Podcast appearances and mentions of George Orwell

Washington clean-air rules stall cremation upgrades, leaving funeral homes stuck with polluting machines. A viral video shows a crazy woman berating an elderly target employee for wearing a red Charlie Kirk shirt. Some SNAP recipients are furious that one state is limiting EBT to ‘real food.’ // Big Local: A Kent farm has been devastated from the floods. Flooding led to a fatality in Snohomish County. The possibility of a landslide looms over residents of Concrete. A suspect has been accused of making a phony 911 call and stabbing a Bellevue police officer over the weekend. // You Pick the Topic: A new film adaptation of George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ changes the story into a warning about capitalism instead of communism.

Ce mercredi, sur Europe 1, Olivier Babeau s'intéresse à la sortie du film d'animation "La Ferme des animaux" dans lequel le sens du roman de George Orwell a été détourné. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

One on One Video Call W/George https://tidycal.com/georgepmonty/60-minute-meetingSupport the show:https://www.paypal.me/Truelifepodcast?locale.x=en_USThe Lila Code: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4612-3942

In episode 1980, Jack and Miles are joined by comedian and desert star tour guide, Caitlin Gill, to discuss… Trump Can’t Throw Coin Good, MAGA Base Also Starting To Cool On Economy, All Those Pictures, Donald Trump Admits That His Son Won’t Care When He Dies, George Orwell’s Animal Farm Gets The Minions Treatment and more! Trump Can’t Throw Coin Good Trump: “You’re gonna see results in 6 months to a year” What we know about the Epstein photos released by Democrats Trump, 79, Admits His Own Son Wouldn’t Want to Attend His Memorial Trump gets distracted by a woman in the crowd he says looks like Ivanka and has her turn for the cameras Sweaty Trump Rambles About Snakes and Thirsts Over Ivanka Lookalike George Orwell’s Animal Farm Gets The Minions Treatment New Animal Farm animated comedy is getting roasted already How the CIA Used ‘Animal Farm’ As Cold War Propaganda Andy Serkis’ ‘Animal Farm’ Animation Acquired by Angel, First Trailer Unveiled The trailer for Andy Serkis' Animal Farm won't help with your book report Animal Farm film blames capitalism... and has a happy ending George Orwell: Why I Write LISTEN: Tea For Two by Oscar Peterson TrioSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to It Was What It Was, the football history podcast. This week co-hosts Jonathan Wilson and Rob Draper delve into George Orwell's infamous essay on sport, specifically focusing on Dinamo Moscow's 1945 tour of Britain. They explore Orwell's controversial viewpoint that serious sport is akin to 'war minus the shooting,' and delve into the historical and political context of this post-WWII football tour. The discussion covers the tactical innovations introduced by the Soviet team, the media and public's reaction, and the broader implications for international sport and politics. This episode provides an in-depth look at how football can both unite and divide, reflecting on Orwell's critique and its relevance to today's sports culture.00:00 Introduction: The Dark Side of Sports01:05 George Orwell's Influence on Sports01:49 The Political Context of the 1945 Moscow Tour02:47 The Goodwill Tour: Ideals vs. Reality05:00 The Soviet Union's Football Strategy08:23 The Arrival of Dinamo Moscow21:45 The First Match: Dinamo Moscow vs Chelsea30:53 The Political Showdown: Arsenal vs Dinamo Moscow32:31 The Final Game in Scotland35:56 Soviet Propaganda and the Legacy of the Tour40:36 Tactical Innovations and English Football's Response47:36 George Orwell's Critique of Sport53:18 Football's Role in Nationalism and International Relations01:00:51 Concluding Thoughts on Orwell and Football Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Bondi Beach & Israel; ISIS; Brown; Reiner; Jimmy Lai; Chile; Animal Farm | Yaron Brook Show

Many of us congratulated ourselves when many of George Orwell's predictions did not come true in 1984... on THIS DAY, December 14th with Chris Conley.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

“Gratitude is contagious. It's something that becomes more powerful as you express it. It reminds me of how fortunate I've been — and through that privilege I feel I owe to do what I can for others.”John Pepper, P&G's former Chairman and CEO, needs no introduction. John has played many roles in business, community, service, and the lives of countless people. He returns to our podcast to discuss his new book, "100 Books That Shaped My Life: Reflections on a Lifetime of Reading, " which might just be the perfect gift this holiday season, for yourself or for anyone in your life who loves a good read."100 Books That Shaped My Life" is no mere book list — it is a life story told through the books that walked alongside John: as a husband, father, leader, citizen, and as someone thinking deeply about what matters most in the time we're given. These are the books that shaped John's understanding of history, democracy, gratitude, and hope — especially in the most recent chapters of his life.Moving from Values, to Biographies, Philosophy, U.S. and Global History, Memoirs, Novels, and Personal Essays, 100 Books That Shaped My Life mirrors something true about John himself: a leader shaped not by one discipline, but by a lifelong curiosity across every discipline. In our conversation, John reflects on how a lifetime of reading helped him better live a lifetime — deepening his understanding of friendship, love, loss, courage, service, and the quiet beauty of everyday life.John's literary influences range from novelists like John Steinbeck, Oliver Sacks, Wallace Stegner, Marilynne Robinson, George Orwell, and Tolstoy, to memoirists such as Frederick Douglass, Katharine Graham, James Reston, and Michelle Obama, to historians and biographers including David Blight, Jon Meacham, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jill Lepore, and so many others. Woven through all of it is a deeply human narrative — his love for his late wife, Francie; his reflections on aging, family, and purpose; the leaders who shaped him; the lessons hard-won; and the quiet moments that stayed with him.As Bob Iger put it, “Whether you're an executive or simply someone who loves reading and learning, you will find great value and wisdom in this book.” And we couldn't agree more. For anyone who enjoys learning from lived experience, this conversation — and this book — make a wonderful companion. It might even inspire you to reflect on everything you've read and learned along the way. Be sure to check out John Pepper's "100 Books That Shaped My Life" wherever you get your favorite books.bookshop.org/p/books/100-books-that-shaped-my-life-reflections-on-a-lifetime-of-reading/23a8c953e3dfd1e5amazon.com/gp/product/B0FXQPHQPK

George Orwell's famous essay "Politics and the English Language" leads us into a discussion of good language, good thought, and their relationship. PATREON-EXCLUSIVE EPISODE - https://www.patreon.com/posts/145712151

Tuesday is the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen's birth, so today I spoke to John Mullan, professor of English Literature at UCL, author of What Matters in Jane Austen. John and I talked about how Austen's fiction would have developed if she had not died young, the innovations of Persuasion, wealth inequality in Austen, slavery and theatricals in Mansfield Park, as well as Iris Murdoch, A.S. Byatt, Patricia Beer, the Dunciad, and the Booker Prize. This was an excellent episode. My thanks to John!TranscriptHenry Oliver (00:00)Today, I am talking to John Mullen. John is a professor of English literature at University College London, and he is the author of many splendid books, including How Novels Work and the Artful Dickens. I recommend the Artful Dickens to you all. But today we are talking about Jane Austen because it's going to be her birthday in a couple of days. And John wrote What Matters in Jane Austen, which is another book I recommend to you all. John, welcome.John Mullan (00:51)It's great to be here.Henry Oliver (00:53)What do you think would have happened to Austin's fiction if she had not died young?John Mullan (00:58)Ha ha! I've been waiting all this year to be asked that question from somebody truly perspicacious. ⁓ Because it's a question I often answer even though I'm not asked it, because it's a very interesting one, I think. And also, I think it's a bit, it's answerable a little bit because there was a certain trajectory to her career. I think it's very difficult to imagine what she would have written.John Mullan (01:28)But I think there are two things which are almost certain. The first is that she would have gone on writing and that she would have written a deal more novels. And then even the possibility that there has been in the past of her being overlooked or neglected would have been closed. ⁓ And secondly, and perhaps more significantly for her, I think she would have become well known.in her own lifetime. you know, partly that's because she was already being outed, as it were, you know, of course, as ⁓ you'll know, Henry, you know, she published all the novels that were published in her lifetime were published anonymously. So even people who were who were following her career and who bought a novel like Mansfield Park, which said on the title page by the author of Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice, they knew they knew.John Mullan (02:26)were getting something by the same author, they wouldn't necessarily have known the author's name and I think that would have become, as it did with other authors who began anonymously, that would have disappeared and she would have become something of a literary celebrity I would suggest and then she would have met other authors and she'd have been invited to some London literary parties in effect and I think that would have been very interesting how that might have changed her writing.John Mullan (02:54)if it would have changed her writing as well as her life. She, like everybody else, would have met Coleridge. ⁓ I think that would have happened. She would have become a name in her own lifetime and that would have meant that her partial disappearance, I think, from sort of public consciousness in the 19th century wouldn't have happened.Henry Oliver (03:17)It's interesting to think, you know, if she had been, depending on how old she would have been, could she have read the Pickwick papers? How would she have reacted to that? Yes. Yeah. Nope.John Mullan (03:24)Ha ha ha ha ha!Yes, she would have been in her 60s, but that's not so old, speaking of somebody in their 60s. ⁓ Yes, it's a very interesting notion, isn't it? I mean, there would have been other things which happened after her premature demise, which she might have responded to. I think particularly there was a terrific fashion for before Dickens came along in the 1830s, there was a terrific fashion in the 1820s for what were called silver fork novels, which were novels of sort of high life of kind of the kind of people who knew Byron, but I mean as fictional characters. And we don't read them anymore, but they were they were quite sort of high quality, glossy products and people loved them. And I'm I like to think she might have reacted to that with her sort of with her disdain, think, her witty disdain for all aristocrats. know, nobody with a title is really any good in her novels, are they? And, you know, the nearest you get is Mr. Darcy, who is an Earl's nephew. And that's more of a problem for him than almost anything else. ⁓ She would surely have responded satirically to that fashion.Henry Oliver (04:28)Hahaha.Yes, and then we might have had a Hazlitt essay about her as well, which would have been all these lost gems. Yes. Are there ways in which persuasion was innovative that Emma was not?John Mullan (04:58)Yes, yes, yes, yes. I know, I know.⁓ gosh, all right, you're homing in on the real tricky ones. Okay, okay. ⁓ That Emma was not. Yes, I think so. I think it took, in its method, it took further what she had done in Emma.Henry Oliver (05:14)Ha ha.This is your exam today,John Mullan (05:36)which is that method of kind of we inhabit the consciousness of a character. And I I think of Jane Austen as a writer who is always reacting to her own last novel, as it were. And I think, you know, probably the Beatles were like that or Mozart was like that. think, you know, great artists often are like that, that at a certain stage, if what they're doing is so different from what everybody else has done before,they stop being influenced by anybody else. They just influence themselves. And so I think after Emma, Jane Austen had this extraordinary ⁓ method she perfected in that novel, this free indirect style of a third-person narration, which is filtered through the consciousness of a character who in Emma's case is self-deludedly wrong about almost everything. And it's...brilliantly tricksy and mischievous and elaborate use of that device which tricks even the reader quite often, certainly the first time reader. And then she got to persuasion and I think she is at least doing something new and different with that method which is there's Anne Elliot. Anne Elliot's a good person. Anne Elliot's judgment is very good. She's the most cultured and cultivated of Jane Austen's heroines. She is, as Jane Austen herself said about Anne Elliot, almost too good for me. And so what she does is she gives her a whole new vein of self-deception, which is the self-deception in the way of a good person who always wants to think things are worse than they are and who always, who, because suspicious of their own desires and motives sort of tamps them down and suppresses them. And we live in this extraordinary mind of this character who's often ignored, she's always overhearing conversations. Almost every dialogue in the novel seems to be something Anne overhears rather than takes part in. And the consciousness of a character whodoesn't want to acknowledge things in themselves which you and I might think were quite natural and reasonable and indeed in our psychotherapeutic age to be expressed from the rooftops. You still fancy this guy? Fine! Admit it to yourself. ⁓ No. So it's not repression actually, exactly. It's a sort of virtuous self-control somehow which I think lots of readers find rather masochistic about her. Henry Oliver (08:38)I find that book interesting because in Sense and Sensibility she's sort of opposed self-command with self-expression, but she doesn't do that in Persuasion. She says, no, no, I'm just going to be the courage of, no, self-command. know, Eleanor becomes the heroine.John Mullan (08:48)Yes. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. But with the odd with the odd burst of Mariannes, I was watching the I thought execrable Netflix ⁓ persuasion done about two or three years ago ⁓ with the luminous Dakota Johnson as as you know, as Anne Elliot. You could not believe her bloom had faded one little bit, I think.John Mullan (09:23)And ⁓ I don't know if you saw it, but the modus operandi rather following the lead set by that film, The Favourite, which was set in Queen Anne's reign, but adopted the Demotic English of the 21st century. similarly, this adaptation, much influenced by Fleabag, decided to deal with the challenge of Jane Austen's dialogue by simply not using it, you know, and having her speak in a completely contemporary idiom. But there were just one or two lines, very, very few from the novel, that appeared. And when they appeared, they sort of cried through the screen at you. And one of them, slightly to qualify what you've just said, was a line I'd hardly noticed before. as it was one of the few Austin lines in the programme, in the film, I really noticed it. And it was much more Marianne than Eleanor. And that's when, I don't know if you remember, and Captain Wentworth, they're in Bath. So now they are sort of used to talking to each other. And Louisa Musgrove's done her recovering from injury and gone off and got engaged to Captain Benwick, Captain Benwick. So Wentworth's a free man. And Anne is aware, becoming aware that he may be still interested in her. And there's a card party, an evening party arranged by Sir Walter Elliot. And Captain Wentworth is given an invitation, even though they used to disapprove of him because he's now a naval hero and a rich man. And Captain Wentworth and Anna making slightly awkward conversation. And Captain Wentworth says, you did not used to like cards.I mean, he realizes what he said, because what he said is, remember you eight years ago. I remember we didn't have to do cards. We did snogging and music. That's what we did. But anyway, he did not used to like cards. And he suddenly realizes what a giveaway that is. And he says something like, but then time brings many changes. And she says, she cries out, I am not so much changed.Henry Oliver (11:23)Mm. Mm, yes, yes. Yep.Yes.Cries out, yeah.John Mullan (11:50)It's absolutely electric line and that's not Eleanor is it? That's not an Eleanor-ish line. ⁓ Eleanor would say indeed time evinces such dispositions in most extraordinary ways. She would say some Johnsonian thing wouldn't she? so I don't think it's quite a return to the same territory or the same kind of psychology.Henry Oliver (12:05)That's right. Yes, yes, yeah.No, that's interesting, yeah. One of the things that happens in Persuasion is that you get this impressionistic writing. So a bit like Mrs. Elliot talking while she picks strawberries. When Lady Russell comes into Bath, you get that wonderful scene of the noises and the sounds. Is this a sort of step forward in a way? And you can think of Austen as not an evolutionary missing link as such, but she's sort of halfway between Humphrey Clinker and Mr. Jangle.Is that something that she would have sort of developed?John Mullan (12:49)I think that's quite possible. haven't really thought about it before, but you're right. think there are these, ⁓ there are especially, they're impressionistic ⁓ passages which are tied up with Anne's emotions. And there's an absolutely, I think, short, simple, but extraordinarily original one when she meets him again after eight years. And it says something like, the room was full, full of people. Mary said something and you're in the blur of it. He said all that was right, you know, and she can't hear the words, she can't hear the words and you can't hear the words and you're inside and she's even, you're even sort of looking at the floor because she's looking at the floor and in Anne's sort of consciousness, often slightly fevered despite itself, you do exactly get this sort of, ⁓ for want of a better word, blur of impressions, which is entirely unlike, isn't it, Emma's sort of ⁓ drama of inner thought, which is always assertive, argumentative, perhaps self-correcting sometimes, but nothing if not confidently articulate.John Mullan (14:17)And with Anne, it's a blur of stuff. there is a sort of perhaps a kind of inklings of a stream of consciousness method there.Henry Oliver (14:27)I think so, yeah. Why is it that Flaubert and other writers get all the credit for what Jane Austen invented?John Mullan (14:35)Join my campaign, Henry. It is so vexing. It is vexing. sometimes thought, I sometimes have thought, but perhaps this is a little xenophobic of me, that the reason that Jane Austen is too little appreciated and read in France is because then they would have to admit that Flaubertdidn't do it first, you know. ⁓Henry Oliver (14:40)It's vexing, isn't it?John Mullan (15:04)I mean, I suppose there's an answer from literary history, which is simply for various reasons, ⁓ some of them to do with what became fashionable in literary fiction, as we would now call it. Jane Austen was not very widely read or known in the 19th century. So it wasn't as if, as it were, Tolstoy was reading Jane Austen and saying, this is not up to much. He wasn't. He was reading Elizabeth Gaskell.Jane Eyre ⁓ and tons of Dickens, tons, every single word Dickens published, of course. ⁓ So Jane Austen, know, to cite an example I've just referred to, I Charlotte Bronte knew nothing of Jane Austen until George Henry Lewis, George Eliot's partner, who is carrying the torch for Jane Austen, said, you really should read some. And that's why we have her famous letter saying, it's, you know, it's commonplace and foolish things she said. But so I think the first thing to establish is she was really not very widely read. So it wasn't that people were reading it and not getting it. It was which, you know, I think there's a little bit of that with Dickens. He was very widely read and people because of that almost didn't see how innovative he was, how extraordinarily experimental. It was too weird. But they still loved it as comic or melodramatic fiction. But I think Jane Austen simply wasn't very widely read until the late 19th century. So I don't know if Flaubert read her. I would say almost certainly not. Dickens owned a set of Jane Austen, but that was amongst 350 selecting volumes of the select British novelists. Probably he never read Jane Austen. Tolstoy and you know never did, you know I bet Dostoevsky didn't, any number of great writers didn't.Henry Oliver (17:09)I find it hard to believe that Dickens didn't read her.John Mullan (17:12)Well, I don't actually, I'm afraid, because I mean the one occasion that I know of in his surviving correspondence when she's mentioned is after the publication of Little Dorrit when ⁓ his great bosom friend Forster writes to him and says, Flora Finching, that must be Miss Bates. Yes. You must have been thinking of Miss Bates.John Mullan (17:41)And he didn't write it in a sort of, you plagiarist type way, I he was saying you've varied, it's a variation upon that character and Dickens we wrote back and we have his reply absolutely denying this. Unfortunately his denial doesn't make it clear whether he knew who Miss Bates was but hadn't it been influenced or whether he simply didn't know but what he doesn't… It's the one opportunity where he could have said, well, of course I've read Emma, but that's not my sort of thing. ⁓ of course I delight in Miss Bates, but I had no idea of thinking of her when I... He has every opportunity to say something about Jane Austen and he doesn't say anything about her. He just says, no.Henry Oliver (18:29)But doesn't he elsewhere deny having read Jane Eyre? And that's just like, no one believes you, Charles.John Mullan (18:32)Yes.Well, he may deny it, but he also elsewhere admits to it. Yeah.Henry Oliver (18:39)Okay, but you know, just because he doesn't come out with it.John Mullan (18:43)No, no, it's true, but he wouldn't have been singular and not reading Jane Austen. That's what I'm saying. Yes. So it's possible to ignore her innovativeness simply by not having read her. But I do think, I mean, briefly, that there is another thing as well, which is that really until the late 20th century almost, even though she'd become a wide, hugely famous, hugely widely read and staple of sort of A levels and undergraduate courses author, her real, ⁓ her sort of experiments with form were still very rarely acknowledged. And I mean, it was only really, I think in the sort of almost 1980s, really a lot in my working lifetime that people have started saying the kind of thing you were asking about now but hang on free and direct style no forget flow bear forget Henry James I mean they're terrific but actually this woman who never met an accomplished author in her life who had no literary exchanges with fellow writersShe did it at a little table in a house in Hampshire. Just did it.Henry Oliver (20:14)Was she a Tory or an Enlightenment Liberal or something else?John Mullan (20:19)⁓ well I think the likeliest, if I had to pin my colours to a mast, I think she would be a combination of the two things you said. I think she would have been an enlightenment Tory, as it were. So I think there is some evidence that ⁓ perhaps because also I think she was probably quite reasonably devout Anglican. So there is some evidence that… She might have been conservative with a small C, but I think she was also an enlightenment person. I think she and her, especially her father and at least a couple of her brothers, you know, would have sat around reading 18th century texts and having enlightened discussions and clearly they were, you know, and they had, it's perfect, you know, absolutely hard and fast evidence, for instance, that they would have been that they were sympathetic to the abolition of slavery, that they were ⁓ sceptics about the virtues of monarchical power and clear-eyed about its corruption, that they had no, Jane Austen, as I said at the beginning of this exchange, had no great respect or admiration for the aristocratic ruling class at all. ⁓ So there's aspects of her politics which aren't conservative with a big C anyway, but I think enlightened, think, I mean I, you know, I got into all this because I loved her novels, I've almost found out about her family inadvertently because you meet scary J-Night experts at Jane Austen Society of North America conferences and if you don't know about it, they look at scants. But it is all interesting and I think her family were rather terrific actually, her immediate family. I think they were enlightened, bookish, optimistic, optimistic people who didn't sit around moaning about the state of the country or their own, you know, not having been left enough money in exes will. And...I think that they were in the broadest sense enlightened people by the standard of their times and perhaps by any standards.Henry Oliver (22:42)Is Mansfield Park about slavery?John Mullan (22:45)Not at all, no. I don't think so. I don't think so. And I think, you know, the famous little passage, for it is only a passage in which Edmund and Fanny talk about the fact it's not a direct dialogue. They are having a dialogue about the fact that they had, but Fanny had this conversation or attempt at conversation ⁓ a day or two before. And until relatively recently, nobody much commented on that passage. It doesn't mean they didn't read it or understand it, but now I have not had an interview, a conversation, a dialogue involving Mansfield Park in the last, in living memory, which hasn't mentioned it, because it's so apparently responsive to our priorities, our needs and our interests. And there's nothing wrong with that. But I think it's a it's a parenthetic part of the novel. ⁓ And of course, there was this Edward Said article some decades ago, which became very widely known and widely read. And although I think Edward Said, you know, was a was a wonderful writer in many ways. ⁓I think he just completely misunderstands it ⁓ in a way that's rather strange for a literary critic because he says it sort of represents, you know, author's and a whole society's silence about this issue, the source of wealth for these people in provincial England being the enslavement of people the other side of the Atlantic. But of course, Jane Auster didn't have to put that bit in her novel, if she'd wanted really to remain silent, she wouldn't have put it in, would she? And the conversation is one where Edmund says, know, ⁓ you know, my father would have liked you to continue when you were asking about, yeah, and she says, but there was such terrible silence. And she's referring to the other Bertram siblings who indeed are, of course, heedless, selfish ⁓ young people who certainly will not want to know that their affluence is underwritten by, you know, the employment of slaves on a sugar plantation. But the implication, I think, of that passage is very clearly that Fanny would have, the reader of the time would have been expected to infer that Fanny shares the sympathies that Jane Austen, with her admiration, her love, she says, of Thomas Clarkson. The countries leading abolitionists would have had and that Edmund would also share them. And I think Edmund is saying something rather surprising, which I've always sort of wondered about, which is he's saying, my father would have liked to talk about it more. And what does that mean? Does that mean, my father's actually, he's one of these enlightened ones who's kind of, you know, freeing the slaves or does it mean, my father actually knows how to defend his corner? He would have beenYou know, he doesn't he doesn't feel threatened or worried about discussing it. It's not at all clear where Sir Thomas is in this, but I think it's pretty clear where Edmund and Fanny are.Henry Oliver (26:08)How seriously do you take the idea that we are supposed to disapprove of the family theatricals and that young ladies putting on plays at home is immoral?John Mullan (26:31)Well, I would, mean, perhaps I could quote what two students who were discussing exactly this issue said quite some time ago in a class where a seminar was running on Mansfield Park. And one of the students can't remember their names, I'm afraid. I can't remember their identities, so I'm safe to quote them. ⁓ They're now probably running PR companies or commercial solicitors. And one of them I would say a less perceptive student said, why the big deal about the amateur dramatics? I mean, what's Jane Austen's problem? And there was a pause and another student in the room who I would suggest was a bit more of an alpha student said, really, I'm surprised you asked that. I don't think I've ever read a novel in which I've seen characters behaving so badly as this.And I think that's the answer. The answer isn't that the amateur dramatics themselves are sort of wrong, because of course Jane Austen and her family did them. They indulged in them. ⁓ It's that it gives the opportunity, the license for appalling, mean truly appalling behaviour. I mean, Henry Crawford, you know, to cut to the chase on this, Henry Crawford is seducing a woman in front of her fiance and he enjoys it not just because he enjoys seducing women, that's what he does, but because it's in front of him and he gets an extra kick out of it. You know, he has himself after all already said earlier in the novel, oh, I much prefer an engaged woman, he has said to his sister and Mrs. Grant. Yes, of course he does. So he's doing that. Mariah and Julia are fighting over him. Mr. Rushworth, he's not behaving badly, he's just behaving like a silly arse. Mary Crawford, my goodness, what is she up to? She's up to using the amateur dramatics for her own kind of seductions whilst pretending to be sort of doing it almost unwillingly. I mean, it seems to me an elaborate, beautifully choreographed elaboration of the selfishness, sensuality and hypocrisy of almost everybody involved. And it's not because it's amateur dramatics, but amateur dramatics gives them the chance to behave so badly.Henry Oliver (29:26)Someone told me that Thomas Piketty says that Jane Austen depicts a society in which inequality of wealth is natural and morally justified. Is that true?John Mullan (29:29)Ha⁓Well, again, Thomas Piketty, I wish we had him here for a good old mud wrestle. ⁓ I would say that the problem with his analysis is the coupling of the two adjectives, natural and morally right. I think there is a strong argument that inequality is depicted as natural or at least inevitable, inescapable in Jane Austen's novels.but not morally right, as it were. In fact, not at all morally right. There is a certain, I think you could be exaggerated little and call it almost fatalism about that such inequalities. Do you remember Mr. Knightley says to Emma, in Emma, when he's admonishing her for her, you know, again, a different way, terribly bad behavior.Henry Oliver (30:38)At the picnic.John Mullan (30:39)At the picnic when she's humiliatedMiss Bates really and Mr Knightley says something like if she'd been your equal you know then it wouldn't have been so bad because she could have retaliated she could have come back but she's not and she says and he says something like I won't get the words exactly right but I can get quite close he says sinceher youth, she has sunk. And if she lives much longer, will sink further. And he doesn't say, ⁓ well, we must have a collection to do something about it, or we must have a revolution to do something about it, or if only the government would bring in better pensions, you know, he doesn't, he doesn't sort of rail against it as we feel obliged to. ⁓ He just accepts it as an inevitable part of what happens because of the bad luck of her birth, of the career that her father followed, of the fact that he died too early probably, of the fact that she herself never married and so on. That's the way it is. And Mr Knightley is, I think, a remarkably kind character, he's one of the kindest people in Jane Austen and he's always doing surreptitious kindnesses to people and you know he gives the Bates's stuff, things to eat and so on. He arranges for his carriage to carry them places but he accepts that that is the order of things. ⁓ But I, you know Henry, I don't know what you think, I think reading novels or literature perhaps more generally, but especially novels from the past, is when you're responding to your question to Mr. Piketty's quote, is quite a sort of, can be quite an interesting corrective to our own vanities, I think, because we, I mean, I'm not saying, you know, the poor are always with us, as it were, like Jesus, but... ⁓ You know, we are so ⁓ used to speaking and arguing as if any degree of poverty is in principle politically remediable, you know, and should be. And characters in Jane Austen don't think that way. And I don't think Jane Austen thought that way.Henry Oliver (33:16)Yes, yes. Yeah.The other thing I would say is that ⁓ the people who discuss Jane Austen publicly and write about her are usually middle class or on middle class incomes. And there's a kind of collective blindness to the fact that what we call Miss Bates poverty simply means that she's slipping out of the upper middle class and she will no longer have her maid.⁓ It doesn't actually mean, she'll still be living on a lot more than a factory worker, who at that time would have been living on a lot more than an agricultural worker, and who would have been living on a lot more than someone in what we would think of as destitution, or someone who was necessitous or whatever. So there's a certain extent to which I actually think what Austin is very good at showing is the... ⁓ the dynamics of a newly commercial society. So at the same time that Miss Bates is sinking, ⁓ I forget his name, but the farmer, the nice farmer, Robert Martin, he's rising. And they all, all classes meet at the drapier and class distinctions are slightly blurred by the presence of nice fabric.John Mullan (34:24)Mr. Robert Martin. Henry Oliver (34:37)And if your income comes from turnips, that's fine. You can have the same material that Emma has. And Jane Austen knows that she lives in this world of buttons and bonnets and muslins and all these new ⁓ imports and innovations. And, you know, I think Persuasion is a very good novel. ⁓ to say to Piketty, well, there's nothing natural about wealth inequality and persuasion. And it's not Miss Bates who's sinking, it's the baronet. And all these admirals are coming up and he has that very funny line, doesn't he? You're at terrible risk in the Navy that you'd be cut by a man who your father would have cut his father. And so I think actually she's not a Piketty person, but she's very clear-eyed about... quote unquote, what capitalism is doing to wealth inequality. Yeah, yeah.John Mullan (35:26)Yes, she is indeed. Indeed.Clear-eyed, I think, is just the adjective. I mean, I suppose the nearest she gets to a description. Yeah, she writes about the classes that she knows from the inside, as it were. So one could complain, people have complained. She doesn't represent what it's like to be an agricultural worker, even though agricultural labour is going on all around the communities in which her novels are set.And I mean, I think that that's a sort of rather banal objection, but there's no denying it in a way. If you think a novelist has a duty, as it were, to cover the classes and to cover the occupations, then it's not a duty that Jane Austen at all perceived. However, there is quite, there is something like, not a representation of destitution as you get in Dickens.but a representation of something inching towards poverty in Mansfield Park, which is the famous, as if Jane Austen was showing you she could do this sort of thing, which is the whole Portsmouth episode, which describes with a degree of domestic detail she never uses anywhere else in her fiction. When she's with the more affluent people, the living conditions, the food, the sheer disgustingness and tawdryness of life in the lodgings in Portsmouth where the Price family live. And of course, in a way, it's not natural because ⁓ in their particular circumstances, Lieutenant Price is an alcoholic.They've got far too many children. ⁓ He's a useless, sweary-mouthed boozer ⁓ and also had the misfortune to be wounded. ⁓ And she, his wife, Fanny's mother, is a slattern. We get told she's a slattern. And it's not quite clear if that's a word in Fanny's head or if that's Jane Austen's word. And Jane Austen...Fanny even goes so far as to think if Mrs. Norris were in charge here, and Mrs. Norris is as it were, she's the biggest sadist in all Jane Austen's fiction. She's like sort Gestapo guard monquet. If Mrs. Norris were in charge, it wouldn't be so bad here, but it's terrible. And Jane Austen even, know, she describes the color of the milk, doesn't she? The blue moats floating in the milk.She dis- and it's all through Fanny's perception. And Fanny's lived in this rather loveless grand place. And now it's a great sort of, ⁓ it's a coup d'etat. She now makes Fanny yearn for the loveless grand place, you know, because of what you were saying really, Henry, because as I would say, she's such an unsentimental writer, you know, andyou sort of think, you know, there's going to be no temptation for her to say, to show Fanny back in the loving bosom of her family, realising what hollow hearted people those Bertrams are. You know, she even describes the mark, doesn't she, that Mr Price's head, his greasy hair is left on the wall. It's terrific. And it's not destitution, but it's something like a life which must be led by a great sort of rank of British people at the time and Jane Austen can give you that, she can.Henry Oliver (39:26)Yeah, yeah. That's another very Dickensian moment. I'm not going to push this little thesis of mine too far, but the grease on the chair. It's like Mr. Jaggers in his horse hair. Yes. That's right, that's right. ⁓ Virginia Woolf said that Jane Austen is the most difficult novelist to catch in the act of greatness. Is that true?John Mullan (39:34)Yes, yes, yes, it is these details that Dickens would have noticed of course. Yes.Yes.⁓ I think it is so true. think that Virginia Woolf, she was such a true, well, I think she was a wonderful critic, actually, generally. Yeah, I think she was a wonderful critic. you know, when I've had a couple of glasses of Rioja, I've been known to say, to shocked students, ⁓ because you don't drink Rioja with students very often nowadays, but it can happen. ⁓ But she was a greater critic than novelist, you know.Henry Oliver (39:54)Yeah.Best critic of the 20th century. Yes, yes. Yeah. And also greater than Emson and all these people who get the airtime. Yes, yes.John Mullan (40:20)You know.I know, I know, but that's perhaps because she didn't have a theory or an argument, you know, and the Seven Types, I know that's to her credit, but you know, the Seven Types of Ambiguity thing is a very strong sort of argument, even if...Henry Oliver (40:31)Much to her credit.But look, if the last library was on fire and I could only save one of them, I'd let all the other critics in the 20th century burn and I'd take the common reader, wouldn't you?John Mullan (40:47)Okay. Yes, I, well, I think I agree. think she's a wonderful critic and both stringent and open. I mean, it's an extraordinary way, you know, doesn't let anybody get away with anything, but on the other hand is genuinely ready to, to find something new to, to anyway. ⁓ the thing she said about Austin, she said lots of good things about Austin and most of them are good because they're true. And the thing about… Yes, so what I would, I think what she meant was something like this, that amongst the very greatest writers, so I don't know, Shakespeare or Milton or, you know, something like that, you could take almost a line, yes? You can take a line and it's already glowing with sort of radioactive brilliance, know, and ⁓ Jane Austen, the line itself, there are wonderful sentences.)Mr. Bennett was so odd a mixture of quick parts, sarcastic humor, reserve and caprice that the experience of three and 20 years had been insufficient to make his wife understand his character. I mean, that's as good as anything in Hamlet, isn't it? So odd a mixture and there he is, the oddest mixture there's ever been. And you think he must exist, he must exist. But anyway, most lines in Jane Austen probably aren't like that and it's as if in order to ⁓ explain how brilliant she is and this is something you can do when you teach Jane Austen, makes her terrific to teach I think, you can look at any bit and if everybody's read the novel and remembers it you can look at any paragraph or almost any line of dialogue and see how wonderful it is because it will connect to so many other things. But out of context, if you see what I mean, it doesn't always have that glow of significance. And sometimes, you know, the sort of almost most innocuous phrases and lines actually have extraordinary dramatic complexity. but you've got to know what's gone on before, probably what goes on after, who's in the room listening, and so on. And so you can't just catch it, you have to explain it. ⁓ You can't just, as it were, it, as you might quote, you know, a sort of a great line of Wordsworth or something.Henry Oliver (43:49)Even the quotable bits, you know, the bit that gets used to explain free and direct style in Pride and Prejudice where she says ⁓ living in sight of their own warehouses. Even a line like that is just so much better when you've been reading the book and you know who is being ventriloquized.John Mullan (43:59)Well, my favourite one is from Pride and Prejudice is after she's read the letter Mr Darcy gives her explaining what Wickham is really like, really, for truth of their relationship and their history. And she interrogates herself. And then at the end, there's ⁓ a passage which is in a passage of narration, but which is certainly in going through Elizabeth's thoughts. And it ends, she had been blind, partial, prejudiced, absurd. And I just think it's, if you've got to know Elizabeth, you just know that that payoff adjective, absurd, that's the coup de grace. Because of course, finding other people absurd is her occupation. It's what makes her so delightful. And it's what makes us complicit with her.Henry Oliver (44:48)Yeah.That's right.John Mullan (45:05)She sees how ridiculous Sir William Lucas and her sister Mary, all these people, and now she has absurded herself, as it were. So blind partial prejudice, these are all repetitions of the same thought. But only Elizabeth would end the list absurd. I think it's just terrific. But you have to have read the book just to get that. That's a whole sentence.You have to have read the book to get the sentence, don't you?Henry Oliver (45:34)Yep, indeed. ⁓ Do we love Jane Austen too much so that her contemporaries are overshadowed and they're actually these other great writers knocking around at the same time and we don't give them their due? Or is she in fact, you know, the Shakespeare to their Christopher Marlowe or however you want to.John Mullan (45:55)I think she's the Shakespeare to their Thomas Kidd or no even that's the... Yes, okay, I'm afraid that you know there are two contradictory answers to that. Yes, it does lead us to be unfair to her contemporaries certainly because they're so much less good than her. So because they're so much less good than her in a way we're not being unfair. know, I mean... because I have the profession I have, I have read a lot of novels by her immediate predecessors. I mean, people like Fanny Burnie, for instance, and her contemporaries, people like Mariah Edgeworth. And ⁓ if Jane Austen hadn't existed, they would get more airtime, I think, yes? And some of them are both Burnie and Edgeworth, for instance. ⁓ highly intelligent women who had a much more sophisticated sort of intellectual and social life than Jane Austen ⁓ and conversed with men and women of ideas and put some of those ideas in their fiction and they both wrote quite sophisticated novels and they were both more popular than Jane Austen and they both, having them for the sort of carpers and complainers, they've got all sorts of things like Mariah Regworth has some working-class people and they have political stuff in their novels and they have feminist or anti-feminist stuff in their novels and they're much more satisfying to the person who's got an essay to write in a way because they've got the social issues of the day in there a bit, certainly Mariah Regworth a lot. ⁓ So if Jane Austen hadn't come along we would show them I think more, give them more time. However, you know, I don't want to say this in a destructive way, but in a certain way, all that they wrote isn't worth one paragraph of Jane Austen, you know, in a way. So we're not wrong. I suppose the interesting case is the case of a man actually, which is Walter Scott, who sort of does overlap with Jane Austen a bit, you know, and who has published what I can't remember, two, three, even four novels by the time she dies, and I think three, and she's aware of him as a poet and I think beginning to be aware of him as a novelist. And he's the prime example of somebody who was in his own day, but for a long time afterwards, regarded as a great novelist of his day. And he's just gone. He's really, you know, you can get his books in know, Penguin and Oxford classics in the shops. I mean, it's at least in good big book shops. And it's not that he's not available, but it's a very rare person who's read more than one or even read one. I don't know if you read lots of Scott, Henry.Henry Oliver (49:07)Well, I've read some Scott and I quite like it, but I was a reactionary in my youth and I have a little flame for the Jacobite cause deep in my heart. This cannot be said of almost anyone who is alive today. 1745 means nothing to most people. The problem is that he was writing about something that has just been sort of forgotten. And so the novels, know, when Waverly takes the knee in front of the old young old pretender, whichever it is, who cares anymore? you know?John Mullan (49:40)Well, yes, but it can't just be that because he also wrote novels about Elizabeth I and Robin Hood and, you know... ⁓Henry Oliver (49:46)I do think Ivanhoe could be more popular, yeah.John Mullan (49:49)Yeah, so it's not just that this and when he wrote, for instance, when he published Old Mortality, which I think is one of his finest novels, I mean, I've read probably 10 Scott novels at nine or 10, you know, so that's only half or something of his of his output. And I haven't read one for a long time, actually. Sorry, probably seven or eight years. He wrote about some things, which even when he wrote about and published about, readers of the time couldn't have much known or cared about. mean, old mortalities about the Covenant as wars in the borderlands of Scotland in the 17th century. I mean, all those people in London who were buying it, they couldn't give a damn about that. Really, really, they couldn't. I mean, they might have recognized the postures of religious fanaticism that he describes rather well.But even then only rather distantly, I think. So I think it's not quite that. I think it's not so much ignorance now of the particular bits of history he was drawn to. I think it's that in the 19th century, historical fiction had a huge status. And it was widely believed that history was the most dignified topic for fiction and so dignified, it's what made fiction serious. So all 19th century authors had a go at it. Dickens had a go at it a couple of times, didn't he? I think it's no, yes, yes, think even Barnaby Rudge is actually, it's not just a tale of two cities. Yes, a terrific book. But generally speaking, ⁓ most Victorian novelists who did it, ⁓ they are amongst, you know, nobodyHenry Oliver (51:22)Very successfully. ⁓ a great book, great book.John Mullan (51:43)I think reads Trollope's La Vendée, you know, people who love Hardy as I do, do not rush to the trumpet major. it was a genre everybody thought was the big thing, know, war and peace after all. And then it's prestige faded. I mean, it's...returned a little bit in some ways in a sort of Hillary man, Tellish sort of way, but it had a hugely inflated status, I think, in the 19th century and that helped Scott. And Scott did, know, Scott is good at history, he's good at battles, he's terrific at landscapes, you know, the big bow wow strain as he himself described it.Henry Oliver (52:32)Are you up for a sort of quick fire round about other things than Jane Austen?John Mullan (52:43)Yes, sure, try me.Henry Oliver (52:44)Have you used any LLMs and are they good at talking about literature?John Mullan (52:49)I don't even know what an LLM is. What is it? Henry Oliver (52:51)Chat GPT. ⁓ John Mullan (53:17)⁓ God, goodness gracious, it's the work of Satan.Absolutely, I've never used one in my life. And indeed, have colleagues who've used them just to sort of see what it's like so that might help us recognise it if students are using them. And I can't even bring myself to do that, I'm afraid. But we do as a...As a department in my university, we have made some use of them purely in order to give us an idea of what they're like, so to help us sort of...Henry Oliver (53:28)You personally don't feel professionally obliged to see what it can tell you. Okay, no, that's fine. John Mullan (53:32)No, sorry.Henry Oliver (53:33)What was it like being a Booker Prize judge?heady. It was actually rather heady. Everybody talks about how it's such a slog, all those books, which is true. But when you're the Booker Prize judge, at least when I did it, you were treated as if you were somebody who was rather important. And then as you know, and that lasts for about six months. And you're sort of sent around in taxes and give nice meals and that sort of thing. And sort of have to give press conferences when you choose the shortlist. and I'm afraid my vanity was tickled by all that. And then at the moment after you've made the decision, you disappear. And the person who wins becomes important. It's a natural thing, it's good. And you realize you're not important at all.Henry Oliver (54:24)You've been teaching in universities, I think, since the 1990s.John Mullan (54:29)Yes, no earlier I fear, even earlier.Henry Oliver (54:32)What are the big changes? Is the sort of media narrative correct or is it more complicated than that?John Mullan (54:38)Well, it is more complicated, but sometimes things are true even though the Daily Telegraph says they're true, to quote George Orwell. ⁓ you know, I mean, I think in Britain, are you asking about Britain or are you asking more generally? Because I have a much more depressing view of what's happened in America in humanities departments.Henry Oliver (54:45)Well, tell us about Britain, because I think one problem is that the American story becomes the British story in a way. So what's the British story?John Mullan (55:07)Yes, yes, think that's true.Well, I think the British story is that we were in danger of falling in with the American story. The main thing that has happened, that has had a clear effect, was the introduction in a serious way, however long ago it was, 13 years or something, of tuition fees. And that's really, in my department, in my subject, that's had a major change.and it wasn't clear at first, but it's become very clear now. So ⁓ it means that the, as it were, the stance of the teachers to the taught and the taught to the teachers, both of those have changed considerably. Not just in bad ways, that's the thing. It is complicated. So for instance, I mean, you could concentrate on the good side of things, which is, think, I don't know, were you a student of English literature once?Henry Oliver (55:49)Mm-hmm.I was, I was. 2005, long time ago.John Mullan (56:07)Yes. OK.Well, I think that's not that long ago. mean, probably the change is less extreme since your day than it is since my day. But compared to when I was a student, which was the end of the 70s, beginning of the 80s, I was an undergraduate. The degree of sort of professionalism and sobriety, responsibility and diligence amongst English literature academics has improved so much.You know, you generally speaking, literature academics, they are not a load of ⁓ drunken wastrels or sort of predatory seducers or lazy, work shy, ⁓ even if they love their own research, negligent teachers or a lot of the sort of the things which even at the time I recognise as the sort of bad behaviour aspects of some academics. Most of that's just gone. It's just gone. You cannot be like that because you've got everybody's your institution is totally geared up to sort of consumer feedback and and the students, especially if you're not in Oxford or Cambridge, the students are essentially paying your salaries in a very direct way. So there have been improvements actually. ⁓ those improvements were sort of by the advocates of tuition fees, I think, and they weren't completely wrong. However, there have also been some real downsides as well. ⁓ One is simply that the students complain all the time, you know, and in our day we had lots to complain about and we never complained. Now they have much less to complain about and they complain all the time. ⁓ So, and that seems to me to have sort of weakened the relationship of trust that there should be between academics and students. But also I would say more if not optimistically, at least stoically. I've been in this game for a long time and the waves of student fashion and indignation break on the shore and then another one comes along a few years later. And as a sort of manager in my department, because I'm head of my department, I've learned to sort of play the long game.And what everybody's hysterical about one moment, one year, they will have forgotten about two or three years later. So there has been a certain, you know, there was a, you know, what, what, you know, some conservative journalists would call kind of wokery. There has been some of that. But in a way, there's always been waves of that. And the job of academics is sort of to stand up to it. and in a of calm way. Tuition fees have made it more difficult to do that I think.Henry Oliver (59:40)Yeah. Did you know A.S. Byatt? What was she like?John Mullan (59:43)I did.⁓ Well...When you got to know her, you recognized that the rather sort of haughty almost and sometimes condescending apparently, ⁓ intellectual auteur was of course a bit of a front. Well, it wasn't a front, but actually she was quite a vulnerable person, quite a sensitive and easily upset person.I mean that as a sort of compliment, not easily upset in the sense that sort of her vanity, but actually she was quite a humanly sensitive person and quite woundable. And when I sort of got to know that aspect of her, know, unsurprisingly, I found myself liking her very much more and actually not worrying so much about the apparent sort of put downs of some other writers and things and also, you know, one could never have said this while she was alive even though she often talked about it. I think she was absolutely permanently scarred by the death of her son and I think that was a, you know, who was run over when he was what 11 years old or something. He may have been 10, he may have been 12, I've forgotten, but that sort of age. I just think she was I just think she was permanently lacerated by that. And whenever I met her, she always mentioned it somehow, if we were together for any length of time.Henry Oliver (1:01:27)What's your favourite Iris Murdoch novel?John Mullan (1:01:33)I was hoping you were going to say which is the most absurd Aris Murdoch novel. ⁓ No, you're an Aris Murdoch fan, are you? Henry Oliver (1:01:38)Very much so. You don't like her work?John Mullan (1:01:59)Okay. ⁓ no, it's, as you would say, Henry, more complicated than that. I sort of like it and find it absurd. It's true. I've only read, re-read in both cases, two in the last 10 years. And that'sThat's not to my credit. And both times I thought, this is so silly. I reread the C to C and I reread a severed head. And I just found them both so silly. ⁓ I was almost, you know, I almost lost my patience with them. But I should try another. What did I used to like? Did I rather like an accidental man? I fear I did.Did I rather like the bell, which is surely ridiculous. I fear I did. Which one should I like the most?Henry Oliver (1:02:38)I like The Sea, the Sea very much. ⁓ I think The Good Apprentice is a great book. There are these, so after The Sea, the Sea, she moves into her quote unquote late phase and people don't like it, but I do like it. So The Good Apprentice and The Philosopher's Pupil I think are good books, very good books.John Mullan (1:02:40)I've not read that one, I'm afraid. Yes, I stopped at the sea to sea. I, you know, once upon a time, I'm a bit wary of it and my experience of rereading A Severed Head rather confirmed me in my wariness because rereading, if I were to reread Myris Murdoch, I'm essentially returning to my 18 year old self because I read lots of Myris Murdoch when I was 17, 18, 19 and I thought she was deep as anything. and to me she was the deep living British novelist. And I think I wasn't alone ⁓ and I feel a little bit chastened by your advocacy of her because I've also gone along with the ⁓ general readership who've slightly decided to ditch Irish Murdoch. her stock market price has sunk hugely ⁓ since her death. But perhaps that's unfair to her, I don't know. I've gone a bit, I'll try again, because I recently have reread two or three early Margaret Drabble novels and found them excellent, really excellent. And thought, ⁓ actually, I wasn't wrong to like these when I was a teenager. ⁓Henry Oliver (1:04:11)The Millstone is a great book.John Mullan (1:04:22)⁓ yes and actually yes I reread that, I reread the Garrick year, the Millstone's terrific I agree, the the Garrick year is also excellent and Jerusalem the Golden, I reread all three of them and and and thought they were very good. So so you're recommending the Philosopher's Apprentice. I'm yeah I'm conflating yes okay.Henry Oliver (1:04:31)first rate. The Good Apprentice and the Philosopher's Pupil. Yeah, yeah. I do agree with you about A Severed Head. I think that book's crazy. What do you like about Patricia Beer's poetry?John Mullan (1:04:56)⁓ I'm not sure I am a great fan of Patricia Beer's poetry really. I got the job of right, what? Yes, yes, because I was asked to and I said, I've read some of her poetry, but you know, why me? And the editor said, because we can't find anybody else to do it. So that's why I did it. And it's true that I came.Henry Oliver (1:05:02)Well, you wrote her... You wrote her dictionary of national... Yes.John Mullan (1:05:23)I came to quite like it and admire some of it because in order to write the article I read everything she'd ever published. But that was a while ago now, Henry, and I'm not sure it puts me in a position to recommend her.Henry Oliver (1:05:35)Fair enough.Why is the Dunciad the greatest unread poem in English?John Mullan (1:05:41)Is it the greatest unread one? Yes, probably, yes, yes, I think it is. Okay, it's great because, first of all, great, then unread. It's great because, well, Alexander Poet is one of the handful of poetic geniuses ever, in my opinion, in the writing in English. Absolutely genius, top shelf. ⁓Henry Oliver (1:05:46)Well, you said that once, yes.Mm-hmm. Yes, yes, yes. Top shelf, yeah.John Mullan (1:06:09)And even his most accessible poetry, however, is relatively inaccessible to today's readers, sort of needs to be taught, or at least you have to introduce people to. Even the Rape of the Lock, which is a pure delight and the nearest thing to an ABBA song he ever wrote, is pretty scary with its just densely packed elusiveness and...Henry Oliver (1:06:27)YouJohn Mullan (1:06:38)You know, and as an A level examiner once said to me, we don't set Pope for A level because it's full of irony and irony is unfair to candidates. ⁓ Which is true enough. ⁓ So Pope's already difficult. ⁓ Poetry of another age, poetry which all depends on ideas of word choice and as I said, literary allusion and The Dunciad is his most compacted, elusive, dense, complicated and bookish poems of a writer who's already dense and compact and bookish and elusive. And the Dunceyad delights in parodying, as I'm sure you know, all the sort of habits of scholarly emendation and encrustation, which turn what should be easy to approach works of literature into sort of, you know, heaps of pedantic commentary. And he parodies all that with delight. But I mean, that's quite a hard ask, isn't it? And ⁓ yeah, and I just and I think everything about the poem means that it's something you can only ever imagine coming to it through an English literature course, actually. I think it is possible to do that. I came to it through being taught it very well and, you know, through because I was committed for three years to study English literature, but it's almost inconceivable that somebody could just sort of pick it up in a bookshop and think, ⁓ this is rather good fun. I'll buy this.Henry Oliver (1:08:26)Can we end with one quick question about Jane Austen since it's her birthday? A lot of people come to her books later. A lot of people love it when they're young, but a lot of people start to love it in their 20s or 30s. And yet these novels are about being young. What's going on there?John Mullan (1:08:29)Sure, sure.Yes.I fear, no not I fear, I think that what you describe is true of many things, not just Jane Austen. You know, that there's a wonderful passage in J.M. Coetzee's novel Disgrace where the reprehensible protagonist is teaching Wordsworth's Prelude.to a group of 19 and 20 year olds. And he adores it. He's in his mid fifties. And he, whilst he's talking, is thinking different things. And what he's thinking is something that I often think actually about certain works I teach, particularly Jane Austen, which is this book is all about being young, but the young find it tedious. Only the aging.You know, youth is wasted on the young, as it were. Only the aging really get its brilliance about the experience of being young. And I think that's a sort of pattern in quite a lot of literature. So, you know, take Northanger Abbey. That seems to me to be a sort of disly teenage book in a way.It's everything and everybody's in a hurry. Everybody's in a whirl. Catherine's in a whirl all the time. She's 17 years old. And it seems to me a delightfully teenage-like book. And if you've read lots of earlier novels, mostly by women, about girls in their, you know, nice girls in their teens trying to find a husband, you know, you realize that sort ofextraordinary magical gift of sort Jane Austen's speed and sprightliness. You know, somebody said to me recently, ⁓ when Elizabeth Bennet sort of walks, but she doesn't walk, she sort of half runs across the fields. You know, not only is it socially speaking, no heroine before her would have done it, but the sort of the sprightliness with which it's described putsthe sort of ploddingness of all fiction before her to shame. And there's something like that in Northanger Abbey. It's about youthfulness and it takes on some of the qualities of the youthfulness of its heroine. know, her wonderful oscillations between folly and real insight. You know, how much she says this thing. I think to marry for money is wicked. Whoa. And you think,Well, Jane Austen doesn't exactly think that. She doesn't think Charlotte Lucas is wicked, surely. But when Catherine says that, there's something wonderful about it. There is something wonderful. You know, only a 17 year old could say it, but she does. And but I appreciate that now in my 60s. I don't think I appreciated it when I was in my teens.Henry Oliver (1:11:55)That's a lovely place to end. John Mullen, thank you very much.John Mullan (1:11:58)Thanks, it's been a delight, a delight. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk/subscribe

In 1949, American critic Lionel Trilling, writing in the New Yorker, was quick to recognize the achievement of George Orwell's new novel. "[P]rofound, terrifying, and wholly fascinating," he said. 1984 "confirms its author in the special, honorable place he holds in our intellectual life." And while the Cold War and the book's primary satirical targets - Stalin and his totalitarian regime - may have faded from view, the rise of technology and our current geopolitics mean that many of 1984's warnings are more relevant than ever. In this episode, Jacke takes a look at George Orwell's classic dystopian novel, which was ranked #6 on the list of the Greatest Books of All Time. Join Jacke on a trip through literary England! Join Jacke and fellow literature fans on an eight-day journey through literary England in partnership with ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠John Shors Travel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ in May 2026! Scheduled stops include The Charles Dickens Museum, Dr. Johnson's house, Jane Austen's Bath, Tolkien's Oxford, Shakespeare's Globe Theater, and more. Learn more by emailing jackewilsonauthor@gmail.com or masahiko@johnshorstravel.com, or by contacting us through our website ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠historyofliterature.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Mid-December update: Act soon - there are only two spots left! The music in this episode is by Gabriel Ruiz-Bernal. Learn more at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠gabrielruizbernal.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Help support the show at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/literature ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠historyofliterature.com/donate ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. The History of Literature Podcast is a member of Lit Hub Radio and the Podglomerate Network. Learn more at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠thepodglomerate.com/historyofliterature⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

durée : 00:10:05 - Le Point culture - par : Sophie-Catherine Gallet - En 1949 paraissait un ouvrage visionnaire, le roman "1984" de George Orwell. Pourtant, si cette œuvre est devenue rapidement l'une des plus célèbres au monde, les conditions dans lesquelles Orwell l'écrivit sont restées mal connues. Jean-Pierre Perrin revient dans un livre sur cette genèse. - réalisation : Laurence Malonda - invités : Jean-Pierre Perrin Journaliste et écrivain

George Orwell hat mit Farm der Tiere, 1984 oder Tage in Burma Literaturgeschichte geschrieben.Es gibt viele Zitate, die es würdig wären, sie im WBG-Adventskalender zu besprochen, doch heute geht es um das vielleicht berühmteste: „Wenn Freiheit überhaupt etwas bedeutet, dann das Recht, anderen Leuten das zu sagen, was sie nicht hören wollen.“Du hast Feedback oder einen Themenvorschlag für Joachim und Nils? Dann melde dich gerne bei Instagram: @wasbishergeschah.podcastWBG-Abo zu Weihnachten verschenken und WBG langfristig sichern: https://steady.page/de/wbg/gift_plans++ Livetour-Tickets gibts hier: wbg.190a.de ++++ Du möchtest mehr über unseren Werbepartner erfahren? Alle Infos findest du hier: https://linktr.ee/wasbishergeschah.podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Overnight News, 2. What Couldn't You Get Rid Of? 3. The Worst Feature In A Car! 4. George Orwell's Thought Gym??? 5. How Late Is Too Late? 6. 12 Days Of Freshmas! 7. The Really REALLY Nice List! 8. A Bold Claim... The ONLY way to wake up in Adelaide is with your best brekkie mates Tom & Callum on Fresh 92.7 Keep up to date on our socials. Instagram - @fresh927 Facebook - Fresh 92.7See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Abundance and Why Selfishness is Good In this episode, we take on important questions like: "Is carbon dioxide good or bad?", "Is the American Dream still alive?", and "Why is selfishness good?" Canada has 3 proposed laws that may give their government a lot more power and take away a lot of freedom for their citizens. In his stories, George Orwell predicted a lot of the things going on now. While those that believe in Socialism say they want to make people "equal", nature has its own equilibrium. Government just needs to get out of the way. In order to achieve great things, we need to know that we can succeed and keep the benefits of our efforts. Tune in to find out why selfishness in a voluntary society is good.  Sponsors: American Gold Exchange Our dealer for precious metals & the exclusive dealer of Real Power Family silver rounds (which we finally got in!!!). Get your first, or next bullion order from American Gold Exchange like we do. Tell them the Real Power Family sent you! Click on this link to get a FREE Starters Guide. Or Click Here to order our new Real Power Family silver rounds. 1 Troy Oz 99.99% Fine Silver Abolish Property Taxes in Ohio: www.AxOHTax.com  Get more information about abolishing all property taxes in Ohio. Our Links: www.RealPowerFamily.com Info@ClearSkyTrainer.com 833-Be-Do-Have (833-233-6428)

Anfang 2022 warnte die Universität der englischen Stadt Northampton ihre Studenten davor, George Orwells 1984 zu lesen. Der Roman behandle „schwierige Themen wie Gewalt, Geschlecht, Sexualität, Klasse, Rasse, Missbrauch, sexueller Missbrauch, politische Ideen und anstößige Sprache“, hieß es in einem Bericht der Daily Mail. Die seelische und geistige Gesundheit auf die sensiblen Studentenseelen im Seminar „betreutes Denken“ stehe durch diese Lektüre auf dem Spiel. Das tatsächliche Anliegen des universitären Awareness-Departments verbirgt sich hinter dem Arsenal wokeness-affiner Trigger-Punkte: Studenten mit einem Mindestmaß an geistiger Selbstständigkeit könnten die Parallelen erkennen zwischen Orwells 1984 und dem ebenso woken wie kaputten England der Gegenwart. Und das ist selbstverständlich unzumutbar! Das ist nun wirklich nicht die Aufgabe einer Universität, freies Denken zu fördern, richtig? Für sich genommen ist diese Anekdote noch halbwegs amüsant. Betrachten wir das gesamte Ausmaß zielgerichteter Beeinflussung bis hin zur Entfernung von Inhalten oder strafrechtlicher Verfolgung von Urhebern in vielen Staaten Europas, entsteht das Bild einer mittlerweile gigantischen Zensur-Industrie im Mantel des noblen Kampfs gegen „Desinformation” oder „Hassrede” – worunter für die einzelnen Regierungen prinzipiell alles fällt, was nicht ihrer Sicht auf die Dinge entspricht. Wer Netanyahu des Völkermords bezichtigt, wer Merz, Macron oder Starmer als Kriegstreiber bezeichnet, inkompetente Politiker als „Schwachkopf“, von der Leyen und Selenskyj als korrupt, der landet im Visier von Behörden, Faktencheckern, Stiftungen, regierungsfinanzierten NGOs, Think Tanks, Unternehmen und wissenschaftlichen Einrichtungen. Darunter sind bekannte wie die Amadeu Antonio Stiftung und weniger bekannte wie das Aspen Institute Deutschland. Wie weit verzweigt ist dieses Zensurnetz? Wer gehört dazu? Wer erhält für seine Zensurbemühungen wie viel Geld aus Steuermitteln? All das hat die Initiative Liber-net (liber-net.org) untersucht und veröffentlicht. Im Zentrum ihres aktuellen Berichts steht - wenig überraschend - Deutschland. Dessen Amts- und Würdenträger mahnen bekanntlich bei jeder Gelegenheit, man müsse aus dem dunklen Kapitel 1933 bis 1945 lernen. Gelernt haben sie tatsächlich vor allem, wie man Zensur im besten Neusprech als „Verteidigung unserer Demokratie“ verkauft. Hören Sie dazu den Beitrag „Das Zensurnetz“, der zunächst bei Multipolar erschienen ist: https://multipolar-magazin.de/meldungen/0347 Sprecherin: Sabrina Khalil Grafik (Ausschnitt): Liber-net.org Radio München www.radiomuenchen.net/​ @radiomuenchen www.facebook.com/radiomuenchen www.instagram.com/radio_muenchen/ twitter.com/RadioMuenchen https://odysee.com/@RadioMuenchen.net:9 https://rumble.com/user/RadioMunchen Radio München ist eine gemeinnützige Unternehmung. Wir freuen uns, wenn Sie unsere Arbeit unterstützen. GLS-Bank IBAN: DE65 4306 0967 8217 9867 00 BIC: GENODEM1GLS Bitcoin (BTC): bc1qqkrzed5vuvl82dggsyjgcjteylq5l58sz4s927 Ethereum (ETH): 0xB9a49A0bda5FAc3F084D5257424E3e6fdD303482

“Ministère de la Vérité”. C'est ainsi que plusieurs responsables politiques — de Bruno Retailleau à Jordan Bardella, en passant aussi par le Parti communiste français — ont qualifié l'idée, attribuée au président de la République, de labelliser les médias. Pour eux, ce serait une tentative de contrôle de l'information.Une expression directement empruntée à George Orwell, dans 1984, où le pouvoir réécrit l'histoire et fabrique la vérité officielle.Mais derrière ces accusations, un débat bien plus large s'ouvre : désinformation, censure, régulation du numérique, pouvoir des plateformes, fragilisation du débat public… Qui fabrique la vérité aujourd'hui ? Qui la garantit ? Qui la conteste ?Alors, vivons-nous un moment orwellien ? Et que dit cette bataille autour de la vérité sur l'avenir de nos démocraties ?Asma MHALLA Politologue, enseignante à Sciences Po, autrice de « Cyberpunk - Le nouveau système totalitaire » aux éditions du Seuil (19.09.25)Jean-Jacques ROSAT Philosophe, journaliste, auteur de « L'esprit du totalitarisme. George Orwell et 1984 face au XXIe siècle » aux éditions Hors d'Atteinte (11.04.25), et auteur de « Le courage de la nuance » aux éditions du Seuil (11.03.21)Gérald BRONNER Sociologue, professeur de sociologie à Sorbonne Université, auteur de « À l'assaut du réel » aux éditions PUF (27.08.25)Mazarine M. PINGEOT Philosophe, écrivaine, autrice de « De l'indifférence à la différence » aux éditions PUF (17.09.25)Jean BIRNBAUM Journaliste et essayiste, rédacteur en chef du « Monde des livres », auteur de « La Force d'être juste » aux éditions Flammarion (08.10.25)

(00:01:18) Deze week maakte de Europese Commissie bekend dat de EU gaat stoppen met het importeren van Russisch gas. Decennialang, hield het de Europese huizen warm en de industrie draaiende. Slavist en journalist Wendelmoet Boersema vertelt.  (00:13:57) Deze week draait de nieuwe documentaire ‘Two Plus Two Is Five' over het gedachtegoed van George Orwell in de bioscopen. Zijn waarschuwingen over het gevaar van autoritair denken, machtsmisbruik en de kwetsbaarheid van democratie klinken nog altijd ongemakkelijk herkenbaar. Journalist en filosoof Thomas Heij keek de film voor ons.  (00:29:02) De column van Abdelkader Benali.  (00:32:32) Neanderthalers deden aan kannibalisme. Door nieuw DNA-onderzoek weten we nu dat de slachtoffers vrouwen en kinderen waren. Archeoloog Gerrit Dusseldorp is te gast.  (00:39:35) Wim Berkelaar recenseert twee boeken en een museum:  - Het verdwijnen van de waarheid - Aart Aarsbergen  - Wilhelmina Drucker: een vrouw in de oppositie - Marianne Braun  - Nederlands Mijnmuseum in Heerlen  (00:53:57) In het nieuwe boek ‘Zij durft' vertellen 32 vrouwen die bij de marine zaten hun verhaal. Samensteller van het boek en marine-veteraan Amy van Son, is te gast samen met Riet Scheffers.  (01:10:50) Op een dag hoorde Olga Majeau over een sprookjesachtig kasteel dat had toebehoord aan haar Hongaarse voorouders. Een kasteel boven op een berg, met twee torens en een toegangspoort. En in dat kasteel bevond zich de grootste schat: een immense Renaissance-collectie met werk van kunstenaars die in wereldmusea hangen: Correggio, Bernini, Tiepolo, Rafaël, Brueghel…      Het kasteel is inmiddels een hotel, maar de kunstcollectie is verdwenen. Waarom is het kasteel niet meer in de familie? En wat is er met de kunstcollectie gebeurd? Valt er nog iets van terug te vinden?  Olga's zoektocht naar antwoorden blijkt al snel een heus true crime verhaal over internationaal kunstrecht, over duistere belangen, en over de perfide trekjes van de kunsthandel.       Luister naar Zeg Paus, waar is m'n kunst? gemaakt door Olga Majeau en Stef Visjager voor AVROTROS en NPO Luister, werd mede mogelijk gemaakt door het NPO-fonds. Alle zes afleveringen zijn ook te horen bij ons in OVT. Voor meer informatie, foto's van kunst en kasteel en uitgebreide credits:  https://www.avrotros.nl/zegpaus/   (https://www.avrotros.nl/zegpaus/)    Meer info: https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-07-december-2025  (https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-07-december-2025)  

Canadians got to see their 2026 World Cup opponents during the group draw this week in Washington — and Prime Minister Mark Carney got to see U.S. President Donald Trump in-person once again as trade talks remain frozen. Did their meeting give any indication of progress? Parliament Hill Watchers Stephanie Levitz and Joël-Denis Bellavance dig into the rendezvous and other simmering political challenges for the prime minister, like what to do next with his cabinet.After that, housing experts Mike Moffat and Carolyn Whitzman join The House to discuss whether the Liberals are meeting their election promises after a new report says Carney's marquee housing initiative won't amount to many new homes. Plus, Conservative housing critic Scott Aitchison breaks down his party's point of view on the issue.Finally, fresh off his time as Canada's representative to the United Nations, Bob Rae tells Catherine Cullen about his decades-long political career, his views on Trump's lasting impact and the parallels he sees between this geopolitical moment and George Orwell's 1984.This episode features the voices of:Stephanie Levitz, senior reporter for the Globe and MailJoël-Denis Bellavance, Ottawa bureau chief for La PressePeter Davoust, Vancouver residentMike Moffat, founding director of the University of Ottawa's “Missing Middle Initiative”Carolyn Whitzman, adjunct professor at the University of Toronto's School of CitiesBob Rae, Canada's former UN ambassador

Like the Bad Religion song says, "sometimes truth is stranger than fiction." In this episode, Andrew For America talks about a recent Al Jazeera article comparing the dystopian novels "1984" by George Orwell, and "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley. The article talks about how these novels discuss "utopia" and "negative utopia," and how our modern technologically advanced world is starting to confirm both of these narratives: these prophetic fiction novels seem to be more factual and accurate than we previously wanted to believe. Andrew also talks about a book released by the Club of Rome entitled, "Mankind at the Turning Point" which lays out how "they invented" the climate crisis idea to be the catalyst idea that would be used to usher in a global control system in the hands of a very few people. Andrew also plays a clip of Klaus Schwab admitting that the World Economic Forum's 'young global leaders' are prepped and utilized to infiltrate governments all over the world. Andrew ends by reading a fantastic piece by Students For Liberty illustrating how the practice of both fascism and socialism is very similar in nature...and how the end result of both theoretical "systems" is always the same.The song selection is the song, "Arthur Ingleman" by the band Hobo Bridge.Visit allegedlyrecords.com and check out all of the amazing punk rock artists!Visit soundcloud.com/andrewforamerica1984 to check out Andrew's music!Like and Follow The Politics & Punk Rock Podcast PLAYLIST on Spotify!!!Check it out here: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1Y4rumioeqvHfaUgRnRxsy...politicsandpunkrockpodcast.comFollow Future Is Now Coalition on Instagram @FutureIsOrgwww.futureis.org

Adolph Hitler gets elected in Namibia again except he's black now.Talking about comics and the Hulk.Whatever you give attention to is what you create.An agregore of nonsense, the way to fight against it is to not care about it.Focus on the light, not the darkness.George Orwell, nothing ever changes, the meaning of genocide, using fancy words and foreign words in English.Yeshua, Christian hipsters and Judaizers.The Septuagint and Masoretic texts, the real name of Jesus.Prior to recording technology we have no idea how ancient languages actually sounded.It's okay to speak English, you can just say English words.Where is God? What if God is space? The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.You cannot drive a nail into the sky.The metaphysics of prayers being answered.What was Lazarus like after he was brought back to life?LinksCindertip's Etsy StoreSupport the showMore Linkswww.MAPSOC.orgFollow Sumo on TwitterAlternate Current RadioSupport the Show!Subscribe to the Podcast on GumroadSubscribe to the Podcast on PatreonSubscribe to the Podcast on BuzzsproutBuy Us a Tibetan Herbal TeaSumo's SubstacksHoly is He Who WrestlesModern Pulp

Paul Buitink spreekt Ab Flipse over noodpakketten, de Russische oorlogsdreiging, de EU en de kansen in Paraguay.Wat zit er nu écht achter die golf van media-aandacht voor noodsituaties, noodpakketten en oorlogsdreiging? Ab is van mening dat die voortdurende dreiging een functie heeft: volgens hem wordt die gebruikt om meer controle vanuit zowel de nationale overheid als Brussel te legitimeren en om een bredere agenda uit te rollen.Ook bespreken ze het Nederlandse leger, de NAVO, de oorlog en mogelijke vrede in OekraïneAb legt hij uit waarom hij niet Moskou, maar juist Brussel als de grootste bedreiging ziet. Hij ziet duidelijke gelijkenissen tussen de nieuwe EU-wet- en regelgeving en het dystopische ‘1984' van George Orwell. En wat is volgens hem de oplossing om Nederland weer op het rechte spoor te krijgen?Waarom is Paraguay een interessant land? Ab vertelt over zijn reis naar Zuid-Amerika en de kansen die hij daar ziet. Ook bespreken ze de nieuwe beperkingen op contante betalingen én een mooie kortingsactie op edelmetaal voor kijkers van de podcast.Bekijk de kortingsactie op munten & baren: https://www.hollandgold.nl/podcast-ab... website GRYP van Ab Flipse: https://www.gryp.it/Ab op X: https://x.com/abflipseOverweegt u om goud en zilver aan te kopen? Dat kan via de volgende website: https://bit.ly/3xxy4sYTimestamps00:00 Intro02:00 Oorlogsdreiging & Noodsituaties10:40 Rusland & Noodwetten15:40 Agenda 2030 & Sustainable Development Goals19:30 Oorlog, Vrede, Defensie Nederland & NAVO29:30 De EU, Nexit & 198433:03 Conservatief Nederland & Oplossingen39:33 Contant geld & Edelmetaal44:00 De business case voor ParaguayTwitter:@Hollandgold:   / hollandgold  @paulbuitink:   / paulbuitink  Let op: Holland Gold vindt het belangrijk dat iedereen vrijuit kan spreken. Wij willen u er graag op attenderen dat de uitspraken die worden gedaan door de geïnterviewde niet persé betekenen dat Holland Gold hier achter staat. Alle uitspraken zijn gedaan op persoonlijke titel door de geïnterviewde en dragen zo bij aan een breed, kleurrijk en voor de kijker interessant beeld van de onderwerpen. Zo willen en kunnen wij u een transparante bijdrage en een zo volledig mogelijk inzicht geven in de economische marktontwikkelingen. Al onze video's zijn er enkel op gericht u te informeren. De informatie en data die we presenteren kunnen verouderd zijn bij het bekijken van onze video's. Onze video's zijn geen financieel advies. U alleen kunt bepalen hoe het beste uw vermogen kunt beleggen. U draagt zelf de risico's van uw keuzes.Bekijk onze website: https://www.hollandgold.nl

After a relatively quiet month (i.e. plenty of time for books!) we are back with a long episode full of booky goodness. Alot of history this month!Books discussed include: - Myths From Mesopotamia (c. 2000-1000BC; ed. Stephanie Dalley, 2008)- A Sicilian Romance (Ann Radcliffe, 1790)- Despard The Sportsman (Cptn Mayne Reid, late 1800s)- Ars Amatoria (Ovid, 2)- Glorious Exploits (Ferdia Lennon, 2024)- Inglorious Empire ( Shashi Tharoor, 2017)- Animal farm (George Orwell, 1945)- Utopia (Thomas More, 1516)- Doctor Fastus (Christopher Marlowe, 1592)- Pandora's Jar (Natalie Haynes, 2020)booksboys.comCheck out patreon.com/booksboys for early access to our catalogue of shows, including the latest series of Playboys Extra and Darkplace Dreamers, plus Comedy Comrades and more. Or give us a one-off donation for our anniversary!Booksboys.com for links to our socials, places to listen, merchandise, music and more. Listen to TheDean!'s latest album A Dozen Barely Salvageable on spotify and buy his book The Life Of A Fellow Called Chester on amazon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How about an AB Short to make sure you don't get too comfortable during the holiday season? It's serious, man, and it's based on my interview with Adrian Smith. He exposes the Fabian Society and how they are as active as ever, from the World Economic Forum to England's leadership to Canadian “healthcare,” happily radiating the world with mind-control, useless wars, eugenics, and nation-building. We'll also go back through history to expose many of their founders: H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, and others. This content is all George Orwell approved, and he warned us about this movement many times. Based on this interview: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-politics-archon-endgame/ More on Adrian: https://aprisonforthemind.blog/ Get The Occult Elvis: https://amzn.to/4jnTjE4 Virtual Alexandria Academy: https://thegodabovegod.com/virtual-alexandria-academy/ Gnostic Tarot Readings: https://thegodabovegod.com/gnostic-tarot-reading/ The Gnostic Tarot: https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/synkrasis Homepage: https://thegodabovegod.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/aeonbyte AB Prime: https://thegodabovegod.com/members/subscription-levels/ Voice Over services: https://thegodabovegod.com/voice-talent/ Support with donation: https://buy.stripe.com/00g16Q8RK8D93mw288 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

For questions, comments or to get involved, e-mail us at audibleanarchist(at)gmail.com Can be read at https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/spilling-the-spanish-beans-2/ Spilling the Spanish Beans is an article, in two parts, by George Orwell, that first appeared in the New English Weekly of 29 July and 2 September 1937. It's an early commentary on the events in Spain during the Spanish Civil War.

Was tun, wenn man als Präsident von Problemen im eigenen Land ablenken will? Man zettelt einen Krieg an. Geht aber nicht, wenn man unbedingt den Friedensnobelpreis bekommen möchte. Also versucht man sich als Friedenstifter. WDR 2 Satiriker Florian Schroeder über Trump, die Ukraine, den 28-Punkte-Plan und das Feindbild Demokratie. Von Florian Schroeder.

(0:00) Intro(1:30) About the podcast sponsor: The American College of Governance Counsel(2:16) Start of interview(3:01) Erik's origin story(6:10) His role at the Tippie College of Business at the University of Iowa.(7:49) Exploring his book Catching Cheats(9:39) About the field of forensic economics(11:00) The Challenge of Private Market Data and Fraud *Reference to our Startup Litigation Digest(16:24) Board Responsibilities in Fraud Detection(19:03) Challenges for private company boards(21:22) Insights and red flags from the Madoff Case(26:30) Insider Trading and Its Challenges(31:29) The Role of Whistleblowers in Fraud. Reference to E142 with Tyler Shultz and E130 with Mary Inman (whistleblower attorney)(35:44) Cultural Perspectives on White-Collar Crime(39:59) The Intersection of Vision and Fraud(41:27) Fraud problems in academia(44:00) The Impact of AI on Fraud Dynamics *suggested read: The Trillion Dollar Governance Reckonings(49:46) The role of directors in the stock backdating scandals "they were happy beneficiaries"(51:03) Books that have greatly influenced his life:Animal Farm by George Orwell (1945)Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer (1997)(53:45) His mentors *discussion about the Norges Bank Investment Mgmt Fund ($2T AUM) and its ethical issues.(56:23) Quotes that she thinks of often or lives her life by.(57:10) An unusual habit or an absurd thing that she loves. (58:08) The living person he most admires: Bill Gates.Erik Lie is the Amelia Tippie Chair in Finance and Professor at the Tippie College of Business at the University of Iowa. His new book, Catching Cheats: Everyday Forensics to Unmask Business Fraud, offers a compelling look at how forensic economics and data-driven analysis can help identify wrongdoing that remains hidden in plain sight.  You can follow Evan on social media at:X: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__To support this podcast you can join as a subscriber of the Boardroom Governance Newsletter at https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Here's a clip from last week's Gaslit Nation Salon, where I lay out what it will take for us to stop reactionary elections that punish whichever party is in power: the political pendulum swinging between Christian nationalists to establishment Democrats back to Christian nationalists. If we're serious about defeating fascism and overcoming the many crises we face, we need real political stability built from the ground up, not another cycle of rage-voting whiplash. Because if we don't confront these systemic issues, the voters will continue to punish whichever party is in power, and, as we saw in 2016 and 2024, this just makes everything worse, for everyone.  The clip also unpacks my conversation with the great E. Jean Carroll, an interview that sparked a lot of questions and debate among our listeners. You can listen to the full interview here on Patreon, here, or wherever you get your podcasts.  Last week's full salon discussion will be available on Monday morning for our Patreon members, along with a Zoom link for Monday's salon at 4pm ET. Come vent or tell us what's happening in your corner of the country.  EVENTS AT GASLIT NATION: December 1st 4pm ET Book Club Discussion – Deaf Republic by Ilya Kaminsky + Total Resistance by H. Von Dach – Poetry and guerrilla strategy: tools for survival and defiance. Minnesota Signal group for Gaslit Nation listeners in the state to find each other: available on Patreon. Vermont Signal group for Gaslit Nation listeners in the state to find each other: available on Patreon. Arizona-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to connect: available on Patreon. Indiana-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to join: available on Patreon. Florida-based listeners are going strong meeting in person. Be sure to join their Signal group: available on Patreon. Gaslit Nation Salons take place Mondays 4pm ET over Zoom and are recorded and shared on Patreon.com/Gaslit for our community Coming soon! Patreon members at the Democracy Defender ($10/month) tier and higher will receive a PDF of Andrea's book Orwell and The Refugees: The Untold Story of Animal Farm.  Coming soon! Patreon members at the Fact Checker ($25/month) tier and higher will receive a new behind-the-scenes look of Mr. Jones, directed by three-time Academy Award-nominee Agnieszka Holland.  Mrs. Orwell – Andrea's new graphic novel on Eileen O'Shaughnessy Blair, the Irish-English poet, wife, and muse of George Orwell who made him into the artist he always longed to be, is out in April. Pre-order your copy here. Patreon supporters at the Freedom Fighter ($50/month) tier and higher will receive signed copies.  Thank you to everyone who supports the show – we could not make Gaslit Nation without you. 

This week, Bill and Phil ponder whether political scandals matter anymore and then discuss George Orwell and whether Trump has created his own Orwellian version of 1984.

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 4: 6:05pm- Will President Donald Trump sign the Epstein Transparency Act later tonight? If signed into law, the bill requires the Department of Justice to make public all unclassified records and investigative materials relating to Jeffrey Epstein no later than 30 days after the date of enactment. 6:15pm- On Monday night, President Donald Trump was the keynote speaker at the McDonald's Impact Summitt—joking that he loves the Filet-o-Fish sandwich but that it often needs more tartar sauce! He also bragged about getting Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to eat a Big Mac while on the campaign trail. 6:20pm- According to reports, President Trump's typical order at McDonald's is: Big Mac, Filet-o-Fish, large fry, diet Coke, and a chocolate milkshake. 6:30pm- According to White House officials, President Donald Trump will sign the Epstein Transparency Act tonight. Looking at his schedule, he has dinner with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at 7:15pm—will Trump sign the bill before or after? 6:35pm- While appearing on CNN with Michael Smerconish, author Barry Levine hypothesized that Donald Trump may have been the 2004 whistleblower that spoke with Palm Beach police about Jeffrey Epstein predations—leading to an investigation. He noted that Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has also made a similar claim. 6:40pm- Rich's PragerU Book Club episode released this afternoon! He sat down with The Daily Wire's Michael Knowles to discuss Animal Farm by George Orwell. Check it out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmFJ11619bY.

Actor Joel Edgerton on his role as an itinerant lumberjack in 1900s Idaho, in Clint Bentley's Train Dreams, an adaptation of a novel by Denis Johnson which is being tipped for Oscar success.The Harris in Preston and Poole Museum in Dorset recently threw their doors open after multi million pound refurbishment projects. We hear how these museums have been transformed and how local communities are responding to their reopening. Photographer Craig Easton tells us about his project An Extremely Un-get-atable Place in which he reflects on the time writer George Orwell spent on the island of Jura in the 1940s. And from South Georgia in the South Atlantic, artist Michael Visocchi joins us to talk about the physical and emotional demands of installing a permanent sculpture to over 100,000 whales slaughtered by the whaling industry. Presenter: Kirsty Wark Producer: Mark Crossan

Send us a textThis week's podcast guest is Joseph Margulies, an accomplished civil rights litigator, author of three books and many online articles, and Cornell University professor. Joe was counsel of record in Supreme Court litigation that established the right of Guantanamo inmates and Americans detained abroad by American forces to challenge their detentions. He describes one of his current clients as having been “imprisoned and tortured in CIA black sites.”Joe and Fairfax criminal lawyer Jonathan Katz graduated from their respective law schools a year apart. Joe's father, Irv, was a great lawyer who was a key mentor to Jon when the litigation partner at Jon's first law firm. Detours about Irv in this interview include his sharp mind, and Joe's and Irv's commonality about the importance of strong persuasive writing skills for litigators. Jon witnessed Irv's taking even complex issues and getting right to the heart of the persuasive matter, with appropriate word imagery and emphasis. Irv's persona shines through in his combat veteran oral history.Starting with doing indigent criminal defense, Joe eventually shifted from mainly wanting to fight in court, to adopting a more client-focused approach that seeks to know his clients as people, as well as what happened in their life path that preceded their arrest and prosecution. That approach develops trust between a lawyer and client that cannot be substituted any other way, and enables the lawyer to persuasively advocate for their clients all the better.  Joe aptly says on his main professional webpage: “If history and science teach us anything, it is that any of us can do monstrous things, and if all of us can be monstrous, then none of us are monsters, which is why I do not believe in the Other, that mythical creature we are so quick to find and eager to cast out.”Asked about approaches to beating the prosecution, Joe admits that he has suffered defeats (as do all criminal defense lawyers), and focuses on the importance for a criminal defense lawyer to sharpen their writing skills, process, and re-writing. For writing excellence, Joe especially likes George Orwell, and addresses his essays, including “Politics and the English Language”.This episode is also available on YouTube and Apple podcasts. This podcast with Fairfax, Virginia criminal / DUI lawyer Jon Katz is playable on all devices at podcast.BeatTheProsecution.com. For more information, visit https://KatzJustice.com or contact us at info@KatzJustice.com, 703-383-1100 (calling), or 571-406-7268 (text). If you like what you hear on our Beat the Prosecution podcast, please take a moment to post a review at our Apple podcasts page (with stars only, or else also with a comment) at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/beat-the-prosecution/id1721413675

EPISODE 628 - Nicholas Casbarro - Vitalerium, A novel was written at 36,000 feet - the narrative of Roman MatthewsWelcome to the Vitalerium UniverseA Sci-Fi Series By Nicholas Keating CasbarroA dark, thrilling odyssey that will challenge everything you think you know about humanity's future. Seven centuries from now, the stars are both a refuge and a battlefield, where ambition, deception, and survival collide.Hailed as a critically acclaimed sci-fi epic, Vitalerium – Descent into the Void delivers a relentless adventure filled with political intrigue, forbidden power, and cosmic mystery. Will you uncover the secrets that lie beyond the void—or be consumed by them?Nicholas CasbarroBorn in Providence, Rhode Island, in 1990. He attended Northeastern University's Doctor of Physical Therapy Program in Boston, class of 2013. Though he never practiced, he maintained his curiosity and love for the sciences. After college, he worked in the medical device field with a specialty in wound-healing and burn treatment. In 2021, he joined a regenerative medicine company where he would spend five days a week on a plane, traveling the country to work with burn surgeons and victims. While flying, he experienced a spark of inspiration, and decided to follow the thread. Since childhood, he had a deep love for science fiction, growing to appreciate the greats in sci-fi like Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, Frank Herbert, Isaac Asimov, and many others. Nicholas used his time on countless flights to create the Vitalerium Series and its universe. The majority of the Vitalerium novel was written at 36,000 feet. He has seven books planned in the Vitalerium Series and continues to craft the narrative of Roman Matthews.https://vitaleriumseries.com/Support the show___https://livingthenextchapter.com/podcast produced by: https://truemediasolutions.ca/Coffee Refills are always appreciated, refill Dave's cup here, and thanks!https://buymeacoffee.com/truemediaca

This week, we're talking about the Epstein Files, the shutdown that wasn't really about the shutdown, and why six words might just end a presidency.Meanwhile, some privileged podcasters are dismissing angry "online" Democrats as if losing our healthcare is just a theoretical concern.  Plus:  The increasingly evident mental decline of a president: Trump goes from "inventing" the word "affordability" to *not wanting to hear about it.* George Orwell's question—"Was he, then, alone, in the possession of a memory?"—has never been more relevant.All this and more on this week's Professional Left podcast.Warning: This episode is not safe for work.Stay in Touch! Email: proleftpodcast@gmail.comWebsite: proleftpod.comSupport via Patreon: patreon.com/proleftpodor Donate in the Venmo App @proleftpodMail: The Professional Left, PO Box 9133, Springfield, Illinois, 62791Support the show

Welcome to Watch. Review. Repeat. This is the podcast where two best friends discuss the latest in film and television and then do it all over again the following episode! Users Colton and Andrew grapple with programs escaping from the digital world into the real world in 'Tron: Ares', the third film in the classic Disney franchise! 00:00:00 - Episode Teaser/Intro Music/Opening 00:04:12 - 'Tron: Ares' (Intro and Fun Fact) 00:11:00 - 'Tron: Ares' (Box Office Breakdown) 00:20:29 - 'Tron: Ares' (Non-Spoilers and Recommendation) 01:04:49 - 'Tron: Ares' (Spoilers) 01:30:31 - Catching Up With Andrew (Birthday Celebration, Baby Bennett Potty Training, Baby Nolan Teething, 1984 by George Orwell) 01:36:01 - Catching Up With Colton ('Vertigo', MLB World Series) 01:41:21 - Listener's Corner ('It: Welcome to Derry') 01:42:59 - Conclusion/Outro Music Visit our website! Support us on Patreon! Thank you for listening! Got something to say? Send it our way to watchreviewrepeat@gmail.com! Produced by: Anna Mattis Intro/Outro Music: Mechanolith Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featured  In this cutting Watchdog on Wall Street episode, the host draws a chilling parallel between Trump's economic claims and George Orwell's 1984, where citizens are told to “reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.” As Trump insists the U.S. is thriving in a “golden age,” Americans face rising costs, struggling small businesses, and growing disillusionment. With even Fox News acknowledging affordability issues, the question looms: is the administration believing its own propaganda? A searing call for honesty, accountability, and economic reality amid political delusion.

We use “Orwellian” to describe everything from campus dust-ups to authoritarian crackdowns. But what did George Orwell actually stand for, what did he get wrong, and what can we learn from him about our age of surveillance capitalism and distraction? Sean's guest is Laura Beers, historian at American University and author of Orwell's Ghosts: Wisdom and Warnings for the 21st Century. They dig into Orwell's defense of truth over ideology, his crusade against euphemism, his experience with propaganda and persecution in Spain, and why 1984 and Animal Farm only capture part of his project.  Host: Sean Illing (@SeanIlling) Guest: Laura Beers, historian and author of Orwell's Ghosts We would love to hear from you. To tell us what you thought of this episode, email us at tga@voxmail.com or leave us a voicemail at 1-800-214-5749. Your comments and questions help us make a better show. And you can watch new episodes of The Gray Area on YouTube. Listen to The Gray Area ad-free by becoming a Vox Member: vox.com/members Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Rage bait pulls your strings and your nervous system pays the price. Social media algorithms thrive on making you angry, fearful, and activated because those emotions keep you scrolling longer, but most people can't spot when they're being manipulated. The internet runs on manufactured outrage that tricks your brain into thinking extreme opinions are everywhere when they're actually held by tiny fractions of people. Your caveman survival instincts make you hyper-focus on threats and problems instead of solutions, which is exactly what content creators exploit for engagement. Dead internet theory reveals most online traffic isn't even human anymore, it's bot farms flooding comments to sway opinions and create artificial division. Learning your personal "tells" when rage bait hooks you, like forming an angry response or that frustrated sigh, gives you the pause needed to respond from wisdom instead of activated emotions. Time boxing your apps, curating ruthlessly by blocking anything that activates you, and the 48-hour rule help protect your nervous system from being puppet-mastered by algorithms designed to keep you in fight-or-flight mode. Resources: WORK WITH NIKKI 1:1: EmotionalBadass.com/coaching THE BI-WEEKLY WELLNESS NEWSLETTER EmotionalBadass.com/newsletter SUPPORT US ON PATREON Patreon.com/emotionalbadass 30 Days to Peace Course EmotionalBadass.com/peace 00:00 How social media algorithms manipulate your emotions 00:55 What is rage bait and why it works 03:15 Why content creators use fear-based engagement tactics 06:40 How to recognize when you're being rage baited 09:55 The psychology behind doom scrolling and hypervigilance 12:10 Why being informed online actually manipulates you 17:00 How fear makes you seek more fearful content 18:40 Stoic perspective on staying informed versus powerless 20:50 Why information addiction feels like a drug hit 22:50 The parasocial outrage cycle explained for HSPs 25:10 How extreme opinions appear more popular online 27:45 Dead internet theory and bot farm manipulation 30:35 Recognizing bot farms in your own content 32:20 How to protect your nervous system online 34:20 Time boxing apps to maintain digital boundaries 35:20 Curating ruthlessly by blocking rage inducing content 36:45 The 48 hour rule for manufactured outrage 38:20 Physical boundaries to stop mindless phone checking 40:30 Replacing scrolling with healthier activities instead 41:35 Dear Internet relationship advice loyalty test drama 47:35 George Orwell's 1984 book recommendation 51:05 Finding beauty in your plan B life Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.racket.newsAn exciting movement led by toothsome intellectuals takes New York by storm. In a completely unrelated discussion, Walter and Matt finish Animal Farm by George Orwell.

In "1984," Orwell described a thought-police totalitarian state. How prescient was he?Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/thethinkingatheist--3270347/support.

What was the inspiration behind George Orwell's most famous works? Why did he move to the remote Scottish island of Jura to finish writing 1984? What was Orwell's “Snitch List” which he handed over to the government after World War 2?  In Part 3 of this miniseries, Anita and William discuss Orwell's life during WW2 and deep-dive his two most famous works…Join the Empire Club: Unlock the full Empire experience – with bonus episodes, ad-free listening, early access to miniseries and live show tickets, exclusive book discounts, a members-only newsletter, and access to our private Discord chatroom. Sign up directly at empirepoduk.com  For more Goalhanger Podcasts, head to www.goalhanger.com. Email: empire@goalhanger.com Instagram: @empirepoduk Blue Sky: @empirepoduk X: @empirepoduk Producer: Anouska Lewis Executive Producer: Dom Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In an episode that is more befitting of George Orwell's 1984 than an American government in 2025, the Trump administration has retaliated against two federal prosecutors at the the DC US Attorney's Office for putting truthful, relevant, and necessary information into a court filing.The prosecutors filed a Sentencing Memorandum, as is usual in every case in which a defendant has been convicted. The sentencing memo read in part: "the defendant, Taylor Franklin Taranto, perpetrated a hoax on June 28, 2023, by falsely claiming that he would cause a car bomb to drive into the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The next day, he drove to a residential neighborhood in Washington, D.C., causing a substantial disruption to the residents and regional law enforcement. When the police responded to the scene of a potential car bomb near a restricted area that was protected heavily by the United States Secret Service, Taranto tried to flee and left his van behind. After securing Taranto's van and executing a lawful search of the vehicle, police found a CZ Scorpion, an M&P pistol, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition in his backpack, which he left in the van. Taranto unlawfully carried the pistols and unlawfully possessed the ammunition.The next day, on June 29, 2023, then-former President Donald Trump published on a social media platform the purported address of former President Barack Obama. Taranto re-posted the address on the same platform and thereafter started livestreaming from his van on his YouTube channel. Taranto broadcast footage of himself as he drove through the Kalorama neighborhood in Washington, D.C., claiming he was searching for 'tunnels' he believed would provide him access to the private residences of certain high-profile individuals, including former President Obama. He parked his van, walked away from it, and approached a restricted area protected by the United States Secret Service. He walked through the nearby woods and stated, 'Gotta get the shot, stop at nothing to get the shot.' After noticing the presence of the Secret Service he said, 'If I were them, I'd be watching this, watching my every move.' He also said, 'So yeah, more than likely, these guys also all hang for treason' and 'I control the block, we've got 'em surrounded.' When Secret Service agents approached him, Taranto fled, but he was apprehended and placed under arrest."The sentencing memo also stated: "On January 6, 2021, thousands of people comprising a mob of rioters attacked the U.S. Capitol while a joint session of Congress met to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election. Taranto was accused of participating in the riot in D.C., by entering the U.S. Capitol Building. After the riot, Taranto returned to his home in the State of Washington, where he promoted conspiracy theories about the events of January 6, 2021."Apparently because the prosecutors put truthful and accurate references to January 6 and Donald Trump into the sentencing memo, within two hours of filing the memo the prosecutors had their government cell phones seized, they were locked out of their government computers, and they were removed from the US Attorney's Office.This represents unlawful retaliation against these prosecutors for providing truthful, accurate, and necessary information to the sentencing judge.In this episode of "The Prosecutors' Verdict" Kevin Flynn and I talk about this legal developments and the horrific precedent it sets for the independence of the Department of Justice and the practice of the law in our nation's courts.To find Kevin on Substack: https://kfflynn.substack.com/To find Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.com/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In an episode that is more befitting of George Orwell's 1984 than an American government in 2025, the Trump administration has retaliated against two federal prosecutors at the the DC US Attorney's Office for putting truthful, relevant, and necessary information into a court filing.The prosecutors filed a Sentencing Memorandum, as is usual in every case in which a defendant has been convicted. The sentencing memo read in part: "the defendant, Taylor Franklin Taranto, perpetrated a hoax on June 28, 2023, by falsely claiming that he would cause a car bomb to drive into the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The next day, he drove to a residential neighborhood in Washington, D.C., causing a substantial disruption to the residents and regional law enforcement. When the police responded to the scene of a potential car bomb near a restricted area that was protected heavily by the United States Secret Service, Taranto tried to flee and left his van behind. After securing Taranto's van and executing a lawful search of the vehicle, police found a CZ Scorpion, an M&P pistol, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition in his backpack, which he left in the van. Taranto unlawfully carried the pistols and unlawfully possessed the ammunition.The next day, on June 29, 2023, then-former President Donald Trump published on a social media platform the purported address of former President Barack Obama. Taranto re-posted the address on the same platform and thereafter started livestreaming from his van on his YouTube channel. Taranto broadcast footage of himself as he drove through the Kalorama neighborhood in Washington, D.C., claiming he was searching for 'tunnels' he believed would provide him access to the private residences of certain high-profile individuals, including former President Obama. He parked his van, walked away from it, and approached a restricted area protected by the United States Secret Service. He walked through the nearby woods and stated, 'Gotta get the shot, stop at nothing to get the shot.' After noticing the presence of the Secret Service he said, 'If I were them, I'd be watching this, watching my every move.' He also said, 'So yeah, more than likely, these guys also all hang for treason' and 'I control the block, we've got 'em surrounded.' When Secret Service agents approached him, Taranto fled, but he was apprehended and placed under arrest."The sentencing memo also stated: "On January 6, 2021, thousands of people comprising a mob of rioters attacked the U.S. Capitol while a joint session of Congress met to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election. Taranto was accused of participating in the riot in D.C., by entering the U.S. Capitol Building. After the riot, Taranto returned to his home in the State of Washington, where he promoted conspiracy theories about the events of January 6, 2021."Apparently because the prosecutors put truthful and accurate references to January 6 and Donald Trump into the sentencing memo, within two hours of filing the memo the prosecutors had their government cell phones seized, they were locked out of their government computers, and they were removed from the US Attorney's Office.This represents unlawful retaliation against these prosecutors for providing truthful, accurate, and necessary information to the sentencing judge.In this episode of "The Prosecutors' Verdict" Kevin Flynn and I talk about this legal developments and the horrific precedent it sets for the independence of the Department of Justice and the practice of the law in our nation's courts.To find Kevin on Substack: https://kfflynn.substack.com/To find Glenn on Substack: https://glennkirschner.substack.com/See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Why did George Orwell go to Spain to fight on the Republican side against General Franco? Who saved his life when he was shot in the throat? How did internal feuds on the leftist side of the war influence his writing and his paranoia?  In Part 2 of this miniseries, William and Anita discuss Orwell's fight against fascism and his experiences in the Spanish Civil War 1936-1939.  Join the Empire Club: Unlock the full Empire experience – with bonus episodes, ad-free listening, early access to miniseries and live show tickets, exclusive book discounts, a members-only newsletter, and access to our private Discord chatroom. Sign up directly at empirepoduk.com  For more Goalhanger Podcasts, head to www.goalhanger.com. Email: empire@goalhanger.com Instagram: @empirepoduk Blue Sky: @empirepoduk X: @empirepoduk Producer: Anouska Lewis Executive Producer: Dom Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

How was George Orwell's childhood rooted in the British Empire and the opium trade in India? Why did George Orwell become a colonial police officer in Burma? When did Orwell develop his anti-imperialist stance? In the first part of this miniseries, Anita and William explore the early life of Eric Blair - later George Orwell - and his time in India and Burma. Join the Empire Club: Unlock the full Empire experience – with bonus episodes, ad-free listening, early access to miniseries and live show tickets, exclusive book discounts, a members-only newsletter, and access to our private Discord chatroom. Sign up directly at empirepoduk.com  For more Goalhanger Podcasts, head to www.goalhanger.com. Email: empire@goalhanger.com Instagram: @empirepoduk Blue Sky: @empirepoduk X: @empirepoduk Producer: Anouska Lewis Executive Producer: Dom Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

FREE book, social medias, appearances & more: https://allmylinks.com/isaacw On today's episode of the Occult Symbolism and Pop Culture with Isaac Weishaupt podcast we wrap up our "Conspiracy Classics" series looking at George Orwell's 1984! Now that we're done with the book from Parts 1 and 2, let's see who George Orwell was and his inspiration for warning us about the 1984 Totalitarian Big Brother government! We'll breakdown the parallels of 1984 with 2025: Newspeak and the origins and meaning of the term "Woke", Palantir's Dark Enlightenment surveillance state, Epstein cover-up memory hole, perpetual war, sex, doublethink and cancel culture, Plato's Republic and what to do now that we know about the 1984 propaganda structures!"2+2=5"In Parts 1 and 2 we'll go through the book and in Part 3 we'll talk about who George Orwell was and how 1984 is happening now through the Dark Enlightenment!Links:1984 Book Club Pt 1: Orwell's Big Brother Dystopian Wasn't Fiction; It Was a Blueprint! Conspiracy Classics Series https://illuminatiwatcher.com/1984-book-club-pt-1-orwells-big-brother-dystopian-wasnt-fiction-it-was-a-blueprint-conspiracy-classics-series/1984 Book Club Pt 2: Orwell's Prophecy Unfolds — Surveillance, Censorship & Psychological Warfare in 2025 https://illuminatiwatcher.com/1984-book-club-pt-2-orwells-prophecy-unfolds-surveillance-censorship-psychological-warfare-in-2025/ONE STOP SHOP- Rumble/YouTube, social media, signed books, audiobooks, shirts & more: AllMyLinks.com/IsaacWShow sponsors- Get discounts while you support the show and do a little self improvement!*CopyMyCrypto.com/Isaac is where you can copy James McMahon's crypto holdings- listeners get access for just $1 WANT MORE?... Check out my UNCENSORED show with my wife, Breaking Social Norms: https://breakingsocialnorms.com/GRIFTER ALLEY- get bonus content AND go commercial free + other perks:*PATREON.com/IlluminatiWatcher : ad free, HUNDREDS of bonus shows, early access AND TWO OF MY BOOKS! (The Dark Path and Kubrick's Code); you can join the conversations with hundreds of other show supporters here: Patreon.com/IlluminatiWatcher (*Patreon is also NOW enabled to connect with Spotify! https://rb.gy/hcq13)*VIP SECTION: Due to the threat of censorship, I set up a Patreon-type system through MY OWN website! IIt's even setup the same: FREE ebooks, Kubrick's Code video! Sign up at: https://illuminatiwatcher.com/members-section/*APPLE PREMIUM: If you're on the Apple Podcasts app- just click the Premium button and you're in! NO more ads, Early Access, EVERY BONUS EPISODE More from Isaac- links and special offers:*BREAKING SOCIAL NORMS podcast, Index of EVERY episode (back to 2014), Signed paperbacks, shirts, & other merch, Substack, YouTube links, appearances & more: https://allmylinks.com/isaacw *STATEMENT: This show is full of Isaac's useless opinions and presented for entertainment purposes. Audio clips used in Fair Use and taken from YouTube videos.  

On today's episode of the Occult Symbolism and Pop Culture with Isaac Weishaupt podcast we continue with our "Conspiracy Classics" series looking at George Orwell's 1984! We'll wrap up the rest of the book and unpack Big Brother's strategies for mass surveillance, corporate collusion with the government, controlling our thoughts, memory holing reality, MSM doublethink and how other Dark Enlightenment concepts! Winston falls in love (big mistake), two minutes of hate during Hate Week, seeds of rebellion land Winston into the dreaded Room 101, and Great Reset concepts of "Freedom is slavery"!In Parts 1 and 2 we'll go through the book and in Part 3 we'll talk about who George Orwell was and how 1984 is happening now through the Dark Enlightenment!1984 Part 1 (in case you missed the beginning): https://illuminatiwatcher.com/1984-book-club-pt-1-orwells-big-brother-dystopian-wasnt-fiction-it-was-a-blueprint-conspiracy-classics-series/Show sponsors- Get discounts while you support the show and do a little self improvement!*CopyMyCrypto.com/Isaac is where you can copy James McMahon's crypto holdings- listeners get access for just $1 WANT MORE?... Check out my UNCENSORED show with my wife, Breaking Social Norms: https://breakingsocialnorms.com/GRIFTER ALLEY- get bonus content AND go commercial free + other perks:*PATREON.com/IlluminatiWatcher : ad free, HUNDREDS of bonus shows, early access AND TWO OF MY BOOKS! (The Dark Path and Kubrick's Code); you can join the conversations with hundreds of other show supporters here: Patreon.com/IlluminatiWatcher (*Patreon is also NOW enabled to connect with Spotify! https://rb.gy/hcq13)*VIP SECTION: Due to the threat of censorship, I set up a Patreon-type system through MY OWN website! IIt's even setup the same: FREE ebooks, Kubrick's Code video! Sign up at: https://illuminatiwatcher.com/members-section/*APPLE PREMIUM: If you're on the Apple Podcasts app- just click the Premium button and you're in! NO more ads, Early Access, EVERY BONUS EPISODE More from Isaac- links and special offers:*BREAKING SOCIAL NORMS podcast, Index of EVERY episode (back to 2014), Signed paperbacks, shirts, & other merch, Substack, YouTube links, appearances & more: https://allmylinks.com/isaacw *STATEMENT: This show is full of Isaac's useless opinions and presented for entertainment purposes. Audio clips used in Fair Use and taken from YouTube videos.