17th-century English philosopher
POPULARITY
2 episodes with hobbesian
5 episodes with hobbesian
5 episodes with hobbesian
2 episodes with hobbesian
2 episodes with hobbesian
3 episodes with hobbesian
2 episodes with hobbesian
2 episodes with hobbesian
3 episodes with hobbesian
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, has been writing about war for decades, including in his book Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (Cornell University Press, 1996). In our conversation, we step back from the immediate conflict in Iran to reflect on what can be called our Age of War. We are in an era of chronic political violence, including in the United States, Pape notes—what he views as a Hobbesian period in global history. And there is not necessarily, he says, an end in sight. Robert A. Pape is Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago specializing in international security affairs. Veteran journalist Paul Starobin is a former Moscow bureau chief for Business Week and a former contributing editor of The Atlantic. He has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and many other publications. His most recent book is Putin's Exiles: Their Fight for a Better Russia (Columbia Global Reports, 2024). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, has been writing about war for decades, including in his book Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (Cornell University Press, 1996). In our conversation, we step back from the immediate conflict in Iran to reflect on what can be called our Age of War. We are in an era of chronic political violence, including in the United States, Pape notes—what he views as a Hobbesian period in global history. And there is not necessarily, he says, an end in sight. Robert A. Pape is Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago specializing in international security affairs. Veteran journalist Paul Starobin is a former Moscow bureau chief for Business Week and a former contributing editor of The Atlantic. He has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and many other publications. His most recent book is Putin's Exiles: Their Fight for a Better Russia (Columbia Global Reports, 2024). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, has been writing about war for decades, including in his book Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (Cornell University Press, 1996). In our conversation, we step back from the immediate conflict in Iran to reflect on what can be called our Age of War. We are in an era of chronic political violence, including in the United States, Pape notes—what he views as a Hobbesian period in global history. And there is not necessarily, he says, an end in sight. Robert A. Pape is Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago specializing in international security affairs. Veteran journalist Paul Starobin is a former Moscow bureau chief for Business Week and a former contributing editor of The Atlantic. He has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and many other publications. His most recent book is Putin's Exiles: Their Fight for a Better Russia (Columbia Global Reports, 2024). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, has been writing about war for decades, including in his book Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (Cornell University Press, 1996). In our conversation, we step back from the immediate conflict in Iran to reflect on what can be called our Age of War. We are in an era of chronic political violence, including in the United States, Pape notes—what he views as a Hobbesian period in global history. And there is not necessarily, he says, an end in sight. Robert A. Pape is Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago specializing in international security affairs. Veteran journalist Paul Starobin is a former Moscow bureau chief for Business Week and a former contributing editor of The Atlantic. He has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and many other publications. His most recent book is Putin's Exiles: Their Fight for a Better Russia (Columbia Global Reports, 2024). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, has been writing about war for decades, including in his book Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (Cornell University Press, 1996). In our conversation, we step back from the immediate conflict in Iran to reflect on what can be called our Age of War. We are in an era of chronic political violence, including in the United States, Pape notes—what he views as a Hobbesian period in global history. And there is not necessarily, he says, an end in sight. Robert A. Pape is Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago specializing in international security affairs. Veteran journalist Paul Starobin is a former Moscow bureau chief for Business Week and a former contributing editor of The Atlantic. He has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and many other publications. His most recent book is Putin's Exiles: Their Fight for a Better Russia (Columbia Global Reports, 2024). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, has been writing about war for decades, including in his book Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (Cornell University Press, 1996). In our conversation, we step back from the immediate conflict in Iran to reflect on what can be called our Age of War. We are in an era of chronic political violence, including in the United States, Pape notes—what he views as a Hobbesian period in global history. And there is not necessarily, he says, an end in sight. Robert A. Pape is Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago specializing in international security affairs. Veteran journalist Paul Starobin is a former Moscow bureau chief for Business Week and a former contributing editor of The Atlantic. He has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and many other publications. His most recent book is Putin's Exiles: Their Fight for a Better Russia (Columbia Global Reports, 2024). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
“You would not want to be me.” — Elon MuskYesterday I argued that Dario Amodei is the most interesting man in America because he's doing something nobody else has the balls to do: acting like a human being in public. Elon Musk is the opposite. He has the balls — nobody would deny that — but what's missing is the human-being. Or perhaps Elon is all-too-human, which explains why so many of us — including myself — loathe him.Charles Steel, a London investor, doesn't loathe Elon. In fact, he's self-published a book about him: The Curious Mind of Elon Musk: Nine Ways He Thinks Differently. Rather than an Elon hagiography, Steel insists, it's an attempt to explain why Musk admirers don't fully understand him, and the Hate-Elon crowd would probably loathe him for different reasons even if they had full navigation rights to his mind.As I said, I'm in the second camp. My dislike of Musk is political — the cosying up to Trump, the DOGE fiasco, the embrace of far-right groups, the transformation of Twitter into a safe space for misanthropes. But Steel makes a case that, in our therapeutic culture, might be harder for some to dismiss: Musk's “curious mind” is the product of childhood bullying, high-functioning autism, an abusive father, and an existential crisis resolved not by philosophy but by The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Apparently Elon read Nietzsche and that, of course, only compounded his existential crisis. Probably because Nietzsche was warning us about a future dominated by philistines like Elon Musk.In navigating the Musk mind, Steel discovers three traits: hyper-rationality, existential angst, and belligerence. Lots of Silicon Valley founders have the first. Some have the second. Almost none have the third. The combination produces a man who genuinely believes that the scientific method — the right of anyone to criticize anything — is a secular religion, and that “wokeness” is a competing religion that must be destroyed. Whether or not you buy this self-serving argument, Steel might be right to stress a Musk worldview — even if that worldview is often childishly indefensible.I suggested to Steel that Musk is trapped in a Hobbesian state of nature — frozen alone, unable to read other people, incapable of separating himself from himself. A kind of naturally narcissistic state. This is what I most dislike about Elon. That he's normalizing this state of nature. Nietzsche might (like his contemporary disciple Peter Thiel) have called him the Anti-Christ. He's certainly the anti-Dario. Five Takeaways• Musk Is the Anti-Dario: Amodei acts like a human being in public. Musk has the balls but what's missing is the human-being. Or perhaps he's all-too-human, which explains why so many of us loathe him. The contrast between them is the story of Silicon Valley in 2026.• Steel's Case Is Harder to Dismiss Than You'd Think: Musk's “curious mind” is the product of childhood bullying, high-functioning autism, an abusive father, and an existential crisis resolved not by philosophy but by The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. He read Nietzsche and it made things worse. Probably because Nietzsche was warning us about philistines like Musk.• Three Traits: Hyper-Rationality, Angst, and Belligerence: Lots of Silicon Valley founders have the first. Some have the second. Almost none have the third. The combination produces a man who believes the scientific method is a secular religion and wokeness is a competing one that must be destroyed. Whether or not you buy this self-serving argument, Steel might be right to stress a Musk worldview — even if it's often childishly indefensible.• Trapped in a Hobbesian State of Nature: Musk is frozen alone, unable to read other people, incapable of separating himself from himself. A kind of naturally narcissistic state. What's most dangerous about Elon is that he's normalising this state of nature for the rest of us.• The Anti-Christ and the Anti-Dario: Nietzsche might, like his contemporary disciple Peter Thiel, have called Musk the Anti-Christ. He's certainly the anti-Dario. The contrast between Amodei and Musk is the story of Silicon Valley — and perhaps America — in 2026. About the GuestCharles Steel is a London-based investor and writer. He has worked with Tony Blair and Save the Children. His book The Curious Mind of Elon Musk: Nine Ways He Thinks Differently is self-published and out now. His next project is on Albert Camus.References:• The Curious Mind of Elon Musk: Nine Ways He Thinks Differently by Charles Steel — the book under discussion.• Episode 2835: Why Dario Amodei Might Be the 21st Century's First Real Leader — yesterday's TWTW, the direct counterpoint.• Zero to One by Peter Thiel — referenced by Steel on Asperger-like traits and Silicon Valley success.• The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams — the book Musk credits with resolving his existential crisis.• The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus — Steel's next project, and the question he'd most like to discuss with Musk.About Keen On AmericaNobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,800 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting.WebsiteSubstackYouTubeApple PodcastsSpotify Chapters:(00:00) - Introduction: I'm not a great fan of Elon Musk (02:05) - Is Musk on the spectrum? (03:56) - The meaning of life and the philosophy of curiosity (05:58) - Childhood bullying, an abusive father, and Musk as casualty (06:53) - “You would not want to be me” (08:38) - Hobbes, the state of nature, and Musk as pre-social man (10:29) - Should we try to be less normal? (12:15) - Racism, empathy, and the missing human attributes (14:14) - Goebbels comparison: when does curiosity become offensive? (15:52) - Why is it always the right? Musk and wokeness (17:18) - The curious mind as mirror of ou...
Constitutional reform is a recurring theme in UK politics. Debates regularly surface about changing the electoral system, reforming the House of Lords, or redefining the role of the courts. These conversations often focus on the traditional institutions of the state: government, parliament and the judiciary. But is that focus too narrow? When considering how power operates in a modern democracy, should constitutional thinking extend beyond these formal branches of government? Might institutions such as the media, financial sector or other centres of influence also deserve attention when we discuss constitutional design? This week, Daniel Hind joins host Alan Renwick to explore a fresh argument that the constitutional reform agenda needs to be broadened. The discussion is based on a new article in The Political Quarterly that calls for a more expansive understanding of how democratic power should be structured and overseen. Mentioned in this episode: Popular Sovereignty and the Constitutional Reform Agenda
“The fatal error is ours. Legislators set out a regulatory regime that keeps regulation at bay. The only other industry with a similar protection is the gun industry.” — Olivier SylvainThere are certain words in book titles that provoke. “Reclaiming”, for example. My guest today is happy to defend the provocation. Fordham law professor and former FTC senior advisor Olivier Sylvain argues in his new book, Reclaiming the Internet, that the internet was never really ours to begin with—and that the story about user control, free speech, and digital democratisation was always more nostalgia than reality.But Sylvain's argument in Reclaiming the Internet: How Big Tech Took Control—and How We Can Take It Back is not the usual big-tech-is-bad narrative (yawn). He doesn't blame the companies. He blames us—or rather, Congress. The fatal error, he says, was Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996, which created a blanket immunity from liability for companies trafficking in user-generated content. The only other industry with comparable legal protection, he says, is the gun industry. That immunity enabled the attention economy's business model. Infinite scrolling = infinite advertising = infinite profit.What follows from that error is now everywhere: autoplay, algorithmic recommendation—design features engineered to hold your attention, not to facilitate free speech. Sylvain insists these companies aren't really platforms. They are, instead, services delivering content pursuant to their bottom line. And now the same Nineties playbook—innovation, user control, free speech—is being replayed with AI. Companies are deploying chatbots before they're ready, racing each other to market. A young man killed himself after a Gemini chatbot told him to and Google invoked the First Amendment in its defence.The fix, Sylvain argues, is not to abolish Section 230 but to attend to the business model itself: data minimisation, purpose limitations, and the kind of product-safety regulation that every other industry—from automobiles to toys to food—already accepts. I should disclose that my wife runs litigation at Google, so I'm all too familiar with the counter argument. But Sylvain makes a persuasive case even if his reclamation project is still a little too Rousseauean for my Hobbesian taste. Five Takeaways• The Fatal Error Was Ours, Not Theirs: Sylvain doesn't blame big tech. He blames us—or rather, Congress. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act created a blanket immunity from liability for user-generated content. The only other industry with comparable protection is the gun industry. That legal shield became the business model.• These Are Not Platforms: The word “platform” implies a neutral conduit connecting users. Sylvain says that's wrong. These are companies engineering your experience—infinite scroll, autoplay, algorithmic recommendation—to hold your attention and serve their bottom line. The free speech story is cover for a commercial design.• The Same Mistake Is Happening with AI: The nineties playbook—innovation, user control, free speech—is being replayed with AI. Companies are deploying chatbots before they're ready, racing each other to market. Internal documents show they knew the dangers. A young man committed suicide after Gemini told him to. Google invoked the First Amendment in its defence.• Data Protection Is the Real Fix: Sylvain argues for data minimisation and purpose limitations—rules that would only allow companies to collect information consistent with the purposes a consumer signed up for. Not to monetise it for opaque reasons. That would dampen the incentive to engineer addiction without touching free speech.• There's a Bipartisan Consensus—but Only for Children: Something is shifting. Courts are rejecting Section 230 defences. Legislators on both sides agree something must be done. But the consensus only extends to protecting children. Sylvain thinks that's a mistake: a 36-year-old man just killed himself after talking to a chatbot. Adults are vulnerable too. About the GuestOlivier Sylvain is a professor of law at Fordham University, a former senior advisor to the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission, and a Senior Policy Research Fellow at Columbia University's Knight First Amendment Institute. His new book is Reclaiming the Internet: How Big Tech Took Control—and How We Can Take It Back (Columbia Global Reports).ReferencesReferences and previous Keen On episodes:• Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (1996) and its evolution into blanket immunity for tech companies• Gonzales v. Google (2023)—the Supreme Court case that declined to rule on Section 230 but allowed the merits to proceed• The Character AI / Gemini chatbot suicide cases—ongoing litigation against Google• Tim Wu on the extractive economics of platform capitalism — previous Keen On episode• Julia Angwin, Zephyr Teachout, and Stewart Brand—referenced in the conversationAbout Keen On AmericaNobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States—hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,800 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting.WebsiteSubstackYouTubeApple PodcastsSpotify Chapters:(00:00) - Introduction: What does “reclaiming” the Internet mean? (03:06) - The layered stack: pipes, platforms, and consumer-facing apps (06:01) - Was user control ever real? The ideology of the nineties (09:32) - The fatal error: Section 230 and blanket immunity (14:51) - Facebook as punching bag—and why Sylvain doesn't blame the companies (17:31) - Addiction, self-harm, and the design features that hold your attention (22:00) - The attention economy and the Gonzales v. Google case (26:35) - How we can take it back: data minimization and purpose limitations (29:02) - “These are not platforms” (31:21) - Europe, the First Amendment, and the right to be forgotten (33:06) - AI business ...
What is a Network State and how does the concept matter in relation to the Trump administration's attempts to take Greenland - and their 'peace' proposals in Gaza and Ukraine? This is the question I asked the transnational legal expert Dr Andrea Leiter: Who is trying to set up legal structure that mandate for No Death, No Taxes and No Democracy? And why might the rest of us end up dead or enslaved (I'll leave you to work out which you think is worse) - because as with any fascist enterprise, there will be the in-group that is protected but not constrained and the out-group that is constrained but not protected and if you're listening to this podcast, the chances of your being in the in-group are vanishingly small. So we ended up discussing Balaji Srinivasan's concepts of the Network State - and no, I have not linked to the book or the website in the show notes: if you want them, you can search. I have, however, linkedto the ideas of the Co-ordiNations put forward by Primavera de Filippi and, of course, there's the ongoing Bioregional work being conducted by Joe Brewer and others: the merging of these two feels to me a good way forward if we're to get rid of the current Hobbesian concepts of a Nation State - which is, for sure, pretty outdated. For those who want background, Andrea works at the intersection of law, digital transformation, and economic innovation. Director of Amsterdam Center for International Law, she's deeply aware of, and involved in, Transnational Law, Digital Economies & Institutional Innovation, all things crypto – as well as being a Social Justice Entrepreneur. She currently leads a Dutch Research Council-funded VENI project on Decentralised Autonomous Organisations (DAOs) and their potential to reshape economic governance from below.So here we go: a radical ride through the forest of nationhood: what it is, why it matters and how we could craft something so much better than what we have now - without the nightmare of fascist police states. Andrea on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrea-leiter/Amsterdam Centre for International Law https://acil.uva.nl/%20VENI%20project%20https://www.nwo.nl/en/researchprogrammes/nwo-talent-programme/projects-veniPrimavera de Filipi https://pdefilippi.com/Coordinations https://blockchaingov.eu/coordi-nations-a-new-institutional-structure-for-global-cooperation/Network State ByLineTimes - Greenland Data Centres https://bylinetimes.com/2026/02/03/pro-trump-ai-giants-pushed-greenland-expansion-weeks-before-trumps-bid-to-seize-the-island/Quinn Solobdian - Crack up Capitalism https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Crack-Up-Capitalism-by-Quinn-Slobodian/9780241460245ExoCapitalism ExoCapitalism: Economies with Absolutely No Limits by Marek Poliks & Roberto Alonso TrilloEconomic Space Agency Protocols for Post Capitalist Expression Protocols for Post-Capitalist Expression by Dick Bryan, Jorge López & Akseli Virtanen About Accidental Gods - What we offer. We offer three strands all rooted in the same soil, drawing from the same river: Accidental Gods, Dreaming Awake and the Thrutopia Writing Masterclass If you'd like to join our next Open Gathering offered as part of our Accidental Gods Programme, it's 'FINDING YOUR SOUL'S PURPOSE' on Sunday 22nd March 2026 from 16:00 - 20:00 GMT - details are here. You don't have to be a member - but if you are, all Gatherings are half price.If you'd like to join us at Accidental Gods, this is the membership where we endeavour to help you to connect fully with the living web of life. If you'd like to train more deeply in the contemporary shamanic work at Dreaming Awake, you'll find us here. If you'd like to explore the recordings from our last Thrutopia Writing Masterclass, the details are hereManda and Louise both offer 121 Mentoring Calls. Manda is fully booked just now, but if you'd like to contact Louise, details are here.
Using the Stone of Democracy to Slay the Goliath of Inequality Goliath's Curse: The History and Future of Societal Collapse By: Luke Kemp Published: 2025 592 Pages Briefly, what is this book about? By most accounts, civilization, which is to say the large Hobbesian state, is a good thing. Kemp doesn't necessarily agree. In his account, states are lumbering, tyrannical, extractive Goliaths, cursed to grow bigger, more oppressive and more brittle until they are eventually brought down by a "stone" that hits in just the right place. Civilization forms out of dominance hierarchies, and these hierarchies generally only move in one direction, towards greater inequality, greater extraction, and more self-interested decisions. This leads to ever increasing fragility and eventual collapse. Collapse might actually be a better place for the masses of people, though it's often quite bloody to get there. Though if that's how it played out in the past, Kemp doesn't think it will necessarily play out that way going forward. If (when?) civilization collapses this time, it will be far more apocalyptic. What authorial biases should I be aware of? Kemp is associated with the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at Cambridge. I was recommended this book by the sagacious Florian U. Jehn of the excellent Existential Crunch blog. Jehn knows his stuff which gives me the confidence to safely locate Kemp as an important scholar in the genre of collapse research, with an interesting, albeit populist/anti-elite take on the subject. Who should read this book? Kemp draws heavily on the ideas of James C. Scott (Seeing Like a State and Against the Grain) and writes in opposition to the ideas of Steven Pinker (in particular The Better Angels of Our Nature). If you find yourself similarly situated, you'll enjoy this book. It's also a great book for anyone who can't get enough discussion of existential risk. And really given the stakes we should be considering as many viewpoints as possible. What does the book have to say about the future? As you might imagine, Kemp's vision of the future is pretty bleak. He is not a techno-optimist, rather he sees in technology the emergence of a new Goliath, a new arena of dominance and extraction. He has a certain amount of hope, but it all revolves around using democracy to disrupt the ratcheting up of inequality and elite power, which seems like a tall order. Specific thoughts: Past, present, and future collapse
Today, on Undercurrent Stories, we turn our attention to the grand sweep of human history — from the hunter-gatherers of the Paleolithic to the great empires of Egypt and Rome, and onward to our interconnected, fragile world of today.At the heart of our discussion lies a question as old as civilisation itself: why do societies rise — and why do they fall?My guest is Dr Luke Kemp, a researcher at the University of Cambridge's Centre for the Study of Existential Risk and author of Goliath's Curse. In it, he challenges many of the stories we tell ourselves about progress and civilisation — arguing that the very forces that built our modern world may also contain the seeds of its undoing.We'll explore the archaeological and historical evidence for collapse, the myths of Hobbesian human nature, and whether our global, technological Goliath can be restrained before it destroys itself.So join us, as we ask: what can the past teach us about surviving the future?Links:Book: Goliath's CurseQuestion or comment? Send us a text message.www.undercurrentstories.com
Yesterday, the Canadian writer Diane Francis argued that Donald Trump should consider Xi Jinping's China a competitor rather than an enemy. Perhaps. But in this zero-sum “competition” between Trump and Xi for top tough guy, there can only be one winner. As Xi Jinping's father's biographer, Joseph Torigian explains, Xi had a brutally harsh upbringing. In his new book about Xi's father, Xi Zhongxun, Torigian explains that it was a childhood descent from privileged son of a communist party aristocrat to utter poverty, political exile and literal homelessness. That's the kind of tough guy that our self-styled “tough guy” President is competing with in today's Hobbesian bipolar world of international politics. I'm pretty sure that only one of these tough guys will come out on top. And it won't be the pampered middle son of a real-estate mogul from Queens.1. Xi Jinping's "Toughness" is Genuine, Not PerformativeUnlike privileged leaders who talk tough, Xi was forged by real hardship - his father was purged five times, spent 16 years in political exile, and Xi himself experienced homelessness, street battles, and rural exile. This created authentic resilience, not manufactured bravado.2. China's System Remains Dangerously Leader-DependentDespite assumptions about "collective leadership," Chinese politics never escaped the strongman model. Even Deng Xiaoping, supposedly constrained by colleagues, made unilateral decisions like Tiananmen. Xi isn't breaking the system - he's following its core logic that only a powerful "core" leader can hold China together.3. Taiwan is Personal, Not Just Political for XiHis father Xi Zhongxun was the party's leading "United Front" strategist who handled Taiwan relations in the 1980s through secret back-channels. For Xi, Taiwan represents both unfinished family business and his promise not to be "the one to lose" Chinese territory bequeathed by ancestors.4. Xi's Strategy is Patience, Not RecklessnessGrowing up watching his father navigate purges taught Xi when to act and when to "bide his time." Unlike Putin's sledgehammer approach, Xi moves "deliberately and competitively, but cautiously" - preferring to win without fighting rather than risk catastrophic failure.5. The Party's Biggest Fear is Losing the Next GenerationXi obsesses over whether young Chinese will remain loyal to the revolutionary cause without experiencing the hardship that dedicated his generation. With property crashes and youth unemployment, he's trying to recreate commitment through "national sacrifice" narratives - but it's unclear if this will work on a generation that expects prosperity, not suffering.1. Xi Jinping's "Toughness" is Genuine, Not PerformativeUnlike privileged leaders who talk tough, Xi was forged by real hardship - his father was purged five times, spent 16 years in political exile, and Xi himself experienced homelessness, street battles, and rural exile. This created authentic resilience, not manufactured bravado.2. China's System Remains Dangerously Leader-DependentDespite assumptions about "collective leadership," Chinese politics never escaped the strongman model. Even Deng Xiaoping, supposedly constrained by colleagues, made unilateral decisions like Tiananmen. Xi isn't breaking the system - he's following its core logic that only a powerful "core" leader can hold China together.3. Taiwan is Personal, Not Just Political for XiHis father Xi Zhongxun was the party's leading "United Front" strategist who handled Taiwan relations in the 1980s through secret back-channels. For Xi, Taiwan represents both unfinished family business and his promise not to be "the one to lose" Chinese territory bequeathed by ancestors.4. Xi's Strategy is Patience, Not RecklessnessGrowing up watching his father navigate purges taught Xi when to act and when to "bide his time." Unlike Putin's sledgehammer approach, Xi moves "deliberately and competitively, but cautiously" - preferring to win without fighting rather than risk catastrophic failure.5. The Party's Biggest Fear is Losing the Next GenerationXi obsesses over whether young Chinese will remain loyal to the revolutionary cause without experiencing the hardship that dedicated his generation. With property crashes and youth unemployment, he's trying to recreate commitment through "national sacrifice" narratives - but it's unclear if this will work on a generation that expects prosperity, not suffering. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe
In The Frontier Effect: State Formation and Violence in Colombia (Cornell UP, 2020), Teo Ballvé challenges the notion that in Urabá, Colombia, the cause of the region's violent history and unruly contemporary condition is the absence of the state. Although he takes this locally oft-repeated claim seriously, he demonstrates that Urabá is more than a case of Hobbesian political disorder. Through his insightful exploration of war, paramilitary organizations, grassroots support and resistance, and drug-related violence, Ballvé argues that Urabá, rather than existing in statelessness, has actually been an intense and persistent site of state-building projects. Indeed, these projects have thrust together an unlikely gathering of guerilla groups, drug-trafficking paramilitaries, military strategists, technocratic planners, local politicians, and development experts each seeking to give concrete coherence to the inherently unwieldy abstraction of "the state" in a space in which it supposedly does not exist. By untangling this odd mix, Ballvé reveals how Colombia's violent conflicts have produced surprisingly coherent and resilient, if not at all benevolent, regimes of rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network
In The Frontier Effect: State Formation and Violence in Colombia (Cornell UP, 2020), Teo Ballvé challenges the notion that in Urabá, Colombia, the cause of the region's violent history and unruly contemporary condition is the absence of the state. Although he takes this locally oft-repeated claim seriously, he demonstrates that Urabá is more than a case of Hobbesian political disorder. Through his insightful exploration of war, paramilitary organizations, grassroots support and resistance, and drug-related violence, Ballvé argues that Urabá, rather than existing in statelessness, has actually been an intense and persistent site of state-building projects. Indeed, these projects have thrust together an unlikely gathering of guerilla groups, drug-trafficking paramilitaries, military strategists, technocratic planners, local politicians, and development experts each seeking to give concrete coherence to the inherently unwieldy abstraction of "the state" in a space in which it supposedly does not exist. By untangling this odd mix, Ballvé reveals how Colombia's violent conflicts have produced surprisingly coherent and resilient, if not at all benevolent, regimes of rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/latin-american-studies
In The Frontier Effect: State Formation and Violence in Colombia (Cornell UP, 2020), Teo Ballvé challenges the notion that in Urabá, Colombia, the cause of the region's violent history and unruly contemporary condition is the absence of the state. Although he takes this locally oft-repeated claim seriously, he demonstrates that Urabá is more than a case of Hobbesian political disorder. Through his insightful exploration of war, paramilitary organizations, grassroots support and resistance, and drug-related violence, Ballvé argues that Urabá, rather than existing in statelessness, has actually been an intense and persistent site of state-building projects. Indeed, these projects have thrust together an unlikely gathering of guerilla groups, drug-trafficking paramilitaries, military strategists, technocratic planners, local politicians, and development experts each seeking to give concrete coherence to the inherently unwieldy abstraction of "the state" in a space in which it supposedly does not exist. By untangling this odd mix, Ballvé reveals how Colombia's violent conflicts have produced surprisingly coherent and resilient, if not at all benevolent, regimes of rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
In The Frontier Effect: State Formation and Violence in Colombia (Cornell UP, 2020), Teo Ballvé challenges the notion that in Urabá, Colombia, the cause of the region's violent history and unruly contemporary condition is the absence of the state. Although he takes this locally oft-repeated claim seriously, he demonstrates that Urabá is more than a case of Hobbesian political disorder. Through his insightful exploration of war, paramilitary organizations, grassroots support and resistance, and drug-related violence, Ballvé argues that Urabá, rather than existing in statelessness, has actually been an intense and persistent site of state-building projects. Indeed, these projects have thrust together an unlikely gathering of guerilla groups, drug-trafficking paramilitaries, military strategists, technocratic planners, local politicians, and development experts each seeking to give concrete coherence to the inherently unwieldy abstraction of "the state" in a space in which it supposedly does not exist. By untangling this odd mix, Ballvé reveals how Colombia's violent conflicts have produced surprisingly coherent and resilient, if not at all benevolent, regimes of rule. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology
Jess and Teen rail against modernity, a tendency it seems of the young and the old, but not of those stuck in the fat middle slog of life. The retreat of culture from physical real estate, the Hobbesian all-against-all ethic of the social media era, and how none of this is new, it's just getting worse. And an extended discussion in the bonus around pro-/anti-natalism against the backdrop of a society spiraling out. Part 1 of 2 For bonus episodes: patreon.com/planamag
In this episode from the ChinaPower Podcast, Dr. Joseph Torigian joins host Bonny Lin to discuss his newly released book, The Party's Interests Come First: The Life of Xi Zhongxun, Father of Xi Jinping. Dr. Torigian describes the life and struggle of Xi Zhongxun as a party official during the Cultural revolution and specifically the impact he had on the life and political views of Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Dr. Torigian notes that his book utilizes the story of Xi Zhongxun's life as a lens to better understand how the Party works and why both Xi Zhongxun and Xi Jinping believe certain values, such as those of sacrifice and suffering for the greater good, are highly important. He describes how Xi Jinping was viewed positively by his father due to the idea that his son had “eaten more bitterness” than other children, even going as far as to state that Xi Jinping had “the makings of a premier.” Dr. Torigian describes how deeply involved Xi Zhongxun was during his time in the party on the United Front, ethnic policy in Tibet and Xinjiang, and policy towards Taiwan, and how, because of his father's dedication to these issues, Xi Jinping views them as personal unfinished business. Finally, Dr. Torigian describes how Xi Zhongxun's influence on his son has left Xi Jinping with a Hobbesian view of the world and with the idea that the Party is the best tool for helping China assert its rightful place in the world and secure its inevitable march towards greatness.
In this episode of the ChinaPower Podcast, Dr. Joseph Torigian joins us to discuss his newly released book The Party's Interests Come First: The Life of Xi Zhongxun, Father of Xi Jinping. Dr. Torigian describes the life and struggle of Xi Zhongxun as a party official during the Cultural revolution and specifically the impact he had on the life and political views of Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Dr. Torigian notes that his book utilizes the story of Xi Zhongxun's life as a lens to better understand how the Party works and why both Xi Zhongxun and Xi Jinping believe certain values, such as those of sacrifice and suffering for the greater good, are highly important. He describes how Xi Jinping was viewed positively by his father due to the idea that his son had “eaten more bitterness” than other children, even going as far as to state that Xi Jinping had “the makings of a premier.” Dr. Torigian describes how deeply involved Xi Zhongxun was during his time in the party on the United Front, ethnic policy in Tibet and Xinjiang, and policy towards Taiwan, and how, because of his father's dedication to these issues, Xi Jinping views them as personal unfinished business. Finally, Dr. Torigian describes how Xi Zhongxun's influence on his son has left Xi Jinping with a Hobbesian view of the world and with the idea that the Party is the best tool for helping China assert its rightful place in the world and secure its inevitable march towards greatness. Dr. Torigian is a research fellow at Stanford's Hoover History Lab, an associate professor at the School of International Service at American University in Washington, and a center associate of the Lieberthal-Rogel Center for Chinese Studies at the University of Michigan. Previously, he was a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Postdoctoral Fellow at Princeton-Harvard's China and the World Program, a Postdoctoral (and Predoctoral) Fellow at Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), a Predoctoral Fellow at George Washington University's Institute for Security and Conflict Studies, an IREX scholar affiliated with the Higher School of Economics in Moscow, a Fulbright Scholar at Fudan University in Shanghai, and a research associate at the Council on Foreign Relations. His research has also been supported by the Stanford Center on International Conflict and Negotiation, MIT's Center for International Studies, MIT International Science and Technology Initiatives, the Critical Language Scholarship program, and FLAS.
Alex sits down with Brian Chau of From the New World for an extended discussion on a range of topics, from building up UATX, to the Online Right, to Strauss on reactionary thought and esoteric writing. The pair tackle it all. This week, the focus shifts to a look at Hobbesian philosophy and Machiavellianism.
Can anyone be trusted anymore?Trust is the glue that holds our social world together, yet it's one of the most fragile bonds we have. In this episode of Hotel Bar Sessions, Rick, Leigh, and Devonya dive into the complexities of trust—what it means, how it functions, and why it's so easy to break but so difficult to restore. From everyday acts of trust, like believing the grocery store clerk's name tag, to the deep-seated political crisis of trust in institutions and democracy, the hosts explore trust as an epistemic, moral, and affective structure that shapes our relationships. Along the way, they discuss Derrida's take on truth-telling, the role of consistency and shared values, and why mistrust often seems more apparent than trust itself.But what happens when trust is shattered—whether between friends, citizens and their government, or even entire political factions? The conversation takes a sobering turn toward our current crisis of trust, examining how unmoored we feel when institutions, democratic processes, and even long-standing social contracts seem to be unraveling. Is trust something we can rebuild, or are we slipping toward a Hobbesian world of raw power? With humor, philosophical insight, and a healthy dose of frustration, the hosts wrestle with the question: how do we live together well when trust is in such short supply?Full episode notes available at this link:https://hotelbarpodcast.com/podcast/episode-171-trust-------------------If you enjoy Hotel Bar Sessions podcast, please be sure to subscribe and submit a rating/review! Better yet, you can support this podcast by signing up to be one of our Patrons at patreon.com/hotelbarsessions!Follow us on Twitter/X @hotelbarpodcast, on Blue Sky @hotelbarpodcast.bsky.social, on Facebook, on TikTok, and subscribe to our YouTube channel!
The boys drink and review a pilsner, then discuss the English philosopher, Thomas Hobbes.Hobbes is best known for his characterization of life in the state of nature as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."Pigweed sets the historical context with some dates and the very consequential events that occurred during Hobbes' life -- including the English civil war, the execution of Charles I, and the restoration.Hobbes wanted to know who gets to rule, under what circumstances, and within what limits. He starts by reflecting on human nature, which he says is a horrific state of war where people live in a constant state of fear. People can make agreements with their neighbors, but Hobbes says there's a need for a sovereign who makes sure people keep their agreements.In Hobbes's mind, the state of nature is so awful that any sovereign, no matter how awful, no matter how tyrannical, is better.
Welcome to What Matters Now, a weekly podcast exploring one key issue currently shaping Israel and the Jewish World, hosted by deputy editor Amanda Borschel-Dan. "Ex astrophysicist now Hobbesian realist." Not many people can pull off that social media profile moniker. In fact, there's likely only one: Prof. Gerald Steinberg, the founder of NGO Monitor. Today, Steinberg is an emeritus professor of Political Studies from Bar Ilan University. Among his realms of interest, he is an expert in human rights, soft power and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). He's delved so deeply into NGOs that in 2002 he founded one himself, the Institute for NGO Research, which is a recognized organization in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council since 2013. NGO Monitor states that it aims to promote accountability and discussion on the reports and activities of NGOs claiming to advance human rights and humanitarian agendas in Israel. Steinberg often targets the bigger "corporate" NGOs such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and a word that came up several times in our discussion is “hypocrisy.” But during our conversation, he also names several smaller groups that are going fair-minded work. So this week, we ask Prof. Gerald Steinberg, what matters now. What Matters Now podcasts are available for download on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode was produced by the Pod-Waves. IMAGE: Prof. Gerald Steinberg, the founder of NGO Monitor, at The Times of Israel's Jerusalem office, July 30, 2024. (Amanda Borschel-Dan/ToI)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
The US Congress just announced war on TikTok; while, in Europe, the EU declared war this week on Spotify and Apple. Elon Musk and Sam Altman have declared war over OpenAI. And everyone inside and outside Google are all war over Gemini. But That Was The Week's Keith Teare, Silicon Valley's most cheerful optimist, still believes in what he sees as the inevitably progressive arc of history away from the power of government. Meanwhile Bitcoin just hit $69,000. What could possibly go wrong?Keith Teare is a Founder and CEO at SignalRank Corporation. Previously he was Executive Chairman at Accelerated Digital Ventures Ltd - A UK-based global investment company focused on startups at all stages. He was also previously the founder at the Palo Alto incubator, Archimedes Labs. Archimedes was the original incubator for TechCrunch and since 2011 has invested, accelerated or incubated many Silicon Valley startups including Around (sold to Miro), Millicast (Sold to Dolby), InFarm, Miles, Quixey; M.dot (sold to GoDaddy); chat.center; Loop Surveys; DownTown and Sunshine. Teare has a track record as a serial entrepreneur with big ideas and has achieved significant returns for investors.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe
Make An Example Of Them. Nervous elites make a move on UFC Conor McGregor in Ireland. Hobbesian realities. Morrissey's "National Front Disco." Javier Milei's literal chainsaw rally in Argentina. Mitt Romney shows his true Uniparty colors, praises Biden as "charming." Describing the "illusion of choice" between the political parties in America. DeSantis cash to endorser Bob Vander Plaats. Manipulating the evangelicals of Iowa. The strange fall of Ann Coulter. Unloved globalists can never show their true face, authenticity out of the question for them. Studying the big bold hair of nationalist political leaders Trump, Milei and Geert Wilders. Notice a pattern? Oscar Wilde: "It is only shallow people who don't judge by appearances." With Great Listener Calls.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
John Gray, author of The New Leviathans: Thoughts After Liberalism, joins The Realignment. Marshall and John discuss why he believes Hobbesian political realism is the only way of understanding the world of the 2020s, how faith in a liberal, well managed future peaked in the 1990s, why history could never truly "end," and how current events from Ukraine, Gaza, and the Pacific reflect could use a more self-aware, realistic, and disabused ethical approach. Subscribe to The Realignment to access our exclusive Q&A episodes and support the show: https://realignment.supercast.com/REALIGNMENT NEWSLETTER: https://therealignment.substack.com/PURCHASE BOOKS AT OUR BOOKSHOP: https://bookshop.org/shop/therealignmentEmail Us: realignmentpod@gmail.comFoundation for American Innovation: https://www.thefai.org/posts/lincoln-becomes-fai
In this episode, we are joined by Dr. Megan Hyska to discuss her work on propaganda. She takes us through the history of the term propaganda, what makes propaganda a distinctly political concept, and how propaganda helps create or inhibit group agency. She shows why thinking that assumes propaganda can only work by manipulating our irrationality fails to help us see that propaganda can be effective even when it does not trick or deceive us. This is a great episode for those of you interested in the relationships between effective propaganda and social power. Also if you are Hobbesian just wait until you hear what Owen has to say!leftofphilosophy.com | @leftofphilmeganhyska.comReferences:Christopher Lewis and Adaner Usmani, “The Injustice of Under-Policing in America,” American Journal of Law and Equality 2 (2022): 85-106Megan Hyska, (2021) “Propaganda, Irrationality, and Group Agency,” in The Routledge Handbook of Political Epistemology, eds. M. Hannon & J. de Ridder: 226-235.Megan Hyska, (2023) “Against Irrationalism in the Theory of Propaganda,” Journal of the American Philosophical Association, 9(2), 303-317.W.E.B. Du Bois, (1926) “Criteria for Negro Art” http://www.webdubois.org/dbCriteriaNArt.htmlAmia Srinivasan, (2016) “Philosophy and Ideology,” Theoria: An International Journal for Theory, History, and Foundations of Science 31(3): 371-380.Music:Vintage Memories by Schematist | schematist.bandcamp.com
David Gordon explores how Abraham Lincoln's stated view on secession was fundamentally Hobbesian, cynical, and violent. Original Article: "If at First You Don't Secede . . ." This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.
David Gordon explores how Abraham Lincoln's stated view on secession was fundamentally Hobbesian, cynical, and violent. Original Article: "If at First You Don't Secede . . ." This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.
When Thomas Hobbes published Leviathan in the 17th century, he argued that the state has absolute authority over its citizens. The principal that the state's monopoly of institutionalised violence keeps the peace is now widely accepted – but is this true, or is it the checks and balances on that power prevent conflict? Gerard Roland talks to Tim Phillips.
Christopher Hallenbrook and I discuss what he calls the "Hobbesian psychology" of the US gun debate.
Hobbesian Trap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobbesian_trap?wprov=sfti1 Positivism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism?wprov=sfti1 Transvaluation of All Values: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transvaluation_of_values?wprov=sfti1 Infinite Game: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_and_Infinite_Games?wprov=sfti1 OODA Loop: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop?wprov=sfti1 The Sorcerer's Apprentice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorcerer's_Apprentice?wprov=sfti1 Political Ontology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ontology?wprov=sfti1 Air gap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_gap_(networking)?wprov=sfti1
First Entry In A New Genre Order No Rights Reserved Ever
Professor Sheldon Solomon is the Ross Professor for Interdisciplinary Studies at Skidmore College, New York. Professor Sheldon is one of the true pioneers in the fields of social and evolutionary psychology. Best known for developing terror management theory (TMT), along with Jess Greenberg and Tom Pyszczynski, Sheldon and colleagues have revolutionised our understanding of how humans deal with their own sense of mortality and the often destructive effects of ‘death denial' on individual and collective behaviour. An engaging speaker and raconteur, in more recent years Sheldon has turned his attention to how death anxiety might be related to the anthropocene and the insatiable appetite of humans for more, whether that be cheap energy or lethal consumption. In this conversation we talk about why death denial is so pervasive, evidence underpinning TMT, death and the Hobbesian imperative in global politics, hope without optimism, Epicurus, Heidegger and much, much more. Solomon can be found here: https://www.skidmore.edu/psychology/faculty/solomon.php We discussed: ‘Death Denial in the Anthropocene' In the book: K. Zywert & Stephen Quilley (eds.), Health in the Anthropocene: Living Well on a Finite Planet (University of Toronto Press, 2020): https://utorontopress.com/9781487524142/health-in-the-anthropocene/ The Worm at the Core: On The Role of Death in Life (with Jeff Greenberg and Tom Pyszczynski) (Penguin/Random House, 2015): https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/170217/the-worm-at-the-core-by-sheldon-solomon-jeff-greenberg-and-tom-pyszczynski/ Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death (Free Press/Macmillan, 1973): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Denial_of_Death Flight from Death, 2003 documentary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_from_Death
You Brought The Trick Room To The Trick House You Tried To Trap Hobbes In The Hobbesian Trap House Y'all Steady Tryna Drown The Shark Ain't Gon' Do Nothin' But Piss Me Off You Wouldn't Like Me When I'm Hangry And What You Call Your World Looks Like A Snack To My Boundless Appetite
This is a segment of episode 336 of Last Born In The Wilderness “All Cops Are Monsters: The Horror Of Police w/ Travis Linnemann.” Listen to the full episode: https://www.lastborninthewilderness.com/episodes/travis-linnemann Purchase a copy of 'The Horror of Police' from Bookshop or University of Minnesota Press: http://bit.ly/3GEmoLn / http://bit.ly/3EVW3ah Author Travis Linnemann joins me to discuss his recently released book 'The Horror of Police,' published by University of Minnesota Press. A good amount of ink has been spilt on the subject of policing — its historical origins; the oppressive and repressive role police play in the day-to-day lives of various marginalized communities; how “copaganda” shapes our collective perceptions of police and police work; and the numerous radical, reformist, and reactionary movements that have risen up against, or in defense of, police across the United States and the world. While Travis Linnemann examines these various subjects and perspectives in 'The Horror of Police,' he does so by delving into the ontological framework police operate within in by “drawing on the language and texts of horror fiction,” philosophy, and police procedurals in film and television. The abject stark horror police invoke, particularly when one recognizes that they are not the “monster fighters” they claim to be, but in fact monsters themselves, is to gaze into the Real — to see, unvarnished and naked, the brutal order police protect and uphold, by whatever means necessary. It is not merely a question of training or militarization or funding, while those individual issues certainly play a part. Police, as overt brute force agents of the liberal-democratic order, serve a crucial function in the collective psyche: as the “bad men” that keep the “other bad men from the door,” to use the words of Detective Rust Cohle from True Detective. As numerous media depictions of cops communicate and demonstrate, in order for police “protect and serve” society, they must occasionally (or frequently) step outside the law to protect and uphold the social order. Because, if the “thin blue line” were to break, civilization as we know it would collapse and descend into chaos — the Hobbesian state of nature would reign supreme. This is the ontology of the police and the order they protect. But, the horror we feel as we gaze into the Real may elicit a different view. It is, again, not that cops are the “monster fighters” they claim to be, but instead monsters themselves. Travis Linnemann is associate professor of sociology at Kansas State University. Working in the area of cultural criminology, Travis's research focuses on the wars on drugs and terror, US police violence and the ways that crime, violence and disorder are imagined and represented. He is author of 'Meth Wars: Police, Media, Power' and 'The Horror of Police'; coauthor of 'Media and Crime in the U.S.'; and coeditor of 'Ghost Criminology: The Afterlife of Crime and Punishment' and the journal 'Crime, Media, Culture.' WEBSITE: https://www.lastborninthewilderness.com PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/lastborninthewilderness DONATE: https://www.paypal.me/lastbornpodcast / https://venmo.com/LastBornPodcast BOOK LIST: https://bookshop.org/shop/lastbornpodcast EPISODE 300: https://lastborninthewilderness.bandcamp.com BOOK: http://bit.ly/ORBITgr ATTACK & DETHRONE: https://anchor.fm/adgodcast DROP ME A LINE: Call (208) 918-2837 or http://bit.ly/LBWfiledrop EVERYTHING ELSE: https://linktr.ee/patterns.of.behavior
Author Travis Linnemann joins me to discuss his recently released book 'The Horror of Police,' published by University of Minnesota Press. A good amount of ink has been spilt on the subject of policing — its historical origins; the oppressive and repressive role police play in the day-to-day lives of various marginalized communities; how “copaganda” shapes our collective perceptions of police and police work; and the numerous radical, reformist, and reactionary movements that have risen up against, or in defense of, police across the United States and the world. While Travis Linnemann examines these various subjects and perspectives in 'The Horror of Police,' he does so by delving into the ontological framework police operate within in by “drawing on the language and texts of horror fiction,” philosophy, and police procedurals in film and television. The abject stark horror police invoke, particularly when one recognizes that they are not the “monster fighters” they claim to be, but in fact monsters themselves, is to gaze into the Real — to see, unvarnished and naked, the brutal order police protect and uphold, by whatever means necessary. It is not merely a question of training or militarization or funding, while those individual issues certainly play a part. Police, as overt brute force agents of the liberal-democratic order, serve a crucial function in the collective psyche: as the “bad men” that keep the “other bad men from the door,” to use the words of Detective Rust Cohle from True Detective. As numerous media depictions of cops communicate and demonstrate, in order for police “protect and serve” society, they must occasionally (or frequently) step outside the law to protect and uphold the social order. Because, if the “thin blue line” were to break, civilization as we know it would collapse and descend into chaos — the Hobbesian state of nature would reign supreme. This is the ontology of the police and the order they protect. But, the horror we feel as we gaze into the Real may elicit a different view. It is, again, not that cops are the “monster fighters” they claim to be, but instead monsters themselves. Travis Linnemann is associate professor of sociology at Kansas State University. Working in the area of cultural criminology, Travis's research focuses on the wars on drugs and terror, US police violence and the ways that crime, violence and disorder are imagined and represented. He is author of 'Meth Wars: Police, Media, Power' and 'The Horror of Police'; coauthor of 'Media and Crime in the U.S.'; and coeditor of 'Ghost Criminology: The Afterlife of Crime and Punishment' and the journal 'Crime, Media, Culture.' Episode Notes: - Purchase a copy of 'The Horror of Police' from Bookshop or University of Minnesota Press: http://bit.ly/3GEmoLn / http://bit.ly/3EVW3ah - Learn more about Travis's work: https://www.travislinnemann.com - Follow him on Twitter: https://twitter.com/crimemann - The song featured is “B538” by Nick Vander from the album Kodama (Nowaki's Selection), used with permission by the artist. Listen and purchase at: https://nickvander.bandcamp.com WEBSITE: https://www.lastborninthewilderness.com PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/lastborninthewilderness DONATE: https://www.paypal.me/lastbornpodcast / https://venmo.com/LastBornPodcast BOOK LIST: https://bookshop.org/shop/lastbornpodcast EPISODE 300: https://lastborninthewilderness.bandcamp.com BOOK: http://bit.ly/ORBITgr ATTACK & DETHRONE: https://anchor.fm/adgodcast DROP ME A LINE: Call (208) 918-2837 or http://bit.ly/LBWfiledrop EVERYTHING ELSE: https://linktr.ee/patterns.of.behavior
In this episode, G3 welcomes the one and only Lundy Wright of Weiss to talk about all of the talk around a Fed Pivot. Has it started? When will it start? What are the signs that a pivot may be coming? What does a pivot even mean? G3 checks in with Lundy to get his thoughts on these and several other related issues. And after the discussion is over, instead of pivoting out of your chair, please stick around to hear important disclosures at the end of the episode. Timestamps:● Was the messaging from the last FOMC meeting incongruent? [1:43]● What is the so-called Fed Pivot anyway? [4:24]● How much does Thursday's CPI print matter to the Fed at this point? [8:43]● Lundy's view on why rallies in risk should be faded.? [13:20]● The Hobbesian choice between a “doom loop” of tightening rates or capitulating to another round of QE to finance America's growing deficit? [18:40]● What does “logical hopscotch” mean? [21:05]● Who is Nick Timiraos and why is he worth paying attention to? [24:17]Disclosures: This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. You should consult your own advisers regarding business, legal, tax, or other matters concerning investments. Any health-related information shared on the podcast is not intended as medical advice or for use in self-diagnosis or treatment. Please consult a qualified healthcare professional before acting upon any health-related information on the podcast. Weiss has no control over information at any external site hyperlinked in this Post. Weiss makes no representation concerning and is not responsible for the quality, content, nature, or reliability of any hyperlinked site and has included hyperlinks only as a convenience. The inclusion of any external hyperlink does not imply any endorsement, investigation, verification, or ongoing monitoring by Weiss of any information in any hyperlinked site. In no event shall Weiss be responsible for your use of a hyperlinked site. This is not intended to be an offer or solicitation of any security. Please visit www.gweiss.com to review related disclosures and learn more about Weiss.
“All my life I've heard spirited advocacy for the dialogue between the Church and the wider culture, but this call has come, almost exclusively, from the Church and not from the culture,” Fr. Robert Barron said in his talk entitled “From Correlation to Assimilation: A New Model for the Church-Culture Dialogue” given to the students and faculty of Christendom College on April 20. “It is this one-way quality of the conversation that is, I submit to you, problematic.”Fr. Robert Barron, a prominent theologian and podcasting priest, is one of the world's great and most innovative teachers of Catholicism. His global media ministry called Word on Fire has a simple but revolutionary mission—to evangelize the culture. His numerous books and essays serve as critical educational and inspirational tools for seminarians, priests, parishioners and young people worldwide.Barron highlights problems within American culture as well its redeemable strengths. Problems which the Church encounters in communicating with American culture include an Hobbesian individualism, the notion of freedom as choice, and the privatization of religion.
Consider the larger pattern. Putin invades Ukraine. Trump refuses to concede and promotes his Big Lie. Rightwing politicians in America and Europe fuel white Christian nationalism. Rightwing television pundits encourage racism and spur bigotry toward immigrants. Police kill innocent Black people with impunity. Powerful men sexually harass and abuse women. Politicians target LGBTQ youth. CEOs who are raking in record profits and pay give workers meager wages and fire them for unionizing. The richest men in the world own the most influential media platforms. Billionaires make large campaign donations (bribes) so lawmakers won't raise their taxes.All are abuses of power. All are occurring at a time when power is concentrated in fewer hands. Throughout history, the central struggle of civilization has been against brutality. The state of nature is a continuous war in which only the fittest survive — where lives are “nasty, brutish, and short,” in the words of English philosopher Thomas Hobbes. Without norms, rules, and laws preventing the stronger from attacking or exploiting the weaker, none of us is safe. We all live in fear. Even the most powerful live in fear of being attacked or deposed.Civilization is the opposite of this state of nature. A civil society doesn't allow the strong to brutalize the weak. Our job — the responsibility of all who seek a decent society — is to move as far from a state of nature as possible. Certain inequalities of power are expected, even in a civil society. Some people are bigger and stronger than others. Some are quicker of mind and body. Some have more forceful personalities. Some have fewer scruples. Some inequalities of income and wealth may be necessary to encourage hard work and inventiveness, from which everyone benefits.But when inequalities become too wide, they invite abuses. Without laws and norms that protect the weaker, the stronger will abuse their positions of power. Such abuses invite further abuses, until society degenerates into a Hobbesian survival of the most powerful. People with great wealth or celebrity; people who occupy high positions in government, business, the media, or the church; people whose race, ethnicity, religion, or gender is dominant; people who command vast armies — such people may be tempted to use their power to demean, harm, or even annihilate weaker people. Unless they are stopped, an entire society — even the world — can descend into chaos. Every time the stronger bully the weaker, the social fabric is tested. If bullying is not contained, the fabric unwinds.Some posit a moral equivalence between those who seek social justice and those who want to protect individual liberty, between “left” and “right.” But there is no moral equivalence between bullies and the bullied, between tyranny and democracy, between brutality and decency — no “balance” between social justice and individual liberty. It is a false equivalence and a false choice. No individual can be free in a society devoid of justice. There can be no liberty where brutality reigns. The struggle for social justice is the most basic struggle of all because it defines how far a civilization has come from a Hobbesian survival of the most powerful. Defending voting rights or LGBTQ rights or women's rights is not the moral equivalent of attacking them. Coming to the assistance of refugee children is not morally equivalent to putting them in cages. Prosecuting police who kill innocent Black people is not one side of an equally respectable stance defending the freedom of police to kill innocent Black people. Fighting racism is not of equal moral value to fueling racism. Seeking stronger safety nets for those in need is not on an equal moral footing with seeking to unravel safety nets. Championing stronger unions is not just the other side of pushing for weaker unions. Demanding higher taxes on billionaires is not morally equivalent to demanding lower taxes on them.We inhabit a society and a world growing more unequal, in which political and economic power is becoming ever more concentrated. To claim that “both sides” — both the more powerful and the weaker — have the same moral standing is to avert one's eyes to this reality. Lobbyists for large corporations, publicists for the wealthy, lawmakers for the privileged, pundits for the powerful, celebrity peddlers of racism and xenophobia — none deserves equal space in the public square to those fighting against abuses of the powerful. The powerful already have the largest megaphones and the deepest pockets. To allow the richest to own the means by which we receive the truth is to enable oligarchy. To allow the worst demagogues free rein is to open wide the gates to tyranny. Our duty is to stop brutality. Our responsibility is to hold the powerful accountable. Our moral obligation is to protect the vulnerable. Putin must be stopped. Trump must be held accountable. Rightwing politicians who encourage white Christian nationalism must be condemned. Celebrity pundits who fuel racism and xenophobia must be denounced and defunded. Police who kill innocent Black people must be brought to justice. Powerful men who sexually harass or abuse women must be prosecuted. CEOs who treat their employees badly must be exposed and censored. Billionaires who bribe lawmakers to cut their taxes or exempt them from regulations must be penalized, and lawmakers who accept such bribes must be sanctioned. Norms and laws must prevent such brutality. This is what civilization demands. This is why the fight is worth it. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe
Corruption and ineffectiveness are often expected of public servants in developing countries. However, some groups within these states are distinctly more effective and public oriented than the rest. Why? Patchwork Leviathan (Princeton UP, 2020) explains how a few spectacularly effective state organizations manage to thrive amid general institutional weakness and succeed against impressive odds. Drawing on the Hobbesian image of the state as Leviathan, Erin Metz McDonnell argues that many seemingly weak states actually have a wide range of administrative capacities. Such states are in fact patchworks sewn loosely together from scarce resources into the semblance of unity. McDonnell demonstrates that when the human, cognitive, and material resources of bureaucracy are rare, it is critically important how they are distributed. Too often, scarce bureaucratic resources are scattered throughout the state, yielding little effect. McDonnell reveals how a sufficient concentration of resources clustered within particular pockets of a state can be transformative, enabling distinctively effective organizations to emerge from a sea of ineffectiveness. Patchwork Leviathan offers a comprehensive analysis of successful statecraft in institutionally challenging environments, drawing on cases from contemporary Ghana and Nigeria, mid-twentieth-century Kenya and Brazil, and China in the early twentieth century. Based on nearly two years of pioneering fieldwork in West Africa, this incisive book explains how these highly effective pockets differ from the Western bureaucracies on which so much state and organizational theory is based, providing a fresh answer to why well-funded global capacity-building reforms fail—and how they can do better. Sebastián Rojas Cabal is a Ph.D. student in the Sociology Department at Princeton University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network
Corruption and ineffectiveness are often expected of public servants in developing countries. However, some groups within these states are distinctly more effective and public oriented than the rest. Why? Patchwork Leviathan (Princeton UP, 2020) explains how a few spectacularly effective state organizations manage to thrive amid general institutional weakness and succeed against impressive odds. Drawing on the Hobbesian image of the state as Leviathan, Erin Metz McDonnell argues that many seemingly weak states actually have a wide range of administrative capacities. Such states are in fact patchworks sewn loosely together from scarce resources into the semblance of unity. McDonnell demonstrates that when the human, cognitive, and material resources of bureaucracy are rare, it is critically important how they are distributed. Too often, scarce bureaucratic resources are scattered throughout the state, yielding little effect. McDonnell reveals how a sufficient concentration of resources clustered within particular pockets of a state can be transformative, enabling distinctively effective organizations to emerge from a sea of ineffectiveness. Patchwork Leviathan offers a comprehensive analysis of successful statecraft in institutionally challenging environments, drawing on cases from contemporary Ghana and Nigeria, mid-twentieth-century Kenya and Brazil, and China in the early twentieth century. Based on nearly two years of pioneering fieldwork in West Africa, this incisive book explains how these highly effective pockets differ from the Western bureaucracies on which so much state and organizational theory is based, providing a fresh answer to why well-funded global capacity-building reforms fail—and how they can do better. Sebastián Rojas Cabal is a Ph.D. student in the Sociology Department at Princeton University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
Corruption and ineffectiveness are often expected of public servants in developing countries. However, some groups within these states are distinctly more effective and public oriented than the rest. Why? Patchwork Leviathan (Princeton UP, 2020) explains how a few spectacularly effective state organizations manage to thrive amid general institutional weakness and succeed against impressive odds. Drawing on the Hobbesian image of the state as Leviathan, Erin Metz McDonnell argues that many seemingly weak states actually have a wide range of administrative capacities. Such states are in fact patchworks sewn loosely together from scarce resources into the semblance of unity. McDonnell demonstrates that when the human, cognitive, and material resources of bureaucracy are rare, it is critically important how they are distributed. Too often, scarce bureaucratic resources are scattered throughout the state, yielding little effect. McDonnell reveals how a sufficient concentration of resources clustered within particular pockets of a state can be transformative, enabling distinctively effective organizations to emerge from a sea of ineffectiveness. Patchwork Leviathan offers a comprehensive analysis of successful statecraft in institutionally challenging environments, drawing on cases from contemporary Ghana and Nigeria, mid-twentieth-century Kenya and Brazil, and China in the early twentieth century. Based on nearly two years of pioneering fieldwork in West Africa, this incisive book explains how these highly effective pockets differ from the Western bureaucracies on which so much state and organizational theory is based, providing a fresh answer to why well-funded global capacity-building reforms fail—and how they can do better. Sebastián Rojas Cabal is a Ph.D. student in the Sociology Department at Princeton University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology
Corruption and ineffectiveness are often expected of public servants in developing countries. However, some groups within these states are distinctly more effective and public oriented than the rest. Why? Patchwork Leviathan (Princeton UP, 2020) explains how a few spectacularly effective state organizations manage to thrive amid general institutional weakness and succeed against impressive odds. Drawing on the Hobbesian image of the state as Leviathan, Erin Metz McDonnell argues that many seemingly weak states actually have a wide range of administrative capacities. Such states are in fact patchworks sewn loosely together from scarce resources into the semblance of unity. McDonnell demonstrates that when the human, cognitive, and material resources of bureaucracy are rare, it is critically important how they are distributed. Too often, scarce bureaucratic resources are scattered throughout the state, yielding little effect. McDonnell reveals how a sufficient concentration of resources clustered within particular pockets of a state can be transformative, enabling distinctively effective organizations to emerge from a sea of ineffectiveness. Patchwork Leviathan offers a comprehensive analysis of successful statecraft in institutionally challenging environments, drawing on cases from contemporary Ghana and Nigeria, mid-twentieth-century Kenya and Brazil, and China in the early twentieth century. Based on nearly two years of pioneering fieldwork in West Africa, this incisive book explains how these highly effective pockets differ from the Western bureaucracies on which so much state and organizational theory is based, providing a fresh answer to why well-funded global capacity-building reforms fail—and how they can do better. Sebastián Rojas Cabal is a Ph.D. student in the Sociology Department at Princeton University.
Author and economist Germinal G. Van joins Darnell & Joel to discuss the economics and politics of Africa. Their conversation covers the following topics: Principles of classical liberals Democratic vs aristocratic systems Wealth redistribution Role of constitutions Colonization of settlement vs exploitation Lockean vs Hobbesian political philosophies Pan-Africanism https://linktr.ee/sixcentsreport Support us at buymeacoffee.com/SixCentsReport Produced by Madden Mitchell Media Song from our intro: Sho Baraka - Pedantic Related Episodes: #149 & #132 References: Classical Liberalism in Africa: A Manifesto The Case for Free-Market Liberalism in Africa Black Love White Lies Germinal G. Van contact info: https://www.germinalgvan.com/ YouTube Instagram LinkedIn Give us your two cents via: Facebook Twitter sixcentsreport@gmail.com
McConnell Center Director Dr. Gary Gregg and Dr. Susan Hanssen, Associate Professor of History and Chair of the History Department at the University of Dallas, explore the roots of church and state in American order. The two discuss the history of 17th century Britain and the English Civil War, Hobbesian and Lockean political theory, and more. https://mcconnellcenter.libsyn.com/58-the-roots-of-american-order-the-constitution-of-church-and-state-with-dr-susan-hanssen
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: On Stateless Societies, published by Martin Sustrik on December 27, 2021 on LessWrong. Acemoglu & Robinson in their book The Narrow Corridor use Tiv people as an example of a stateless society. The statelessness among Tiv was achieved by penalizing or eliminating those who grew successful or powerful enough to become an eventual condensation point for creation of a state. The traditional mechanism for doing so was accusing such people of witchcraft. This, on one hand, left Tiv without the state and the associated oppression, but, on the other hand, kept them dirt-poor. That sounds all right on the theoretical level, but what made me really visualize the process was a story about how Shaka Zulu, the builder of the Zulu Kingdom, broke the power of stateless elements in the traditional Zulu society. When a hammerhead crane flew over his kraal and a porcupine wandered into it, when a crow perched on a fence and began to utter human words he summoned a team of witch doctors led by a woman called Nobela: The Zulus were lined up and Nobela and here associates began "smelling out" the witches who had brought on the evil omens. They picked on prosperous people. One had grown rich through frugality. Another had put cattle manure on his lands as fertilizer, producing a bountiful harvest much greater than his neighbors'. Yet another was a fine stock breeder who had picked the best bulls and taken great care of his stock and as a result had seen a prodigious expansion of his herds. Shaka took offense, accused the witch doctors of false accusations and demanded that two of them must die in compensation. The witch doctors panicked and asked Shaka for protection. He agreed, conditional on that they "won't cheat any more". That way he broke the power of the institution of witch doctors. Another interesting data point about stateless societies is this paper by Lowes, Nunn, Robinson and Weigel (yes, the same Robinson as in The Narrow Corridor book). In turns out that in Congo there is a set of tribes which are ethnically and culturally pretty homogeneous, except that while all of them are historically stateless, one tribe managed to establish a state. The researchers made the people from this area play different economic games and find out that people with a state are less cooperative than stateless people. This is a single study and may eventually prove to be non-reproducible, but do have a look at the paper: The methodology is pretty rigorous and the experiments are cleverly devised. Moreover, I am inclined to believe the results just because how genuinely confused the researchers seem to be. (They have done the experiment with the expectation that people with the state will be more cooperative.) The above has challenged my implicit assumption that stateless societies are in the permanent Hobbesian "warre". That they are, basically, failed states. But from the above it looks like that stateless societies aren't kept around by the failure to coordinate. In fact, they survive by actively cooperating to prevent the hierarchical structures to emerge. From that point of view, it's rather the state that is the result of coordination failure. For whatever reason the traditional mechanisms of coordination suddenly break and the resulting societal collapse is what we refer to as a "state". In should be said that given how oppressive many early states have been it's hard to blame the Tiv for wanting to avoid it. The approach, interestingly, proved useful also in the colonial era. From Wikipedia: These socio-political arrangements caused great frustration to British attempts to incorporate the population into Colonial Nigeria and establish an administration on the lower Benue. The strategy of indirect rule, which the British felt to be highly successful in regards to ruling over the Hausa and F...
It's a Hobbesian war of all against all as CNN and Fox News do battle, Trump fulminates over immigration, and Hamas makes its move. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
It's a Hobbesian war of all against all as CNN and Fox News do battle, Trump fulminates over immigration, and Hamas makes its move. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
© 2020-2026 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
