychology Hosted by experts in trauma-informed care with clinical experience in EMDR, brainspotting, somatic experiencing, and Jungian analysis. Resources: Visit gettherapybirmingham.com for articles on somatic trauma mapping, Jungian therapy, and evidence-based body-centered healing approaches. Discover the untold story of how trauma therapy evolved from Freudian analysis to revolutionary body-based healing approaches that preceded "The Body Keeps the Score" by decades. This evidence-based deep dive explores the pioneering work of Wilhelm Reich, Carl Jung, and Fritz Perls who discovered that trauma lives in the body long before modern neuroscience proved them right. Learn why your physical symptoms might be stored emotional memories and how the therapeutic revolution of the 1960s changed psychology forever. What You'll Learn: Why Reich was expelled from psychoanalytic institutes for discovering "character armor" How Jung's archetypal psychology laid groundwork for modern therapy approaches The real story behind Fritz Perls and the birth of Gestalt therapy Why America abandoned somatic approaches for cognitive behavioral therapy How trauma gets trapped in muscles, creating chronic tension and pain The scientific evidence behind body-based trauma treatment Perfect for: Mental health professionals, trauma survivors, psychology students, anyone interested in the history of psychotherapy, and those seeking alternatives to traditional talk therapy. Evidence-Based Content: Drawing from peer-reviewed research, historical documents, and the foundational texts of somatic psychology, this episode traces the scientific evolution from Freudian psychoanalysis through modern neuroscience-backed trauma therapy. Keywords: trauma therapy, somatic therapy, body keeps the score, Wilhelm Reich, Carl Jung, Fritz Perls, PTSD treatment, psychology history, mind-body connection, character armor, nervous system healing, experiential therapy, depth psychology Hosted by experts in trauma-informed care with clinical experience in EMDR, brainspotting, somatic experiencing, and Jungian analysis. Resources: Visit gettherapybirmingham.com for articles on somatic trauma mapping, Jungian therapy, and evidence-based body-centered healing approaches.  

Welcome to Rendering Unconscious – the Gradiva award-winning podcast about psychoanalysis & culture, with me, Dr Vanessa Sinclair. https://renderingunconscious.substack.com Rendering Unconscious episode 349. RU350: MARY WILD & VANESSA SINCLAIR TALK SHRINKS ON SCREEN (TV): https://renderingunconscious.substack.com/p/ru349-mary-wild-and-vanessa-sinclair I sat down with Freudian cinephile Mary Wild to dish about shrinks on screen. This episode was originally recorded for Mary's Patreon channel. Mary has just launched her own Substack. Be sure to give her a follow and support independent thinkers: https://psycstar.substack.com/about Follow her at: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/marywild/posts Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/psycstar/ In this conversation, Mary and I discuss the portrayal of mental health professionals in television shows. The conversation begins with "The Sopranos," focusing on Tony Soprano's therapy sessions with psychiatrist Jennifer Melfi, highlighting the dynamic between a mobster and his therapist. The discussion then moves to "Mr. Robot," examining Elliot Alderson's sessions with his therapist, Krista, and his internal monologue. "In Treatment" is analyzed, exploring the crisis of faith experienced by therapist Paul Weston. The episode concludes with a look at "Hannibal," where Dr. Hannibal Lecter's sessions with his therapist, played by Gillian Anderson, are examined. Mary Wild is the Freudian Cinephile – a pop psychoanalyst exploring film, philosophy, and the strange contours of modern life. She's been hosting the Projections series of events at the Freud Museum London for more than a decade. Join her for whimsical cinematic interpretation and witty cultural critique. No one tops Mary for psychoanalytic interpretations of cinema! Stay tuned for her forthcoming book Psychoanalysing Horror Cinema (Routledge, 2025). https://www.routledge.com/Psychoanalysing-Horror-Cinema/Wild/p/book/9781032545097?srsltid=AfmBOorqpeove7e8PlV8GNwGRfi1mes8MEdFFvN_YsbtdSrZY8qpP7-b News and events: Coming up on Thursday, June 5th Mary is hosting her next online event PROJECTIONS: Lynchian Women. Not to be missed. You know I'll be there! https://www.freud.org.uk/event/projections-lynchian-women/ Projections: Death Scenes in Cinema with Mary Wild, Begins September 21: https://www.morbidanatomy.org/classes/p/projections-death-scenes-in-cinema-with-mary-wild-september Check out our previous discussion: RU349: MARY WILD & VANESSA SINCLAIR TALK PSYCHOANALYSTS & THERAPISTS ON FILM: https://soundcloud.com/highbrowlowlife/ru349-mary-wild-vanessa?si=69420d5f2b0343c5a18cec5f443ee6f0&utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing Thank you for listening to the Rendering Unconscious Podcast and for reading the Rendering Unconscious anthologies. And thank you so much for supporting this work by being a paid subscriber at the Substack. It makes my work possible. If you are so far a free subscriber, thanks to you too. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to gain access to all the material on the site, including all future and archival podcast episodes. https://renderingunconscious.substack.com If you would like information about entering into psychoanalytic treatment with me, joining the group I run for those who have relocated to another country, or have other questions, please feel free to contact me via vs [at] drvanessasinclair.net https://www.drvanessasinclair.net/contact/ Thank you.

-- On the Show: — Republican Senator Rand Paul announces he'll vote to block Trump's DOGE bill, calling it a tax hike dressed up as populism — Trump officials admit the promised wave of new trade deals has produced exactly zero agreements so far — Trump's FDA pick spreads vaccine misinformation on live TV, leaving host Margaret Brennan stunned — Donald Trump mocks Joe Biden's cancer diagnosis, floats bizarre conspiracies, and suggests pardoning P. Diddy — Trump tells so many lies during a single appearance that even a friendly crowd seems stunned — Elon Musk's interview goes off the rails as he dodges basic immigration questions and spirals into Trump flattery — Elon Musk was reportedly involved in a physical fight in the Trump White House over failed budget promises — JD Vance blames Biden for economic shrinkage… four months into Trump's second term — Trump brags that Melania asked if he's “as long” as golfer Bryson DeChambeau in another Freudian overshare -- On the Bonus Show: Attacker injures eight at Israeli hostage march, AOC more popular than Trump or Harris, CDC is stripped of power to help stop childhood lead poisoning, much more...

Welcome to Rendering Unconscious – the Gradiva award-winning podcast about psychoanalysis & culture, with me, Dr Vanessa Sinclair. https://renderingunconscious.substack.com Rendering Unconscious episode 349. RU349: MARY WILD & VANESSA SINCLAIR TALK PSYCHOANALYSTS & THERAPISTS ON FILM https://renderingunconscious.substack.com/p/ru349-mary-wild-and-vanessa-sinclair I sat down with Freudian cinephile Mary Wild to dish about shrinks on film. This episode was originally recorded for Mary's Patreon channel. Mary has just launched her own Substack. Be sure to give her a follow and support independent thinkers: https://psycstar.substack.com/about Follow her at: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/marywild/posts Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/psycstar/ In this conversation, Mary and I chat about the portrayal of mental health professionals in film and TV. We discuss the accuracy and impact of these portrayals, including the stigma around mental health and the challenges faced by therapists. We analyze scenes from films like "Spellbound," "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," and "Girl, Interrupted," highlighting issues such as the misrepresentation of therapists, the impact of funding cuts on mental health services, and the societal pressures on identity and diagnosis. The conversation also touches upon the importance of making psychoanalytic concepts accessible and the role of therapists in empowering their patients. Mary Wild is the Freudian Cinephile – a pop psychoanalyst exploring film, philosophy, and the strange contours of modern life. She's been hosting the Projections series of events at the Freud Museum London for more than a decade. Join her for whimsical cinematic interpretation and witty cultural critique. No one tops Mary for psychoanalytic interpretations of cinema! Stay tuned for her forthcoming book Psychoanalysing Horror Cinema (Routledge, 2025). https://www.routledge.com/Psychoanalysing-Horror-Cinema/Wild/p/book/9781032545097?srsltid=AfmBOorqpeove7e8PlV8GNwGRfi1mes8MEdFFvN_YsbtdSrZY8qpP7-b News and events: Coming up on Thursday, June 5th Mary is hosting her next online event PROJECTIONS: Lynchian Women. Not to be missed. You know I'll be there! https://www.freud.org.uk/event/projections-lynchian-women/ Projections: Death Scenes in Cinema with Mary Wild, Begins September 21: https://www.morbidanatomy.org/classes/p/projections-death-scenes-in-cinema-with-mary-wild-september Check out our previous discussions: RU315: MARY WILD ON FEMININE JOUISSANCE & DEATH SCENES IN CINEMA RU257: MARY WILD & EMMALEA RUSSO ON JIM MORRISON, CINEMA, POETRY, PSYCHOANALYSIS, PHILOSOPHY & CULTURE RU233: MARY WILD ON DAVID BOWIE & PSYCHOANALYSING HORROR CINEMA RU208: THE MAGIC OF CINEMA & THE UNCONSCIOUS WITH MARY WILD RU158: MARY WILD ON PSYCHOANALYSIS & CINEMA, TAXIDERMY IN ALFRED HITCHCOCK'S “PSYCHO” RU68: MARY WILD, PROJECTIONS CINEPHILE ON THE FREUD NETFLIX SERIES RU49: MARY WILD, FREUDIAN CINEPHILE ON PROJECTIONS Thank you for listening to the Rendering Unconscious Podcast and for reading the Rendering Unconscious anthologies. And thank you so much for supporting this work by being a paid subscriber at the Substack. It makes my work possible. If you are so far a free subscriber, thanks to you too. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to gain access to all the material on the site, including all future and archival podcast episodes. https://renderingunconscious.substack.com If you would like information about entering into psychoanalytic treatment with me, joining the group I run for those who have relocated to another country, or have other questions, please feel free to contact me via vs [at] drvanessasinclair.net https://www.drvanessasinclair.net/contact/ Thank you.

Fredag! Det blir allt mellan Vodafone och Hitler. Har du ett skvaller som fler borde få höra? Maila det till kafferepetpod@gmail.comMissa inte vår månatliga systerpodd Cigarrummet. Bli prenumerant på www.underproduktion.se/cigarrummet14:25 - Nyfikna morsan19:08 - Toa-Pulle27:35 - Snygg med otur31:25 - Freudian torsk37:38 - Inskolning44:03 - Det blåser upp till grogg47:35 - Mitt bröllop52:27 - Spela apa1:03:10 - In medias res vid kaffemaskinen Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What if… one of your core values that should be empowering turned out to be something that held you back?It's meant to build confidence to try things. But it becomes a sort of low-key vicious cycle that subconsciously holds you back and curbs your ability to change.That silent boomerang would be ironic for a professional change agent, but that same boomerang has been both catalyst and inhibitor of Suzanne Hopson's story.Growing up, Suzanne was taught, to quote her exact words as she said them in the conversation you're about to hear, to “never think that there wasn't something I couldn't do”. I listened to the recording three times to make sure I heard her right. Did she mean it just like that? Was it a Freudian slip? Well, she goes on to say that would have been a limiting belief IF she had it, but that life taught her – sometimes rudely – that she couldn't do what she set out to do. It was a double-edged sword. So was the other core value, that you can't do anything by yourself. While we can achieve more as a collective than the sum of our individual efforts, it can also mean that you can't do anything on your own. I'll let you sit with that one and hear from Suzanne on that.So where did all of this leave Suzanne?After three decades working in the multifamily industry, she came to an inflection point where she began to ask whether she should remain in her executive role or strike out on her own as an entrepreneur. Having to go through the experience of laying off employees, due to no fault of their own or her own, was a catalyst. As you're about to discover when you tune in for my chat with Suzanne, she did quit her executive job and start Here2Elevate™, which works with companies and their leadership to see the world as they want it to be and learn how to make it that way. Two factors played a big role. One is the power of mentorship, both positive and negative. The other is coming to terms with the visceral power of change management – the “grit” of it.Whatever you've come to believe about change management and change in general, you may find yourself seeing a new point of view.Suzanne's hype song is “Fight Song” by Rachel Platten.Resources:Suzanne Hopson's website: https://here2elevate.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/suzannehopson/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/here2elevate Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/here2elevate/X: https://x.com/suzanne_hopson Take Suzanne Hopson's Business Performance Assessment Quiz to discover how your team measures up in key areas like profitability and strategic thinking. Start now: https://elevated-business-performance.scoreapp.com Invitation from Lori:This episode is sponsored by Zen Rabbit. Smart business leaders know trust is the foundation of every great workplace. And in today's hybrid and fast-moving work culture, trust isn't built in quarterly town halls or the occasional Slack message. It's built through consistent, clear, and HUMAN communication. Companies and leaders TALK about the importance of connection and community. And it's easy to believe your organization is doing a great job of maintaining...

She ‘Saw Him Go In'... But Was Panicking About Hitting Him-Explain That, Karen In this episode, we're pulling apart one of the most confounding contradictions in the Karen Read case — and it all comes down to what she knew, when she knew it, and what she said. Karen Read told investigators she saw John O'Keefe walk into the house that night. But then, hours later, she was sobbing, pulling at Jennifer McCabe, frantically saying: “Did I hit him? Could I have hit him?” Let that sink in. If she saw him go inside, why was she panicking that she ran him over? Why was she screaming to Google “how long to die in the cold” if she thought he was safe indoors? And how do you reconcile that kind of panic with someone who didn't know their boyfriend was lying dead in a snowbank? Tony Brueski sits down with retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer to analyze this bizarre contradiction. Is it a case of genuine confusion and guilt-fueled anxiety — or a Freudian slip from someone who knew exactly what had happened? We break down the timeline inconsistencies, look at Karen's own statements from that morning, and unpack what her emotional reactions tell us — and what they don't. Because when you claim to have seen someone walk into a house, you don't start crying hours later about hitting them with a car… unless there's more to the story. This episode gets to the heart of the defense's weakest point — and why the prosecution is leaning into Read's own words to prove what she knew all along. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #KarenReadTrial #TrueCrimePodcast #TimelineContradictions #HiddenKillers #FBIAnalysis #GuiltVsInnocence #CourtroomDrama #CrimeSceneLogic Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

She ‘Saw Him Go In'... But Was Panicking About Hitting Him-Explain That, Karen In this episode, we're pulling apart one of the most confounding contradictions in the Karen Read case — and it all comes down to what she knew, when she knew it, and what she said. Karen Read told investigators she saw John O'Keefe walk into the house that night. But then, hours later, she was sobbing, pulling at Jennifer McCabe, frantically saying: “Did I hit him? Could I have hit him?” Let that sink in. If she saw him go inside, why was she panicking that she ran him over? Why was she screaming to Google “how long to die in the cold” if she thought he was safe indoors? And how do you reconcile that kind of panic with someone who didn't know their boyfriend was lying dead in a snowbank? Tony Brueski sits down with retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer to analyze this bizarre contradiction. Is it a case of genuine confusion and guilt-fueled anxiety — or a Freudian slip from someone who knew exactly what had happened? We break down the timeline inconsistencies, look at Karen's own statements from that morning, and unpack what her emotional reactions tell us — and what they don't. Because when you claim to have seen someone walk into a house, you don't start crying hours later about hitting them with a car… unless there's more to the story. This episode gets to the heart of the defense's weakest point — and why the prosecution is leaning into Read's own words to prove what she knew all along. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #KarenReadTrial #TrueCrimePodcast #TimelineContradictions #HiddenKillers #FBIAnalysis #GuiltVsInnocence #CourtroomDrama #CrimeSceneLogic Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

Every Christian is a counselor—whether we realize it or not. The question is: what worldview do we draw from when we give advice? In this podcast, Scott Brown and Jason Dohm, joined by special guest Jason Winslade, discuss the folly of secular psychology—which assumes that man is basically good—and even some Christian counseling, which baptizes Freudian psychology with a few Bible verses. What's needed, instead, is people who think biblically and reject dangerous worldly philosophies (Col. 2:8-10), drawing from God's all-sufficient Word to restore sinners and support the suffering in their time of need (Gal. 6:1-2). Relying on the sure foundation of Scripture, every Christian can learn, with God's help, to wisely counsel others.

Sponsored by EasyDNS https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord In episode 166 of Not on Record, hosts Joseph and Michael delve into a law school-style hypothetical involving a trial with a crucial audio or video recording that's difficult to understand due to accents or unclear articulation. The core issue arises when the judge, after submissions, privately re-examines the recording and arrives at a different conclusion than what was presented, without informing counsel. During trial a trial judge made several errors, including a sweeping generalization about an arranged marriage and misinterpreting "slept" as "slapped," deeming it a Freudian slip. The hosts emphasize that an accused person has the right to know the case they must meet and the evidence being used against them. Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger & Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com

She ‘Saw Him Go In'... But Was Panicking About Hitting Him-Explain That, Karen In this episode, we're pulling apart one of the most confounding contradictions in the Karen Read case — and it all comes down to what she knew, when she knew it, and what she said. Karen Read told investigators she saw John O'Keefe walk into the house that night. But then, hours later, she was sobbing, pulling at Jennifer McCabe, frantically saying: “Did I hit him? Could I have hit him?” Let that sink in. If she saw him go inside, why was she panicking that she ran him over? Why was she screaming to Google “how long to die in the cold” if she thought he was safe indoors? And how do you reconcile that kind of panic with someone who didn't know their boyfriend was lying dead in a snowbank? Tony Brueski sits down with retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer to analyze this bizarre contradiction. Is it a case of genuine confusion and guilt-fueled anxiety — or a Freudian slip from someone who knew exactly what had happened? We break down the timeline inconsistencies, look at Karen's own statements from that morning, and unpack what her emotional reactions tell us — and what they don't. Because when you claim to have seen someone walk into a house, you don't start crying hours later about hitting them with a car… unless there's more to the story. This episode gets to the heart of the defense's weakest point — and why the prosecution is leaning into Read's own words to prove what she knew all along. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #KarenReadTrial #TrueCrimePodcast #TimelineContradictions #HiddenKillers #FBIAnalysis #GuiltVsInnocence #CourtroomDrama #CrimeSceneLogic Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

She ‘Saw Him Go In'... But Was Panicking About Hitting Him-Explain That, Karen In this episode, we're pulling apart one of the most confounding contradictions in the Karen Read case — and it all comes down to what she knew, when she knew it, and what she said. Karen Read told investigators she saw John O'Keefe walk into the house that night. But then, hours later, she was sobbing, pulling at Jennifer McCabe, frantically saying: “Did I hit him? Could I have hit him?” Let that sink in. If she saw him go inside, why was she panicking that she ran him over? Why was she screaming to Google “how long to die in the cold” if she thought he was safe indoors? And how do you reconcile that kind of panic with someone who didn't know their boyfriend was lying dead in a snowbank? Tony Brueski sits down with retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer to analyze this bizarre contradiction. Is it a case of genuine confusion and guilt-fueled anxiety — or a Freudian slip from someone who knew exactly what had happened? We break down the timeline inconsistencies, look at Karen's own statements from that morning, and unpack what her emotional reactions tell us — and what they don't. Because when you claim to have seen someone walk into a house, you don't start crying hours later about hitting them with a car… unless there's more to the story. This episode gets to the heart of the defense's weakest point — and why the prosecution is leaning into Read's own words to prove what she knew all along. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #KarenReadTrial #TrueCrimePodcast #TimelineContradictions #HiddenKillers #FBIAnalysis #GuiltVsInnocence #CourtroomDrama #CrimeSceneLogic Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872  

In Part 2, we wrap up our consideration of Jean-Paul Sartre's midcentury magnum opus by exploring how we move from the inaccessible interiority of consciousness to our concrete relations with others. The latter half of Being & Nothingness takes up the question of what aspects of our being are revealed to us in confrontation with the Other. Sartre famously argues here that it is the Other's look, the omnipresent possibility of being seen, judged, and evaluated by another consciousness that discloses the objectivity of our being through and for the Other. As soon as the Other enters the scene, a fundamental aspect of our being is alienated from us; captured in the Other's appropriating gaze. The various attempts by the for-itself to retrieve this alienated being and penetrate the Other's essential freedom play a determinate role in shaping the contours of our fundamental projects, that is the immanently revisable set of possibilities, meaning, and value we pro-ject into the world.  In the final sections of the book, Sartre sketches an alternative to Freudian psychoanalysis, asks us to reframe our conception of the autonomous will and the role of giving and asking for reasons, and gestures towards an ethics grounded in criterionless choice.Please consider becoming a paying subscriber to our Patreon to get exclusive bonus episodes, early access releases, and bookish merch: https://www.patreon.com/MoralMinorityFollow us on Twitter(X).Devin: @DevinGoureCharles: @satireredactedEmail us at: moralminoritypod@gmail.com

In episode 89 of the Podcast for Social Research, recorded live at BISR Central, BISR faculty Danielle Drori, Jude Webre, and Lauren K. Wolfe sat down following a screening of Stanley Kubrick's controversial final film, Eyes Wide Shut, to discuss its long thirty years in the making, its source material in fin-de-siècle Vienna, and its vision of bourgeois marriage and sexual morality in turn-of-the-millennium New York. Kicking off with behind-the-scenes Hollywood details, Jude adumbrates an argument for the film as an auteur's personal reverie, tracing resonances between it and the enigmatic story of Kubrick's own (second) married life in postwar New York City; Lauren then lets us in on the lurid sexual obsessions of Arthur Schnitzler, on whose 1926 novella Dream Story the film is based, with the interpretive aid of W.G. Sebald; while Danielle guides us through a collective Freudian analysis of the dreams that run through and construct the film's emotional core. With insightful and witty participation from the audience, the talk touches on masculinity within marriage; nudity and nakedness; coitus interruptus; Freud's stages of sexual development; dream as unconscious communication; sex and death; fucking down and marrying up; Nicole Kidman as gay icon; and whether anything of substance appears to have changed in bourgeois sexual morality between circa 1900 and 1999. The Podcast for Social Research is produced by Ryan Lentini. Learn more about upcoming courses on our website. Follow Brooklyn Institute for Social Research on Twitter / Facebook / Instagram / Bluesky  

Michelle Obama has a Freudian slip in a rant about child mutilation, Neil Young claims that Tesla is for fascists, and Tim Walz admits Kamala's big mistake. Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri Ep.1726 - - - DailyWire+: Join us at dailywire.com/subscribe and become part of the rebellion against the ridiculous. Normal is back. And this time, we're keeping it. The hit podcast, Morning Wire, is now on Video! Watch Now and subscribe to their YouTube channel: https://bit.ly/3RFOVo6 Live Free & Smell Fancy with The Candle Club: https://thecandleclub.com/michael - - - Today's Sponsors: Birch Gold - Text KNOWLES to 989898 for your free information kit. Jeremy's Razors - Try Jeremy's Razors for 20% off risk-free: https://www.jeremysrazors.com/KNOWLES Lean - Visit https://takelean.com and get 20% off with promo code MICHAEL20 - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6 Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek

Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/tL9-DNEWaLoDay 7 of the Karen Read Retrial happened on April 30, 2025. Jen McCabe is back on the stand with Direct Examination. Special Prosecutor, Hank Brennan, asked her to recount when Karen Read said, "I hit him, I hit him, I hit him." Jen said it was in front of a female EMT and she was shock that Karen would say something like that. Direct Examination end in the morning for Alan Jackson to come in hot for a fiery Cross Examination! Jackson confronted Jen McCabe about not telling the Grand Jury that Karen said that she hit John O'Keefe and in fact she only said "Could I have hit him?" and "Did I hit him?" Jen was very evasive with her answers and even questioned Jackson. Judge Cannone would ask Jackson to move along because he would ask Jen McCabe the same question over and over again. Sometimes it would seem like he was making mountains of mole hills. Other times he would make snarky comments and the Judge would tell him to stop and tell the Jury to dismiss his comments.Jackson pointed out how Jen was corroborating stories with everyone that had been at 34 Fairview Rd the night of the 28th and the morning of the 29th. It began as early as after the Police and First Responders left the scene. Jen even went as far as to ask Julie Nagle for a screenshot of a text message of when her brother, Ryan Nagle, arrived at 34 Fairview Rd to pick her up. Jen did not share that information with Law Enforcement.The biggest discrepancy was that she initially lied to the FBI! The FBI showed up to Jen McCabe's to question her about the case. Jen asked them to wait for 10 mins before speaking with them. The FBI reminded her that it is crime to lie to them and they asked her if she called anyone before they began their conversation. Jen told them that she called her husband, Matt McCabe and her friend, Kerry Roberts. Jen ended the interview early because she felt uncomfortable with the questions they had asked her. Jen later called back the FBI to let them know that she "forgot" that she had also called 3 additional people during those 10 mins: Peggy O'Keefe, The District Attorney Witness Advocate, and Brian Albert Sr. Judge Cannone had another Freudian slip by calling Jen McCabe- Ms. Read. Ouch!There are many highlights of Jen McCabe seemingly being evasive but the biggest thing that didn't add up was her saying that she told Former Trooper Michael Proctor that she told him that she hear Karen Read say, "I hit him." However, that was not in his report. It doesn't make sense that Mr. Proctor didn't include that his report because that would have been perceived as a confession and Karen would have been in hand cuffs much sooner.RESOURCESRetrial Day 6 Case Brief - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DV3yO_X6EpsSherri Papini Case - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVeiHSEo6VMWhat You Need to Know About the Retrial - https://youtu.be/89Jpa8vz1RQ Karen Read Retrial Playlist - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsbUyvZas7gKOJlfL__9F027hlETVU-vo Karen Read Trial - 2024 -

Michelle Obama referred to herself as “a Black man” on her podcast yesterday, and the internet is going wild! Was this a clip taken out of context, or did Michelle (Michael) actually commit a Freudian slip? What about the other evidence suggesting Michelle is a man? Next, we share an exclusive audio recording from Tina Peters herself. Tina was recently moved to the La Vista Correctional Facility, where she has been enduring harsh and unfair treatment with no aid from any faculty. She has a message for you, so be sure to tune in. All this and more on today's Untamed.  

In today's discussion with David Masciotra about the first hundred days of Trump 2.0 I made the (Freudian) error of referring to it as a “hundred years”. It certainly feels like a hundred years. So how should the Democrats respond to Trump's avalanche of illiberalism? Masciotra argues they should emulate Ted Kennedy's forceful 1987 rhetoric against Robert Bork, focusing on the existential threats to civil rights and democracy rather than worrying about bread and butter economic issues. Masciotra criticizes the Dems for neglecting their working class base while pursuing moderate suburban voters and running Kamala-style cheerful campaigns. He believes Democrats lack the unified messaging infrastructure that the Republicans have built and suggests they need to balance aggressive opposition with muscular Kennedyesque idealism to effectively counter Trump's assault upon American democracy. Five Key Takeaways* Masciotra believes Democrats should adopt Ted Kennedy's direct, aggressive rhetorical approach from his Robert Bork speech to counter Trump's policies.* He argues Democrats often run positive campaigns while Republicans run fear-based campaigns, which are typically more effective.* The Democratic Party lacks the unified messaging infrastructure the Republican Party has built over decades.* Masciotra suggests Democrats are too focused on chasing moderate voters while neglecting their base, unlike Republicans who effectively rally their core supporters.* He contends that after condemning Trump's actions, Democrats need to offer Kennedy-like idealism that gives people "ripples of hope" and something more positive to work toward.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

A year ago, the great American historian Adam Hochschild came on KEEN ON AMERICA to discuss American Midnight, his best selling account of the crisis of American democracy after World War One. A year later, is history really repeating itself in today's crisis of American democracy? For Hochschild, there are certainly parallels between the current political situation in the US and post WW1 America. Describing how wartime hysteria and fear of communism led to unprecedented government repression, including mass imprisonment for political speech, vigilante violence, and press censorship. Hochschild notes eery similarities to today's Trump's administration. He expresses concern about today's threats to democratic institutions while suggesting the importance of understanding Trump supporters' grievances and finding ways to bridge political divides. Five Key Takeaways* The period of 1917-1921 in America saw extreme government repression, including imprisoning people for speech, vigilante violence, and widespread censorship—what Hochschild calls America's "Trumpiest" era before Trump.* American history shows recurring patterns of nativism, anti-immigrant sentiment, and scapegoating that politicians exploit during times of economic or social stress.* The current political climate shows concerning parallels to this earlier period, including intimidation of opposition, attacks on institutions, and the widespread acceptance of authoritarian tendencies.* Hochschild emphasizes the importance of understanding the grievances and suffering that lead people to support authoritarian figures rather than dismissing their concerns.* Despite current divisions, Hochschild believes reconciliation is possible and necessary, pointing to historical examples like President Harding pardoning Eugene Debs after Wilson imprisoned him. Full Transcript Andrew Keen: Hello, everybody. We recently celebrated our 2500th edition of Keen On. Some people suggest I'm mad. I think I probably am to do so many shows. Just over a little more than a year ago, we celebrated our 2000th show featuring one of America's most distinguished historians, Adam Hochschild. I'm thrilled that Adam is joining us again a year later. He's the author of "American Midnight, The Great War, A Violent Peace, and Democracy's Forgotten Crisis." This was his last book. He's the author of many other books. He is now working on a book on the Great Depression. He's joining us from his home in Berkeley, California. Adam, to borrow a famous phrase or remix a famous phrase, a year is a long time in American history.Adam Hochschild: That's true, Andrew. I think this past year, or actually this past 100 days or so has been a very long and very difficult time in American history that we all saw coming to some degree, but I don't think we realized it would be as extreme and as rapid as it has been.Andrew Keen: Your book, Adam, "American Midnight, A Great War of Violent Peace and Democracy's Forgotten Crisis," is perhaps the most prescient warning. When you researched that you were saying before we went live that your books usually take you between four and five years, so you couldn't really have planned for this, although I guess you began writing and researching American Midnight during the Trump 1.0 regime. Did you write it as a warning to something like is happening today in America?Adam Hochschild: Well, I did start writing it and did most of the work on it during Trump's first term in office. So I was very struck by the parallels. And they're in plain sight for everybody to see. There are various dark currents that run through this country of ours. Nativism, threats to deport troublemakers. Politicians stirring up violent feelings against immigrants, vigilante violence, all those things have been with us for a long time. I've always been fascinated by that period, 1917 to 21, when they surged to the surface in a very nasty way. That was the subject of the book. Naturally, I hoped we wouldn't have to go through anything like that again, but here we are definitely going through it again.Andrew Keen: You wrote a lovely piece earlier this month for the Washington Post. "America was at its Trumpiest a hundred years ago. Here's how to prevent the worst." What did you mean by Trumpiest, Adam? I'm not sure if you came up with that title, but I know you like the term. You begin the essay. What was the Trumpiest period in American life before Donald Trump?Adam Hochschild: Well, I didn't invent the word, but I certainly did use it in the piece. What I meant by that is that when you look at this period just over 100 years ago, 1917 to 1921, Woodrow Wilson's second term in office, two things happened in 1917 that kicked off a kind of hysteria in this country. One was that Wilson asked the American Congress to declare war on Germany, which it promptly did, and when a country enters a major war, especially a world war, it sets off a kind of hysteria. And then that was redoubled some months later when the country received news of the Russian Revolution, and many people in the establishment in America were afraid the Russian Revolution might come to the United States.So, a number of things happened. One was that there was a total hysteria against all things German. There were bonfires of German books all around the country. People would take German books out of libraries, schools, college and university libraries and burn them in the street. 19 such bonfires in Ohio alone. You can see pictures of it on the internet. There was hysteria about the German language. I heard about this from my father as I was growing up because his father was a Jewish immigrant from Germany. They lived in New York City. They spoke German around the family dinner table, but they were terrified of doing so on the street because you could get beaten up for that. Several states passed laws against speaking German in public or speaking German on the telephone. Eminent professors declared that German was a barbaric language. So there was that kind of hysteria.Then as soon as the United States declared war, Wilson pushed the Espionage Act through Congress, this draconian law, which essentially gave the government the right to lock up anybody who said something that was taken to be against the war. And they used this law in a devastating way. During those four years, roughly a thousand Americans spent a year or more in jail and a much larger number, shorter periods in jail solely for things that they wrote or said. These were people who were political prisoners sent to jail simply for something they wrote or said, the most famous of them was Eugene Debs, many times the socialist candidate for president. He'd gotten 6% of the popular vote in 1912 and in 1918. For giving an anti-war speech from a park bandstand in Ohio, he was sent to prison for 10 years. And he was still in prison two years after the war ended in November, 1920, when he pulled more than 900,000 votes for president from his jail cell in the federal penitentiary in Atlanta.So that was one phase of the repression, political prisoners. Another was vigilante violence. The government itself, the Department of Justice, chartered a vigilante group, something called the American Protective League, which went around roughing up people that it thought were evading the draft, beating up people at anti-war rallies, arresting people with citizens arrest whom they didn't have their proper draft papers on them, holding them for hours or sometimes for days until they could produce the right paperwork.Andrew Keen: I remember, Adam, you have a very graphic description of some of this violence in American Midnight. There was a story, was it a union leader?Adam Hochschild: Well, there is so much violence that happened during that time. I begin the book with a graphic description of vigilantes raiding an office of the Wobblies, the Industrial Workers of the World, in Tulsa, Oklahoma, taking a bunch of wobblies out into the prairie at night, stripping them, whipping them, flogging them fiercely, and then tarring and feathering them, and firing shotguns over their heads so they would run off into the Prairie at Night. And they did. Those guys were lucky because they survive. Other people were killed by this vigilante violence.And the final thing about that period which I would mention is the press censorship. The Espionage Act gave the Postmaster General the power to declare any publication in the United States unmailable. And for a newspaper or a magazine that was trying to reach a national audience, the only way you could do so was through the US mail because there was no internet then. No radio, no TV, no other way of getting your publication to somebody. And this put some 75 newspapers and magazines that the government didn't like out of business. It in addition censored three or four hundred specific issues of other publications as well.So that's why I feel this is all a very dark period of American life. Ironically, that press censorship operation, because it was run by the postmaster general, who by the way loved being chief censor, it was ran out of the building that was then the post office headquarters in Washington, which a hundred years later became the Trump International Hotel. And for $4,000 a night, you could stay in the Postmaster General's suite.Andrew Keen: You, Adam, the First World War is a subject you're very familiar with. In addition to American Midnight, you wrote "To End All Wars, a story of loyalty and rebellion, 1914 to 18," which was another very successful of your historical recreations. Many countries around the world experience this turbulence, the violence. Of course, we had fascism in the 20s in Europe. And later in the 30s as well. America has a long history of violence. You talk about the violence after the First World War or after the declaration. But I was just in Montgomery, Alabama, went to the lynching museum there, which is considerably troubling. I'm sure you've been there. You're not necessarily a comparative political scientist, Adam. How does America, in its paranoia during the war and its clampdown on press freedom, on its violence, on its attempt to create an authoritarian political system, how does it compare to other democracies? Is some of this stuff uniquely American or is it a similar development around the world?Adam Hochschild: You see similar pressures almost any time that a major country is involved in a major war. Wars are never good for civil liberties. The First World War, to stick with that period of comparison, was a time that saw strong anti-war movements in all of the warring countries, in Germany and Britain and Russia. There were people who understood at the time that this war was going to remake the world for the worse in every way, which indeed it did, and who refused to fight. There were 800 conscientious objectors jailed in Russia, and Russia did not have much freedom of expression to begin with. In Germany, many distinguished people on the left, like Rosa Luxemburg, were sent to jail for most of the war.Britain was an interesting case because I think they had a much longer established tradition of free speech than did the countries on the continent. It goes way back and it's a distinguished and wonderful tradition. They were also worried for the first two and a half, three years of the war before the United States entered, that if they crack down too hard on their anti-war movement, it would upset people in the United States, which they were desperate to draw into the war on their side. Nonetheless, there were 6,000 conscientious objectors who were sent to jail in England. There was intermittent censorship of anti-war publications, although some were able to publish some of the time. There were many distinguished Britons, such as Bertrand Russell, the philosopher who later won a Nobel Prize, sent to jails for six months for his opposition to the war. So some of this happened all over.But I think in the United States, especially with these vigilante groups, it took a more violent form because remember the country at that time was only a few decades away from these frontier wars with the Indians. And the westward expansion of the United States during the 19th century, the western expansion of white settlement was an enormously bloody business that was almost genocidal for the Native Americans. Many people had participated in that. Many people saw that violence as integral to what the country was. So there was a pretty well-established tradition of settling differences violently.Andrew Keen: I'm sure you're familiar with Stephen Hahn's book, "A Liberal America." He teaches at NYU, a book which in some ways is very similar to yours, but covers all of American history. Hahn was recently on the Ezra Klein show, talking like you, like we're talking today, Adam, about the very American roots of Trumpism. Hahn, it's an interesting book, traces much of this back to Jackson and the wars of the frontier against Indians. Do you share his thesis on that front? Are there strong similarities between Jackson, Wilson, and perhaps even Trump?Adam Hochschild: Well, I regret to say I'm not familiar with Hahn's book, but I certainly do feel that that legacy of constant war for most of the 19th century against the Native Americans ran very deep in this country. And we must never forget how appealing it is to young men to take part in war. Unfortunately, all through history, there have been people very tempted by this. And I think when you have wars of conquest, such as happen in the American West, against people who are more poorly armed, or colonial wars such as Europe fought in Africa and Asia against much more poorly-armed opponents, these are especially appealing to young people. And in both the United States and in the European colonization of Africa, which I know something about. For young men joining in these colonizing or conquering adventures, there was a chance not just to get martial glory, but to also get rich in the process.Andrew Keen: You're all too familiar with colonial history, Adam. Another of your books was about King Leopold's Congo and the brutality there. Where was the most coherent opposition morally and politically to what was happening? My sense in Trump's America is perhaps the most persuasive and moral critique comes from the old Republican Center from people like David Brooks, Peter Wayno has been on the show many times, Jonathan Rausch. Where were people like Teddy Roosevelt in this narrative? Were there critics from the right as well as from the left?Adam Hochschild: Good question. I first of all would give a shout out to those Republican centrists who've spoken out against Trump, the McCain Republicans. There are some good people there - Romney, of course as well. They've been very forceful. There wasn't really an equivalent to that, a direct equivalent to that in the Wilson era. Teddy Roosevelt whom you mentioned was a far more ferocious drum beater than Wilson himself and was pushing Wilson to declare war long before Wilson did. Roosevelt really believed that war was good for the soul. He desperately tried to get Wilson to appoint him to lead a volunteer force, came up with an elaborate plan for this would be a volunteer army staffed by descendants of both Union and Confederate generals and by French officers as well and homage to the Marquis de Lafayette. Wilson refused to allow Roosevelt to do this, and plus Roosevelt was, I think, 58 years old at the time. But all four of Roosevelt's sons enlisted and joined in the war, and one of them was killed. And his father was absolutely devastated by this.So there was not really that equivalent to the McCain Republicans who are resisting Trump, so to speak. In fact, what resistance there was in the U.S. came mostly from the left, and it was mostly ruthlessly silenced, all these people who went to jail. It was silenced also because this is another important part of what happened, which is different from today. When the federal government passed the Espionage Act that gave it these draconian powers, state governments, many of them passed copycat laws. In fact, a federal justice department agent actually helped draft the law in New Hampshire. Montana locked up people serving more than 60 years cumulatively of hard labor for opposing the war. California had 70 people in prison. Even my hometown of Berkeley, California passed a copycat law. So, this martial spirit really spread throughout the country at that time.Andrew Keen: So you've mentioned that Debs was the great critic and was imprisoned and got a considerable number of votes in the election. You're writing a book now about the Great Depression and FDR's involvement in it. FDR, of course, was a distant cousin of Teddy Roosevelt. At this point, he was an aspiring Democratic politician. Where was the critique within the mainstream Democratic party? Were people like FDR, who had a position in the Wilson administration, wasn't he naval secretary?Adam Hochschild: He was assistant secretary of the Navy. And he went to Europe during the war. For an aspiring politician, it's always very important to say I've been at the front. And so he went to Europe and certainly made no sign of resistance. And then in 1920, he was the democratic candidate for vice president. That ticket lost of course.Andrew Keen: And just to remind ourselves, this was before he became disabled through polio, is that correct?Adam Hochschild: That's right. That happened in the early 20s and it completely changed his life and I think quite deepened him as a person. He was a very ambitious social climbing young politician before then but I think he became something deeper. Also the political parties at the time were divided each party between right and left wings or war mongering and pacifist wings. And when the Congress voted on the war, there were six senators who voted against going to war and 50 members of the House of Representatives. And those senators and representatives came from both parties. We think of the Republican Party as being more conservative, but it had some staunch liberals in it. The most outspoken voice against the war in the Senate was Robert LaFollette of Wisconsin, who was a Republican.Andrew Keen: I know you write about La Follette in American Midnight, but couldn't one, Adam, couldn't won before the war and against domestic repression. You wrote an interesting piece recently for the New York Review of Books about the Scopes trial. William Jennings Bryan, of course, was involved in that. He was the defeated Democratic candidate, what in about three or four presidential elections in the past. In the early 20th century. What was Bryan's position on this? He had been against the war, is that correct? But I'm guessing he would have been quite critical of some of the domestic repression.Adam Hochschild: You know, I should know the answer to that, Andrew, but I don't. He certainly was against going to war. He had started out in Wilson's first term as Wilson's secretary of state and then resigned in protest against the military buildup and what he saw as a drift to war, and I give him great credit for that. I don't recall his speaking out against the repression after it began, once the US entered the war, but I could be wrong on that. It was not something that I researched. There were just so few voices speaking out. I think I would remember if he had been one of them.Andrew Keen: Adam, again, I'm thinking out loud here, so please correct me if this is a dumb question. What would it be fair to say that one of the things that distinguished the United States from the European powers during the First World War in this period it remained an incredibly insular provincial place barely involved in international politics with a population many of them were migrants themselves would come from Europe but nonetheless cut off from the world. And much of that accounted for the anti-immigrant, anti-foreign hysteria. That exists in many countries, but perhaps it was a little bit more pronounced in the America of the early 20th century, and perhaps in some ways in the early 21st century.Adam Hochschild: Well, we remain a pretty insular place in many ways. A few years ago, I remember seeing the statistic in the New York Times, I have not checked to see whether it's still the case, but I suspect it is that half the members of the United States Congress do not have passports. And we are more cut off from the world than people living in most of the countries of Europe, for example. And I think that does account for some of the tremendous feeling against immigrants and refugees. Although, of course, this is something that is common, not just in Europe, but in many countries all over the world. And I fear it's going to get all the stronger as climate change generates more and more refugees from the center of the earth going to places farther north or farther south where they can get away from parts of the world that have become almost unlivable because of climate change.Andrew Keen: I wonder Democratic Congress people perhaps aren't leaving the country because they fear they won't be let back in. What were the concrete consequences of all this? You write in your book about a young lawyer, J. Edgar Hoover, of course, who made his name in this period. He was very much involved in the Palmer Raids. He worked, I think his first job was for Palmer. How do you see this structurally? Of course, many historians, biographers of Hoover have seen this as the beginning of some sort of American security state. Is that over-reading it, exaggerating what happened in this period?Adam Hochschild: Well, security state may be too dignified a word for the hysteria that reigned in the country at that time. One of the things we've long had in the United States is a hysteria, paranoia directed at immigrants who are coming from what seems to be a new and threatening part of the world. In the mid-19th century, for example, we had the Know-Nothing Party, as it was called, who were violently opposed to Catholic immigrants coming from Ireland. Now, they were people of Anglo-Saxon descent, pretty much, who felt that these Irish Catholics were a tremendous threat to the America that they knew. There was much violence. There were people killed in riots against Catholic immigrants. There were Catholic merchants who had their stores burned and so on.Then it began to shift. The Irish sort of became acceptable, but by the end of the 19th century, beginning of the 20th century the immigrants coming from Europe were now coming primarily from southern and eastern Europe. In other words, Italians, Sicilians, Poles, and Jews. And they became the target of the anti-immigrant crusaders with much hysteria directed against them. It was further inflamed at that time by the Eugenics movement, which was something very strong, where people believed that there was a Nordic race that was somehow superior to everybody else, that the Mediterraneans were inferior people, and that the Africans were so far down the scale, barely worth talking about. And this culminated in 1924 with the passage of the Johnson-Reed Immigration Act that year, which basically slammed the door completely on immigrants coming from Asia and slowed to an absolute trickle those coming from Europe for the next 40 years or so.Andrew Keen: It wasn't until the mid-60s that immigration changed, which is often overlooked. Some people, even on the left, suggest that it was a mistake to radically reform the Immigration Act because we would have inevitably found ourselves back in this situation. What do you think about that, Adam?Adam Hochschild: Well, I think a country has the right to regulate to some degree its immigration, but there always will be immigration in this world. I mean, my ancestors all came from other countries. The Jewish side of my family, I'm half Jewish, were lucky to get out of Europe in plenty of time. Some relatives who stayed there were not lucky and perished in the Holocaust. So who am I to say that somebody fleeing a repressive regime in El Salvador or somewhere else doesn't have the right to come here? I think we should be pretty tolerant, especially if people fleeing countries where they really risk death for one reason or another. But there is always gonna be this strong anti-immigrant feeling because unscrupulous politicians like Donald Trump, and he has many predecessors in this country, can point to immigrants and blame them for the economic misfortunes that many Americans are experiencing for reasons that don't have anything to do with immigration.Andrew Keen: Fast forward Adam to today. You were involved in an interesting conversation on the Nation about the role of universities in the resistance. What do you make of this first hundred days, I was going to say hundred years that would be a Freudian error, a hundred days of the Trump regime, the role, of big law, big universities, newspapers, media outlets? In this emerging opposition, are you chilled or encouraged?Adam Hochschild: Well, I hope it's a hundred days and not a hundred years. I am moderately encouraged. I was certainly deeply disappointed at the outset to see all of those tech titans go to Washington, kiss the ring, contribute to Trump's inauguration festivities, be there in the front row. Very depressing spectacle, which kind of reminds one of how all the big German industrialists fell into line so quickly behind Hitler. And I'm particularly depressed to see the changes in the media, both the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post becoming much more tame when it came to endorsing.Andrew Keen: One of the reasons for that, Adam, of course, is that you're a long-time professor at the journalism school at UC Berkeley, so you've been on the front lines.Adam Hochschild: So I really care about a lively press that has free expression. And we also have a huge part of the media like Fox News and One American Network and other outlets that are just pouring forth a constant fire hose of lies and falsehood.Andrew Keen: And you're being kind of calling it a fire hose. I think we could come up with other terms for it. Anyway, a sewage pipe, but that's another issue.Adam Hochschild: But I'm encouraged when I see media organizations that take a stand. There are places like the New York Times, like CNN, like MSNBC, like the major TV networks, which you can read or watch and really find an honest picture of what's going on. And I think that's a tremendously important thing for a country to have. And that you look at the countries that Donald Trump admires, like Putin's Russia, for example, they don't have this. So I value that. I want to keep it. I think that's tremendously important.I was sorry, of course, that so many of those big law firms immediately cave to these ridiculous and unprecedented demands that he made, contributing pro bono work to his causes in return for not getting banned from government buildings. Nothing like that has happened in American history before, and the people in those firms that made those decisions should really be ashamed of themselves. I was glad to see Harvard University, which happens to be my alma mater, be defiant after caving in a little bit on a couple of issues. They finally put their foot down and said no. And I must say, feeling Harvard patriotism is a very rare emotion for me. But this is the first time in 50 years that I've felt some of it.Andrew Keen: You may even give a donation, Adam.Adam Hochschild: And I hope other universities are going to follow its lead, and it looks like they will. But this is pretty unprecedented, a president coming after universities with this determined of ferocity. And he's going after nonprofit organizations as well. There will be many fights there as well, I'm sure we're just waiting to hear about the next wave of attacks which will be on places like the Ford Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation and other big nonprofits. So hold on and wait for that and I hope they are as defiant as possible too.Andrew Keen: It's a little bit jarring to hear a wise historian like yourself use the word unprecedented. Is there much else of this given that we're talking historically and the similarities with the period after the first world war, is there anything else unprecedented about Trumpism?Adam Hochschild: I think in a way, we have often had, or not often, but certainly sometimes had presidents in this country who wanted to assume almost dictatorial powers. Richard Nixon certainly is the most recent case before Trump. And he was eventually stopped and forced to leave office. Had that not happened, I think he would have very happily turned himself into a dictator. So we know that there are temptations that come with the desire for absolute power everywhere. But Trump has gotten farther along on this process and has shown less willingness to do things like abide by court orders. The way that he puts pressure on Republican members of Congress.To me, one of the most startling, disappointing, remarkable, and shocking things about these first hundred days is how very few Republican members to the House or Senate have dared to defy Trump on anything. At most, these ridiculous set of appointees that he muscled through the Senate. At most, they got three Republican votes against them. They couldn't muster the fourth necessary vote. And in the House, only one or two Republicans have voted against Trump on anything. And of course, he has threatened to have Elon Musk fund primaries against any member of Congress who does defy him. And I can't help but think that these folks must also be afraid of physical violence because Trump has let all the January 6th people out of jail and the way vigilantes like that operate is they first go after the traitors on their own side then they come for the rest of us just as in the first real burst of violence in Hitler's Germany was the night of the long knives against another faction of the Nazi Party. Then they started coming for the Jews.Andrew Keen: Finally, Adam, your wife, Arlie, is another very distinguished writer.Adam Hochschild: I've got a better picture of her than that one though.Andrew Keen: Well, I got some very nice photos. This one is perhaps a little, well she's thinking Adam. Everyone knows Arlie from her hugely successful work, "Strangers in their Own Land." She has a new book out, "Stolen Pride, Lost Shame and the Rise of the Right." I don't want to put words into Arlie's mouth and she certainly wouldn't let me do that, Adam, but would it be fair to say that her reading, certainly of recent American history, is trying to bring people back together. She talks about the lessons she learned from her therapist brother. And in some ways, I see her as a kind of marriage counselor in America. Given what's happening today in America with Trump, is this still an opportunity? This thing is going to end and it will end in some ways rather badly and perhaps bloodily one way or the other. But is this still a way to bring people, to bring Americans back together? Can America be reunited? What can we learn from American Midnight? I mean, one of the more encouraging stories I remember, and please correct me if I'm wrong. Wasn't it Coolidge or Harding who invited Debs when he left prison to the White House? So American history might be in some ways violent, but it's also made up of chapters of forgiveness.Adam Hochschild: That's true. I mean, that Debs-Harding example is a wonderful one. Here is Debs sent to prison by Woodrow Wilson for a 10-year term. And Debs, by the way, had been in jail before for his leadership of a railway strike when he was a railway workers union organizer. Labor organizing was a very dangerous profession in those days. But Debs was a fairly gentle man, deeply committed to nonviolence. About a year into, a little less than a year into his term, Warren Harding, Woodrow Wilson's successor, pardoned Debs, let him out of prison, invited him to visit the White House on his way home. And they had a half hour's chat. And when he left the building, Debs told reporters, "I've run for the White house five times, but this is the first time I've actually gotten here." Harding privately told a friend. This was revealed only after his death, that he said, "Debs was right about that war. We never should have gotten involved in it."So yeah, there can be reconciliation. There can be talk across these great differences that we have, and I think there are a number of organizations that are working on that specific project, getting people—Andrew Keen: We've done many of those shows. I'm sure you're familiar with the organization Braver Angels, which seems to be a very good group.Adam Hochschild: So I think it can be done. I really think it could be done and it has to be done and it's important for those of us who are deeply worried about Trump, as you and I are, to understand the grievances and the losses and the suffering that has made Trump's backers feel that here is somebody who can get them out of the pickle that they're in. We have to understand that, and the Democratic Party has to come up with promising alternatives for them, which it really has not done. It didn't really offer one in this last election. And the party itself is in complete disarray right now, I fear.Andrew Keen: I think perhaps Arlie should run for president. She would certainly do a better job than Kamala Harris in explaining it. And of course they're both from Berkeley. Finally, Adam, you're very familiar with the history of Africa, Southern Africa, your family I think was originally from there. Might we need after all this, when hopefully the smoke clears, might we need a Mandela style truth and reconciliation committee to make sense of what's happening?Adam Hochschild: My family's actually not from there, but they were in business there.Andrew Keen: Right, they were in the mining business, weren't they?Adam Hochschild: That's right. Truth and Reconciliation Committee. Well, I don't think it would be on quite the same model as South Africa's. But I certainly think we need to find some way of talking across the differences that we have. Coming from the left side of that divide I just feel all too often when I'm talking to people who feel as I do about the world that there is a kind of contempt or disinterest in Trump's backers. These are people that I want to understand, that we need to understand. We need to understand them in order to hear what their real grievances are and to develop alternative policies that are going to give them a real alternative to vote for. Unless we can do that, we're going to have Trump and his like for a long time, I fear.Andrew Keen: Wise words, Adam. I hope in the next 500 episodes of this show, things will improve. We'll get you back on the show, keep doing your important work, and I'm very excited to learn more about your new project, which we'll come to in the next few months or certainly years. Thank you so much.Adam Hochschild: OK, thank you, Andrew. Good being with you. 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

Pete kicks things off with an identity crisis – he's convinced he's 34, and Luke has the unenviable task of breaking the news that he's... absolutely not. Talk then turns to Pete's upcoming WrestleMe Vegas trip and the truly chaotic prospect of a 120-man Royal Rumble. That's a lot of sweaty bodies!Elsewhere, after a brief detour into 'The Slug', the lads debate where the line is drawn between harmless kink and full-blown creep behaviour. Plus, why do homophobes always say things are being jammed down their throats? Is it just a coincidence… or the Freudian slip of the century?Email us at hello@lukeandpeteshow.com or you can get in touch on X, Threads or Instagram if character-restricted messaging takes your fancy.***Please take the time to rate and review us on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your pods. It means a great deal to the show and will make it easier for other potential listeners to find us. Thanks!*** Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Karen Read's Behavior Analyzed FBI Profiler Robin Dreeke Breaks It Down Retired FBI Special Agent Robin Dreeke, former head of the Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program, joins us for a revealing breakdown of the Karen Read case. As the trial unfolds, Dreeke dives into her shifting narrative, apparent contradictions, and what her behavior may actually reveal about her role in the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. We explore how alcohol, emotional reinforcement, and false memory can distort reality—and how Read's behavior fits a pattern seen in cases involving control, self-victimization, and narrative manipulation. From bizarre Freudian slips to unlikely defense theories involving a well-trained dog, nothing is off the table. With new vehicle data and voicemail records about to surface in trial, this episode provides a deeper lens on the probability, psychology, and behaviors that may define the outcome of one of the most confounding true crime stories in recent memory. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #KarenReadTrial #FBIProfiler #RobinDreeke #TrueCrimeAnalysis #DeceptionDetection #BehavioralAnalysis #KarenReadCase #JohnOKeefeDeath Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872 

Karen Read's Behavior Analyzed FBI Profiler Robin Dreeke Breaks It Down Retired FBI Special Agent Robin Dreeke, former head of the Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program, joins us for a revealing breakdown of the Karen Read case. As the trial unfolds, Dreeke dives into her shifting narrative, apparent contradictions, and what her behavior may actually reveal about her role in the death of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. We explore how alcohol, emotional reinforcement, and false memory can distort reality—and how Read's behavior fits a pattern seen in cases involving control, self-victimization, and narrative manipulation. From bizarre Freudian slips to unlikely defense theories involving a well-trained dog, nothing is off the table. With new vehicle data and voicemail records about to surface in trial, this episode provides a deeper lens on the probability, psychology, and behaviors that may define the outcome of one of the most confounding true crime stories in recent memory. #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #KarenReadTrial #FBIProfiler #RobinDreeke #TrueCrimeAnalysis #DeceptionDetection #BehavioralAnalysis #KarenReadCase #JohnOKeefeDeath Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

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

In The Ego and the Id, Sigmund Freud uses the analogy of a horse and rider to illustrate the relationship between the ego and the id, emphasizing that we may have less control over the unconscious than we'd like to believe. Yet, a decade later in New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, Freud introduces the psychoanalytic motto: “Where id was, there ego shall be,” hinting at the possibility of greater agency than he originally proposed. This tension—between the limits of our control and the hope for transformation—has always intrigued me. In this episode, I explore that dynamic by sharing a few key quotes from Freud, and one from Mari Ruti that I believe sheds meaningful light on this enduring paradox.

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!

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.

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.

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 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

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/

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

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.

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.