Podcasts about ideologically

Carney claiming that he's looking out for safety - he is not.Device level enforcement,Buying planes from Italy,Ideologically captured government,Canada preparing to keep the straight of hormuz open?––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––Music: If I Had a Chicken - Kevin MacLeod • If I Had a Chicken – Kevin MacLeod https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fewLXi6GATM - Royalty Free Music––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––Sign Up for the Full ShowLocals (daily video)Sample Showshttps://canadapoli2.locals.com/ Spotify https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/canadapoli/subscribePrivate Full podcast audio https://canadapoli.com/feed/canadapoliblue/Buy subscriptions here (daily video and audio podcast):https://canadapoli.cm/canadapoli-subscriptions/Youtubehttps://www.youtube.com/c/CanadaPoli/videosMe on Telegramhttps://t.me/realCanadaPoliMe on Rumblehttps://rumble.com/user/CanadaPoli Me on Odysseyhttps://odysee.com/@CanadaPoli:f Me on Bitchutehttps://www.bitchute.com/channel/l55JBxrgT3Hf/ Podcast RSShttps://anchor.fm/s/e57706d8/podcast/rsshttps://LinkRoll.co Go here to discuss the show without algorithmic censorship. See you there!

1. Election Results & Significance Ken Paxton wins decisively with roughly 64% vs 36% (a ~28-point margin). This is described as: A major upset for an incumbent A “sea change” in Republican politics Cornyn had: 24 years in the Senate Significant institutional power and funding Despite heavy financial backing (over $100M+ spent, mostly for Cornyn), Paxton wins overwhelmingly. 2. Why Paxton Won Several factors are highlighted: ✅ Anti-establishment sentiment The race was a: “Conservative grassroots vs establishment Republican” Voters favored a more ideological, outsider-style candidate. ✅ Trump’s influence Donald Trump endorsed Paxton (late in the race). The hosts argue: The endorsement boosted Paxton’s margin But Paxton was already leading in polls ✅ Perception of ideological purity Paxton is: “The most conservative attorney general in the country” This appealed to Republican primary voters. 3. The Role of Money The race becomes: One of the most expensive Senate primaries ever Despite: Massive spending (mostly pro-Cornyn) Outcome shows:

Last time we spoke about the battle Yaoyi. Japan pushed hard into Hubei with a plan: surround the main Chinese forces and seize Yichang, hoping to use it to strike at Chongqing. At first, the fighting was chaotic and punishing. The Chinese side tried to hold the line and disrupt the advance, and they even managed setbacks for the Japanese, pushing back, retaking key ground, and hitting supply and positioning weaknesses. But victory came with a cost: commanders were lost, and every gain was hard-won. Still, the battle didn't unfold as a clean Chinese retreat or a simple Japanese win. As Japanese units shifted and tested for openings, the Chinese forces adjusted—delaying, regrouping, and fighting to keep their formations from being completely trapped. Eventually, Japan managed to break through at critical moments, especially through crossings and maneuvers that the Chinese had not fully sealed off. In the end, Japan succeeded in taking Yichang, but it didn't achieve the decisive annihilation it wanted.    #201 The New Fourth Army Incident and the Strained United Front Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. After the catastrophe of the early 1930s, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) entered the war against Japan in a political mood that was both hopeful and wary: it wanted to be seen as a genuine national leader of resistance, yet it also feared being absorbed—or destroyed—by the Guomindang (KMT) state it had spent years battling. That tension became the organizing principle of the war's early years. The turning point came from the Xi'an Incident in December 1936, which forced a new calculation in Nationalist politics. In the months that followed, agreements between KMT and CCP representatives were publicly proclaimed in August and September 1937, after the Shanghai fighting began. Under these arrangements, the CCP accepted constraints that in peacetime would have looked like surrender: it pledged to strive for Sun Yixian's "Three People's Principles," to end its former policies of armed revolt and sovietization, to abolish the soviet government, and to discontinue both the term "Red Army" and the expectation that its forces would operate outside central control. Communist troops would be treated as part of the national military under KMT command, and the revolution's old administrative structures were to be formally dismantled. In return, the KMT offered the CCP something just as important: space to exist publicly and politically. Liaison offices were permitted in key cities; the CCP was allowed to publish the New China Daily; and it could nominate representatives to KMT advisory bodies. Civil rights were extended—political prisoners were released—and subsidies were established to help cover administrative and military expenses in "reintegrated" areas and territories. The war thus transformed the tactical reality on the ground: the CCP could not treat the KMT as an immediate enemy, but it also could not afford to become politically passive. It had to learn how to fight Japan while building legitimacy fast enough to survive the next phase. In the first year and a half, the Party Center focused on three problems that kept returning in different forms: how the "united front" would be defined—especially what the CCP's relationship to the National government should be; how to coordinate military strategy and tactics with Nationalist units without losing control of its own operations; and how leadership should be consolidated, particularly for Mao Zedong in a party that still contained rival centers of authority. These disputes mattered not just for doctrine but for survival, because the CCP's autonomy was constantly being tested by the very alliance that was supposed to protect it. Mao's own approach to the united front combined cooperation with a refusal to surrender independence. Publicly, the CCP praised Jiang Jieshi and the KMT and promised unity, but it did so in language that was deliberately broad. In private (and in internal party debates), Mao treated unity as conditional: the CCP must not split the united front, but it also must not be "bound hand and foot." The strategic idea that emerged was political initiative under constraints—fighting when it could plausibly claim justification, keeping enough restraint that the CCP would not appear self-interested or anti-national, and deciding for itself when to engage and when to withdraw. This balance was reinforced through military reorganization. In August–September 1937, CCP forces were reorganized as the Eighth Route Army (8RA), with roughly 30,000 men drawn from Long March survivors, local forces, and new recruits. The 8RA was divided into three divisions: the 115th, 120th, and 129th, commanded by Lin Biao, He Long, and Liu Bocheng respectively. Shortly after the war began, the National government also authorized a second major Communist force: the New Fourth Army (N4A), to operate in central China. Its core came from those left behind when the Long March began in 1934—small groups surviving in difficult conditions against continuing KMT pressure. Officially authorized at 12,000, it took months to reach that strength. Nominally commanded by Ye Ting, actual military and political control rested with Xiang Ying and Chen Yi. From the start, then, the CCP's wartime "integration" with the National system coexisted with a clear effort to preserve internal control. Ideologically, the CCP worked to make its revolutionary program compatible—at least in appearance—with a national resistance coalition. On the New Democracy demonstrated how this strategy operated on two levels. In KMT-controlled spaces, its language could be read as aligning with liberal-democratic expectations: public participation, multi-party governance, legally protected civil rights. But in CCP-controlled areas, the same text could carry sharper class-based and authoritarian implications. The Party wanted a united front that broadened support without becoming committed to Nationalist limits on how society itself might be reorganized after victory. Meanwhile, even as the rhetoric of unity rose, the CCP worried about something more dangerous than military setbacks: the possibility that the KMT might accommodate Japan. Late 1939 and early 1940 made this fear harder to dismiss. Japan pursued collaboration with Wang Jingwei, culminating in the establishment of a "reorganized" government at Nanjing in March 1940. At the same time, Japanese intermediaries sought approaches to Chiang Kai-shek himself—an effort that the CCP tracked closely as a sign that peace negotiations might be possible even when battlefield conditions looked grim. Propaganda was involved, but the anxiety was real: if Japan and the Nationalists reached an arrangement, the CCP's whole wartime legitimacy-building effort could collapse overnight. As a result, the united front was interpreted inside the CCP not as a permanent coalition with the KMT, but as a flexible strategy with a cardinal purpose: to prevent peace between Japan and the Nationalists. Mao's position on the united front reflected this. For him, the alliance was meant to suspend the possibility of a China–Japan settlement, not to end the CCP's separate identity. The CCP could participate in a reconstituted national framework—possibly even a "democratic republic"—to gain legality and influence, but it should remain politically and, where possible, physically separate from the KMT. By 1939, however, the practical meaning of "flexibility" collided with reality. What had seemed, to some observers, like an unusually cordial entente began to fade. The KMT Central Committee adopted measures early in 1939 aimed at restricting Communist expansion, and armed clashes increased through the summer and continued into autumn and winter—especially around North China Communist bases. The period of rising conflict was later labeled by the CCP as the "first anti-Communist upsurge" (roughly spanning December 1939 into March 1940), but the crucial point was that both sides viewed each confrontation as a test of legal rights, moral legitimacy, and control over territory. Strategically, the CCP understood the KMT's effort as an attempt to check unauthorized growth of Communist armed power and to recover areas where influence had already slipped away—either to the Communists or, by indirect effect, to Japan. The KMT emphasized its traditional legal authority; the CCP countered with its claim to an "evolutionary" moral right to challenge the government's legitimacy. In practice, the conflict took the form of increasingly systematic military pressure, including a blockade around the Shen–Gan–Ning region. By this point, the blockade involved large numbers of troops (on the order of hundreds of thousands), halting Communist expansion and disrupting direct contact with other Communist forces farther afield, even as fighting flared along border zones and around vulnerable points in the Communist defensive perimeter. So, by the edge of the "middle years," the wartime alliance had not broken into open civil war—but it had also stopped being secure. The united front survived, yet it operated under strain: its language of cooperation continued, while "friction" between partners hardened into a central feature of the resistance struggle. Transition into the war's second phase began in early 1939, shaped by the stalemate Mao had already anticipated at the sixth plenum in late 1938. Mao argued that during this prolonged "new stage" the forces of resistance—above all, Communist-led forces—would strengthen. The overall result, however, was mixed. In Shandong and Central China, new Communist bases did take shape. But across much of North China, Japanese consolidation cost the resistance heavily in manpower and population. Base-area economies suffered serious strain, and the peasantry endured hardships more severe than at any earlier point. This stalemate had two main dimensions. The first was the growing resentment of the Nationalists toward Communist expansion—resentment made especially sharp by their own losses. As the Nationalists were driven out of regions that had previously provided them their greatest wealth and power in the central and lower Yangtze basin, they also lost the "cream" of their armies. In contrast, the CCP was spreading through the wider countryside behind Japanese lines, extending its influence and winning broader popular support. The second dimension was Japan's desire—and need—to consolidate territories it had only nominally conquered and to extract economic value from them. After all, the logic of the "China Incident" was to draw on China's labor and resources to strengthen Japan, not to bleed Japan's gains away by draining wealth into China's vast interior. A Japanese colonel, lamenting the situation, captured the frustration of this drift into deeper entanglement: he regretted that Japan had not ended the "China Incident" once its initial objectives were reached. Instead, Japan was drawn into the hinterland and became bogged down in endless attrition—leaving it with little more than "real estate" rather than the popular support it believed it would secure from those it claimed to "liberate." To improve their position, Japanese authorities—still fragmented by internal rivalry—pursued several strategies. One was a new peace offensive aimed simultaneously at Jiang Jieshi, alongside efforts to establish a "reformed" Nationalist government under Wang Jingwei, who had fled Chongqing in December 1938. Japan also recruited more collaborators and puppet officials. Finally, it carried out forceful military, political, and economic measures intended to establish effective territorial control and eliminate opposition. During the middle years of the war, the Communists described their conflicts with the Nationalists using the euphemism "friction". By 1939, what many observers—possibly incorrectly—had viewed as an unusually warm alliance began to break down. In early 1939, the KMT Central Committee adopted measures meant to restrict the CCP. From the summer onward, military clashes began and continued into autumn and winter with increasing frequency and intensity, most of them concentrated around and within the North China base areas. The Communists later labeled the period from December 1939 to March 1940 the "first anti-Communist upsurge." Naturally, each side accused the other of aggression and claimed self-defense against unjust attacks. Strategically, though, the North China "upsurge" functioned as a Nationalist attempt to limit the CCP's expansion beyond the areas assigned to it and to regain influence in regions the Communists—or the Japanese—had already taken from the KMT. Jiang Jieshi framed the matter as a defense of legal rights grounded in tradition, while the Communists asserted an "evolutionary" right to challenge the moral legitimacy of those legal claims. During 1939, the Nationalists began to blockade Shen–Gan–Ning around its southern and western perimeter. Within a year, this blockade grew to nearly 400,000 troops, including some of the last remaining Central Army units under the command of Hu Zongnan. The blockade stopped further Communist expansion, especially into Gansu and Suiyuan, and severed direct contact between SKN and Communists operating in Xinjiang (Chinese Turkestan) adjacent to Soviet Central Asia. The Xinjiang Communists—including Mao Zedong's brother—were eliminated in 1942. Meanwhile, fierce fighting erupted along the Gansu–Shaanxi border and in the north-eastern corner of SKN near the Great Wall at Suide, as the blockading forces probed for weak points. Elements of He Long's 120th Division were even pulled back from the Jin–Sui base across the Yellow River to strengthen SKN's regular defenses. Economically, the blockade was even more damaging. During 1939, central government subsidies to the Border Region budget were cut off. Trade between the Border Region and other parts of China nearly stopped, a devastating blow to a region unable to supply itself with many basic commodities. At the same time, Nationalist and regional forces also attempted to expand their military and administrative authority into Hebei, Shanxi, Henan, and Shandong—areas the CCP now considered its base zones. In resisting these efforts, the CCP predictable accused its rivals of harming resistance work and damaging the people's interests. The "experts in dissension" were said to cooperate with the Japanese and their puppets. Based on increasing collaboration by regional units with Japan, the CCP implied that this was a deliberate and cynical strategy—described as "crooked-line patriotism"—intended to preserve those units for future anti-Communist operations. Even so, the CCP tried to avoid an open break with the Nationalist regime in Chongqing. In public, it consistently portrayed these clashes as being initiated by local commanders acting beyond orders from higher authority—despite knowing this depiction was false. Jiang Jieshi, unable to refute the claim outright, effectively permitted it to serve as the justification for a firm Communist response. Mao Zedong outlined the general resistance policy as "justification, expedience, and restraint". The CCP was to fight when it could claim justification and when it could gain advantage, but not to press attacks beyond what the Nationalists would tolerate or in ways that could damage its image as selfless patriots. Communist forces were expected to keep initiative as much as possible in their own hands—deciding when to engage, whether to engage, and when to disengage. The most striking episode of the "first anti-Communist upsurge" was the rupture with Yan Xishan in December 1939. Tensions in Shanxi had been rising throughout the summer and autumn, as Yan and his conservative supporters—associated with the "Old Army"—linked the Sacrifice League and the Dare-to-die Corps of the "New Army" with Communist forces. When base areas and Japanese occupation eventually took over much of his province, Yan was forced into exile at Qiulin across the Yellow River in Shaanxi. In November, Yan ordered his Old Army to disarm the Dare-to-die forces with help from central units dispatched by Hu Zongnan. In the bloody fighting that followed, these elements gradually broke free of even nominal provincial control and fully completed their connection with Communist forces. More than 30,000 people went over to the Communists. One KMT intelligence agent described the process with bitterness and a sense of inevitability: the Communists were first "full of sweet words," flattery, and distortions designed to open things up and conceal their actions. But once they had fully entrenched themselves, and once the low-level base had been established, they turned and bit. The agent suggested they had suspected things might end this way, but were not aware how quickly events would move—or that it could happen precisely while Communist calls for "united front" and "maintenance of unity for resistance" filled the air. About a month later, in February and March 1940, elements of the 8RA beat back this so-called upsurge. Zhang Yinwu's forces were disarmed and dispersed across the plains of north Hebei. To the south, Chu Huaiping and Shi Yusan were pushed out of the base area, as was the KMT-appointed provincial governor Lu Zhonglin. Although some non-Communist forces remained in the region, the CCP's and CCLY bases were never again seriously threatened by forces affiliated with the central government. Reinforcing the CCP's accusations, Shi Yusan was later executed in 1940 by the central government for collaboration with the Japanese. By late 1939, CCP central authorities maintained that the areas where the CCP could expand its armed strength were mainly limited to Shandong and Central China. In those regions, the CCP continued trying to carve out bases where they could operate. The situation in Shandong was complicated. After the Japanese invasion, most Nationalist-affiliated forces stayed in the province, while Communist forces and bases were weaker and more scattered than further west. Only in late 1938 did major 8RA units from the 115th and 129th Divisions—led by Xu Xiangqian and Luo Ronghuan—enter Shandong to link up with the Shandong column and local guerrillas, including survivors of a large band recently decimated by the Japanese. Even with these efforts, Communist actions led to clashes not only with Japanese forces but also with various Nationalist-affiliated groups—groups that were stronger than the Communists at the time. Until late 1940, the CCP's clashes with Nationalist forces in Shandong were actually bloodier than clashes with the Japanese. The CCP understood that its Chinese rivals mistrusted one another, and that their attitudes toward the CCP varied widely. The main Nationalist forces were often not tightly affiliated with Chiang Kai-shek or the central government. Instead, they operated under independent—and at times disgruntled—regional commanders. Communist tactics were expressed through slogans emphasizing ways to win support and isolate hardliners: develop progressive forces and win over fence-sitters while isolating "die-hards"; flatter top echelons, enlist the middle ranks, and hit the rank and file; and win over Yi Xuezhong, isolate Shen Honglie, and eliminate Qin Qirong. Still, unlike other North China base areas, the Communists were unable for several years to neutralize Nationalist forces in Shandong. Even if Japanese mop-up campaigns had not weakened those Nationalists, the text suggests the Communists may still have struggled to do so. By November 1940, Xu Xiangqian claimed meaningful progress while admitting Shandong had not yet become a fully consolidated base. CCP successes were greatest along parts of the Shandong–Hebei border, around the Taishan massif in central Shandong, and near the tip of the peninsula far to the east. Elsewhere, "progressive forces" remained weak. Communist regular troops numbered about 70,000, which was far below the party center's goals of 150,000 regulars and between 1.5 and 2 million self-defense forces. Moreover, systematic economic reforms had barely begun. The CCP relied on familiar practices—confiscations, collections of "national salvation grain," contributions, and loans—alongside a conventional taxation system adjusted to favor poorer peasants. Communist expansion in Central China was even riskier, with a greater likelihood of large-scale conflict with central government forces than in the north. In much of North China, "friction" came primarily from rapid Communist expansion into areas with partial vacuums. In Central China, however, base-building required displacing an existing Nationalist military-administrative presence closely tied to Jiang Kai-shek and the Chongqing government. The burden of this expansion was carried mainly by the 6th Detachment (northern Anhui and Jiangsu) and the 5th Detachment, which was reinforced by 15,000 to 20,000 8RA troops under Huang K'o-ch'eng. As Chen Yi's 1st Detachment crossed from south to north through the corridor provided by Guan Wenwei's local forces, it became actively involved as well. This expansion—driven by increasingly urgent directives from Mao and Liu during the latter part of 1939 and into 1940—brought the N4A north of the river into ever more frequent and sharper clashes with Nationalist authorities in Anhui and Jiangsu, especially with units under Jiangsu governor Han Deqin. South of the river, though, Xiang Ying did not directly challenge Chongqing's commanders. Mao later charged that Xiang Ying may have been influenced by Wang Ming, or else he may simply have seen no realistic alternative. His forces—three detachments plus a headquarters unit—were heavily outnumbered by Qu Chutong's Nationalist units, not to mention Japanese forces and their puppets. Even if Mao insisted bases could be built "anywhere," the Shanghai–Hangzhou–Nanjing triangle was especially difficult terrain. Xiang Ying and his followers had survived with extraordinary tenacity in the mountains of South China between 1934 and 1937, enduring brutal search-and-destroy operations that were not lifted until the war began. It therefore seems unlikely that such survivors would suddenly become "right-wing capitulationists."  Yet by spring 1940, Mao was pressing Xiang Ying more intensely. The Central Committee's message was explicit: expansion was necessary in all cases. It meant reaching into all enemy-occupied areas rather than being bound by the Kuomintang's restrictions—going beyond Kuomintang limits, not waiting for official appointments, not depending on higher-ups for financing, and instead expanding armed forces freely and independently. It also meant setting up base areas without hesitation, independently mobilizing the masses in those areas, and building united front organs of political power under Communist Party leadership. The struggle between Nationalists and Communists involved more than contests for control of territory behind Japanese lines. It also involved national-level politics, ideology, and leadership. One worrying development for the CCP was the campaign throughout 1939 to expand Jiang Kai-shek's prestige and formal power—adding more titles for him across major party, government, and military positions. In early 1939, the Central Executive Committee appointed him "director-general" of the Kuomintang, a title reminiscent of the one previously held by Sun Yat-sen. In addition, during the summer and autumn of 1939 there was talk of constitutional rule. In November, the KMT announced plans to convene a constitutional assembly the following year. If Jiang could fulfill these promises, he and his government could gain new legitimacy and wider popularity. Mao and his colleagues could not allow this to go unchallenged. If the Nationalists were to have a paramount leader and authoritative spokesperson, the CCP needed one as well. The timing of Mao's famous "On the new democracy"—written in late 1939 and published the next January—was therefore no accident. Its substance had been anticipated earlier, but its final timing and full development were shaped by the KMT's constitutional movement. The CCP's entry into this competition served as both a bid for support away from the KMT and a statement of the multi-class united front that the CCP wanted to lead. Although "On the new democracy" was written in a tone that seemed moderate, it persuaded many Chinese readers that the CCP had either diluted its revolutionary objectives or postponed them to a distant future. In Kuomintang-controlled areas, the work could be read through the liberal values associated with Anglo-American democracy—popular participation, multi-party government, legally protected civil rights. In CCP-controlled territories, the same language carried stronger authoritarian, class-based meanings. In internal documents meant for party audiences rather than public consumption, the ambiguity was removed, showing a tough but patient and flexible commitment not only to resistance but also to social control and social change. During this same period, the Communists expressed deep concern about Nationalist capitulation to Japan—not only on the battlefield behind Japanese lines but also at the highest levels. Some of this concern was propaganda, but beneath propaganda lay genuine anxiety. In late 1939 and early 1940, politically aware Chinese already knew that Japan was negotiating with the unpredictable Wang Jingwei, who had fled Chongqing a year earlier. A "reorganized national government" in Nanjing was finally established in March 1940, representing the most formidable collaboration with Japan to date. Less well known, but equally important, was that Japan was also seeking an understanding directly with Jiang Kai-shek through intermediaries in Hong Kong. This effort, called "Operation Kiri"—described as spreading a "feast for Chiang"—combined intrigue with a kind of dark comedy. Reports suggested Chiang's reported interest in peace could have been a stratagem designed to discredit Wang Jingwei by keeping him waiting. But even if Chiang had no intention of coming to terms with Japan, the Communists could not be sure what the outcome would be until after the multi-pronged peace offensive had failed. By the middle of 1940, China had never been so isolated. In Europe, the "phony war" ended in the spring when Germany launched a blitz across the Low Countries. France fell soon after, and England appeared likely to be next. Japan used this moment to press China to sever its last tenuous connections to the outside world: cutting the Burma Road, trade with neutral Hong Kong, and the rail link running from Hanoi to Kunming. At the same time, Russia was engaged in a difficult and embarrassing war with Finland and reduced military aid to the Nationalists. The United States was only gradually moving away from isolationism and clearly regarded England as more important than China. In Chongqing and elsewhere in "Free China," signs of war weariness, despair, and demoralization were visible. Under these circumstances, Mao's insistence on aggressive expansion was a calculated risk—either it would deter any Japanese advance, or it would place the Communists in the strongest possible position in case a split between the KMT and the CCP became unavoidable. In Central China, the size and pace of the fighting kept increasing, starting in the final months of 1939. One flashpoint was the clash between Luo Pinghui's 5th Detachment and units of Han Deqin's Jiangsu force near Lake Gaoyou. In the following months, Guan Wenwei's forces ranged along the left bank of the Yangtze, repeatedly running into Luo's troops as they operated farther north. Luo also began receiving some 8RA reinforcements, moving them south through areas controlled by the 6th Detachment. Clearly, a major showdown was taking shape across north and central Jiangsu. At the same time, the South Yangtze Command was doing poorly. Nationalist commanders Leng Xin and Qu Chutong restricted its activities so severely that Mao and Liu gradually abandoned the idea of building a unified, consolidated base in that region. During late spring and early summer, Chen Yi moved most of his 1st and 2nd Detachments north of the Yangtze. In September, the 3rd Detachment followed suit, crossing the river into the area around Lake Chaohu, where the 4th Detachment was already stationed. After these moves, only the Headquarters Detachment—under Ye Ting and Xiang Ying—remained south of the Yangtze, positioned at Qingxian in southern Anhui. As the military situation edged toward an open confrontation, negotiations began in June 1940 between representatives of the KMT and the CCP. The core issues were Communist operating zones and the authorized strength of the armies led by the CCP. Proposals were exchanged, followed by equally sharp and hostile counter-proposals, but no agreement was reached. The KMT viewed it as a concession to permit the CCP "free rein" north of the pre-1938 course of the Yellow River, with the exception of southern Shanxi, which was to remain under the influence of Yan Xishan. In exchange, the KMT demanded that all 8RA and N4A units evacuate Central China. In effect, the KMT was offering the CCP something it was already prepared to allow, in return for the CCP giving up what it might soon be able to obtain by force of arms. Nationalist authorities then issued a set of deadlines, but without clearly stating what would happen if those deadlines were violated. On the surface, the CCP appeared to be complying in part. The movements of Chen Yi and the South Yangtze Command could look like obedience, but in reality they were responses to orders coming from their own superior leadership rather than instructions issued by the Nationalists. Even so, Xiang Ying's continued delays and evasions during the autumn and winter of 1940 remained puzzling. One possibility is that he felt—quite reasonably—that Mao had already lost confidence in him and that once he crossed to the north bank of the river he would lose his command. Another complication was that directives from Yan'an were sometimes ambiguous and even contradictory. He may also have been trying to reach secure understandings with KMT commanders about evacuation routes and guaranteed safe conduct out of the area. For a period, Han Teqin kept most of his forces—estimated at about 70,000 men, far outnumbering the N4A—in north Jiangsu, thereby blocking the expansion of the 6th Detachment and slowing further southern intrusions by 8RA troops. But by mid-summer he realized he would have to counter the N4A build-up in central Jiangsu, or else risk writing that region off to the Communists. A confusing sequence of engagements then unfolded, culminating in a decisive battle in early October 1940 near the central Jiangsu town of Huangjiao. Over the course of four days, several of Han's main-force units belonging to the 89th Army were destroyed, while others were scattered. That battle also served as a signal for the 6th Detachment to advance more aggressively in the north. In the aftermath, one of Han's principal commanders entered collaboration with the CCP, while another defected to the Nanjing government under Wang Jingwei. Although Han Teqin managed to maintain a foothold in Jiangsu until 1943, his real power had been broken. Relatively little attention was paid to the battle of Huangjiao in the Chinese press. The KMT did not want to publicize what it considered a disastrous defeat, while the Communists were satisfied to stay silent about an episode that conflicted with their proclaimed policy of a united front. As could be expected, during the autumn—after Han Teqin's defeat—KMT-CCP negotiations deteriorated further. In early December, Jiang Kai-shek personally ordered that all N4A forces withdraw from southern Anhui and southern Jiangsu by 31 December. He also ordered that the entire 8RA be positioned north of the Yellow River by the same deadline, followed one month later by the N4A. Discussions then followed between Ye Ting and Qu Chutong's deputies concerning the route to be taken, safe conduct, and—astonishingly—the money and supplies that were to be provided to the N4A to help it move. On 25 December, Mao Zedong ordered Xiang Ying to begin evacuating immediately. Yet it was not until 4 January 1941 that Ye and Xiang actually started moving. Almost immediately, Qu Chutong's forces harassed and dispersed the N4A Headquarters Group, which included administrative personnel, wounded soldiers and dependents, as well as combat-ready troops. In an attempt to reorganize, they moved southwest toward Maolin, where they were surrounded by Nationalists and, over the next several days, were cut to pieces. Losses were heavy on both sides. The CCP suffered an estimated 9,000 casualties. Xiang Ying tried twice to break out of the blockade on his own, but failed. He was then denounced as a deserter by Ye Ting, who took over full command of the doomed forces. Xiang Ying eventually escaped, but he was killed a couple of months later by one of his own bodyguards, motivated by the N4A gold reserves that he had taken with him. Up to the very end, Xiang either failed or refused to seek refuge in Liu Shaoqi's domain north of the Yangtze. The unfortunate Ye Ting was arrested and spent the rest of the war in prison. He was finally released in 1946, only to die one month later in a plane crash, along with several other high-ranking party members. On 17 January, Jiang Kai-shek declared that the New Fourth Army was dissolved for insubordination. Direct contacts between Yan'an and Chongqing nearly came to an end, and CCP military liaison offices in several cities held by the Nationalists were closed. This is what became known as the New Fourth Army incident, also referred to as the South Anhui incident. Clearly, it functioned as an act of retaliation for the defeats suffered by Han Teqin in north and central Jiangsu. It ended any realistic prospect of establishing a consolidated Communist base south of the Yangtze. Still, from a strategic perspective, these losses were ultimately more than offset by the gains achieved farther north. In fact, only a few months later, the reorganized N4A quietly began reintroducing some units into this region, where they carried out guerrilla activities without possessing a secure territorial base. Unlike the relative silence surrounding the fighting at Huangjiao, the New Fourth Army incident sparked bitter, prolonged controversy. The CCP argued that it was a second "anti-Communist upsurge," even more serious than the first. Presenting themselves as martyred patriots, they depicted their opponents as people who wanted to end the War of Resistance through what they called "Sino-Japanese cooperation" aimed at "suppressing the Communists." In their account, the Nationalists wanted to replace the war of resistance with civil war, substitute capitulation for independence, trade unity for a split, and replace light with darkness. People were telling each other the news and were horrified. Indeed, they claimed that the situation had never been as critical as it was at that moment. The Nationalist response, of course, was that provocations had been numerous and serious, and that violations of military discipline could not be tolerated. But the KMT's unwillingness to describe in detail its own defeats at the CCP's hands left it speaking in broad generalities. In the propaganda battle, the CCP clearly gained the better position and won more political capital. If it was politically valuable to be regarded as a national hero, it was even more valuable to be seen as a national martyr.  Many Chinese—and some outside—observers were genuinely alarmed and feared that civil war might openly resume. Yet, with a few exceptions, the events that culminated in the New Fourth Army incident have generally been interpreted as marking the breakdown of the second united front. That interpretation, however, is described as being wrong in two respects. First, the CCP understood the united front not as a narrow arrangement limited to a few major partners, but as a strategy that could be applied flexibly to all political, military, and social forces in China—from the highest levels of the central government down to the smallest village. Relations with Jiang Jieshi and the Guomindang regime mattered, but they did not, by themselves, constitute the whole of the united front. Even regarding Jiang and the Nationalists specifically, the common reading is said to be misguided. Throughout the war, a cardinal objective of the united front was to prevent peace between Japan and the Nationalists. Therefore, if clashes between CCP forces and those of the central government on such a large scale as at Huangjiao and Maolin could occur without leading to peace with Japan and without triggering a full-scale resumption of civil war, then this should not be understood as the end of the united front—it should be seen as its fundamental vindication. If friction at that scale could nevertheless be tolerated by Jiang Jieshi, then fears about his future accommodation with Japan were greatly reduced. Following the New Fourth Army incident, the CCP reorganized its political and military presence in Central China. The Central Plains and South-east China Bureaus were merged and renamed the Central China Bureau, with Liu Shaoqi placed in charge, reflecting the area's importance to Party Central. The New Fourth Army was also reorganized completely and substantially regularized. Chen Yi became its new acting commander, since Ye Ting was imprisoned. He directed the force, now divided into seven divisions. Each division had territorial responsibilities, and in each region the CCP claimed the establishment of a base. Indeed, base construction proceeded in earnest only after the friction of 1940 and the New Fourth Army incident. In the years that followed, the operating areas of the First through Fourth Divisions contained expanding enclaves of consolidated territory, where military dominance was joined with open party work: administrative control, the development of mass organizations, local elections, and socio-economic reforms. The other three areas fluctuated between semi-consolidated and guerrilla status. With the incident, the worst phase of the KMT-CCP conflict was now over. When CCP documents later speak of a third upsurge in 1943, they refer to something openly political. With the exception of Shandong—where a fairly strong Nationalist presence persisted for a longer time—the overall balance of power among Chinese forces behind Japanese lines had shifted in favor of the CCP by mid-1941. In subsequent years the CCP's predominance became even more pronounced, until by the end of 1943 the Communists were virtually beyond challenge by Chinese rivals.   I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. After the CCP and KMT entered the united front, cooperation felt conditional from the start. Mao pushed the New Fourth Army to reorganize and preserve Communist autonomy, even as the 1937 agreements publicly pledged obedience to KMT leadership. In 1939–40 the Communists worried that Chiang might negotiate peace with Japan; so they expanded bases and military presence, triggering repeated clashes. The pressure intensified when KMT orders forced the New Fourth Army to evacuate south Anhui in late 1940. 

SEG 14: Grant Newsham discusses South Korea's reluctance to assist in the Strait of Hormuz. He characterizes the current administration as ideologically pro-China and skeptical of US alliances, potentially undermining regional security cooperation against common global threats. (15)1950 Korea

A coalition of historical groups, parks advocacy organizations and scientists are suing the National Park Service for removing signs about climate change, Indigenous history, slavery and other historical topics. The litigants say the removals erase history and undermine science.

In “The Cost of Truth,” Vince Fakhoury Horn speaks with Daniel Klein—a former religious Zionist settler turned outspoken critic of the ideology—about dehumanization, self-forgiveness, and the courage required to speak truth at the risk of losing everything (except one's humanity).

John Batchelor and Bill Roggio examine the US fleet near Iran, questioning the effectiveness of air power alone against ideologically committed regimes like the Houthis. 2.1638

This is a sneak peek from the latest Inside Call Me Back, the members-only edition of the podcast. Amit Segal joins Dan to separate spin from substance and answer the question on everyone's mind: is a military operation truly imminent, and how should Israelis think about what comes next? They also discuss Amit's political worldview and how it compares to his father's Jabotinskyite vision. To hear the full conversation, become a member by following the link in the description or visiting arkmedia.org. In the full episode:  Dan and Amit Segal take listener questions that dig deep into the Israeli divide. Will the election revolve around the Haredi draft crisis or the judicial reform? Should Antizionist Arab parties be able to run in Israeli elections? What is the future of Judea and Samaria and how long can Israel postpone the question of Palestinian statehood? And does Amit share his father's vision of a Jabotinsky right?  More Ark Media: Subscribe to Inside Call me Back Listen to For Heaven's Sake Listen to What's Your Number? Watch Call me Back on YouTube Newsletters | Ark Media | Amit Segal | Nadav Eyal Instagram | Ark Media | Dan X | Dan Dan Senor & Saul Singer's book, The Genius of Israel Get in touch Credits: Ilan Benatar, Adaam James Levin-Areddy, Brittany Cohen, Ava Weiner, Martin Huergo, Mariangeles Burgos, Patricio Spadavecchia, Yuval Semo 

Political Horseshoe: Convergence of Left and Right on Interventionism — Veronique de Rugy — de Rugy describes the political "horseshoe" theory wherein ideologically opposed left and right political movements converge on preferences for expansive government intervention and managed economy policies. de Rugy documents that while left and right factions blame different villains—wealth inequality versus immigration—both now support agricultural subsidies, protectionist tariffs, and direct state economic intervention. de Rugy emphasizes that both extremes have systematically abandoned classical free-market principles in favor of comprehensive managed economy frameworks emphasizing state control and industrial policy direction. 1910

PREVIEW — Veronique de Rugy — The Political Horseshoe: Converging Discontent. de Rugy explains the political "horseshoe" theory, which posits that ideologically opposed extremes—the far Left and far Right—converge in their fundamental conviction that the United States is pursuing a catastrophic trajectory requiring comprehensive government intervention and systemic restructuring. de Rugy documents that both ideological poles perceive the existing political-economic order as fundamentally irreparably corrupted or unjust, generating agreement across the ideological spectrum regarding the necessity of radical systemic transformation despite divergent visions regarding post-transformation governance structures and resource allocation mechanisms. 1955

The discussion turns to Joseph Stalin and his relationship with the legacy of Leninism. Stalin was a more "ideologically flexible" and savvy political operator than Trotsky, who was relentlessly focused on immediate and continuous revolution. While both Lenin and Trotsky employed political violence, the terror under Stalin was a different phenomenon because much of it was directed at high-ranking members of the Communist Party and the secret police in the Great Purge. The purges were motivated by Stalin's paranoia and the need to find scapegoats for the regime's failure to deliver prosperity and freedom. The assassination of Trotsky in 1940 is often seen as wrapping up the Great Terror, though arrests and executions continued.

"I think that all of the people that I know that are working on Bitcoin Core and other Bitcoin projects are onlyinterested in the monetary use case. But I think that many of them take a more long term view in how that might be happening if we're trying to get towards this being not just the money for anyone, but the money for everyone."~ Murch In this episode, I sit down with Murch, long-time Bitcoin Core developer and co-founder of Localhost Research, for a deep and candid dive into how Bitcoin really works — not just technically, but socially and ideologically. We explore how Core contributors organize, fund, and ship software, the recent OP_RETURN debate, and the cultural divides that have surfaced around Bitcoin development. Can the protocol stay pure and neutral while the community grows more opinionated? What does it mean when social dynamics shape technical direction? And how can open-source developers and commentators bridge the gap to keep Bitcoin strong and united? From software releases and mempool policy to the human side of collaboration and conflict — this chat goes right to the heart of what it means to build Bitcoin. Check out our awesome sponsors! Ledn: Need fiat but don't want to sell your Bitcoin? Ledn offers secure, Bitcoin-backed loans with no credit checks, flexible repayment, and fast turnaround—often within 24 hours. With $10B+ in loans across 100+ countries and transparent Proof of Reserves, Ledn is a trusted option for unlocking liquidity without giving up your Bitcoin. (Link: https://learn.ledn.io/audible) HRF: The Human Rights Foundation is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that promotes and protects human rights globally, with a focus on closed societies. Subscribe to HRF's Financial Freedom Newsletter today. (Link: https://mailchi.mp/hrf.org/financial-freedom-newsletter) OFF: The Oslo Freedom Forum is a global human rights event by the Human Rights Foundation (HRF), uniting voices from activism, journalism, tech, and beyond. Through powerful stories and collaboration, OFF advances freedom and human potential worldwide. Join us next June. (Link: https://oslofreedomforum.com/) Pubky: Pubky is building the next web, a decentralized system designed to put control back in your hands. Escape censorship, algorithmic manipulation, and walled gardens by owning your identity and data. Explore the Pubky web and become the algorithm today. Don't forget to find me on my Pubky ID here: pk:5d7thwzkxx5mz6gk1f19wfyykr6nrwzaxri3io7ahejg1z74qngo. (Link: https://pubky.org) Chroma: Chroma is dedicated to advancing human performance and well-being through cutting-edge light therapy devices and performance eyewear. Their mission is to enhance physical and mental health, unlocking peak human health, cognitive function, and physical performance. Get 10% off your order with the code BITCOINAUDIBLE. (Link: https://getchroma.co/?ref=BitcoinAudible) Guest Links Murch Website (Link: https://murch.one/) Murch on X (Link: https://x.com/cguida6) Murch on Github (Link: https://github.com/Murchandamus) Localhost Research (Link: https://lclhost.org/) Host Links ⁠Guy on Nostr ⁠(Link: http://tinyurl.com/2xc96ney)

On this episode of the Chuck ToddCast, Chuck sits down with Adam Jentleson, executive director of the new Searchlight Institute, to talk about how Democrats can build a broader, more durable governing coalition. Jentleson explains why Searchlight is designed to promote ideological diversity within the Democratic Party — and why policies that blend progressive and moderate ideas tend to last longer and win in more places. He warns that Democrats’ electoral path to the presidency and a 60-seat Senate majority is narrowing and argues the party’s best hope lies in economic populism — the same force that powered Trump’s rise but could be reclaimed with a focus on kitchen-table issues and fairness for working Americans. The conversation dives deep into the party’s messaging struggles during the government shutdown, the growing divide between “fight Trump” and “look past Trump” factions, and the need for Democrats to recruit candidates who can win in red and purple states — even if they don’t align perfectly on social issues. Jentleson also offers sharp insights on the filibuster’s evolution from a necessary safeguard to a legislative dead end, and why Democrats need to get more strategic — not louder — if they want to govern effectively and outlast Republican populism. Go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Thank you Wildgrain for sponsoring. Visit http://wildgrain.com/TODDCAST and use the code "TODDCAST" at checkout to receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life! Got injured in an accident? You could be one click away from a claim worth millions. Just visit https://www.forthepeople.com/TODDCAST to start your claim now with Morgan & Morgan without leaving your couch. Remember, it's free unless you win! Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Adam Jentleson joins the Chuck ToddCast 01:30 Why choose the name “Searchlight Institute? 02:30 How is Searchlight different from the Center for American Progress? 06:00 Ideologically diverse policies tend to be more durable 08:00 Democrats must embrace ideological diversity to win in red states 11:00 Democrats have to make trade offs to win in more places 12:00 Democrats electoral path to presidency gets more narrow in ‘32 12:45 What does Democrats’ path to 60 senate seats look like? 13:45 Economic populism is a powerful force, it’s why Trump won 15:00 Economic populism beat out Republican orthodoxy 16:15 Populism hasn’t been transferable from Trump, but it’s durable 17:15 This economy is ok if you have money and horrid if not 19:00 The Kerry/Edwards economic policies are what are popular today 19:45 When Democrats succeed it’s on economic ideas 20:15 Is an economic downturn the only path for Dems to win presidency? 22:15 Democrats give Republicans ammo on cultural issues 23:15 Mamdani won by relentlessly focusing on kitchen table issues 24:30 Why weren’t Democrats able to sell their decision to reopen govt 26:15 Congressional leadership & communication are different skills 27:15 No side demanding a major concession in a shutdown got it 28:00 Dems succeeded in driving a message about healthcare 30:30 Divide on left is “look past Trump” or “fight Trump” 32:00 Democrats need to find issues they can run on in every state 33:45 The litmus test for Dems should be can they take back the senate 34:45 The path for Dems to take back the senate 36:15 Dems will have to embrace candidates with different social views 37:00 Gavin Newsom has been winning lately on tactics not policy 38:00 Dem candidates need to be fighters with broadly palatable policy 39:45 Any worries about an insurgent third party? 42:15 A third party candidate could certainly cause Dems to lose 43:45 The filibuster has become a pocket veto 45:45 The filibuster should require work and not be used passively 47:15 The filibuster started as needed reform, now is a problem 49:00 The origin of budget reconciliation 51:45 The judiciary was designed to be non-partisan 53:00 Vote threshold for judges should be higher to avoid partisans 55:30 If you raise the threshold too high there will be judicial backlogs 57:45 Do you see Searchlight as an incubator for policy, tactics or both? 59:00 What does Graham Platner’s staying power say about him? 1:01:00 Democratic aligned groups need to be smarter about their asksSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of the Chuck ToddCast, Chuck unpacks a tumultuous week for Donald Trump as newly released Epstein emails reignite old scandals — and this time, they may stick. With Speaker Mike Johnson appearing to serve Trump’s interests over his own members, and a worsening economy eroding public patience, Chuck explores whether we’re witnessing the beginning of Trump’s “lame duck” moment. He draws parallels between Trump’s endless stream of controversies, his history of corrupt pardons, and how even “teflon” presidents eventually turn “velcro” when conditions shift. As the cost of living rises and swing voters tune out partisan noise, scandals like Epstein’s are cutting through both sides’ information bubbles — forcing Republicans to reckon with Trump’s baggage. Chuck argues that if Democrats manage a midterm sweep, historians might look back on this very week as the turning point when Trump’s political luck finally began to run out. Then, Chuck sits down with Adam Jentleson, executive director of the new Searchlight Institute, to talk about how Democrats can build a broader, more durable governing coalition. Jentleson explains why Searchlight is designed to promote ideological diversity within the Democratic Party — and why policies that blend progressive and moderate ideas tend to last longer and win in more places. He warns that Democrats’ electoral path to the presidency and a 60-seat Senate majority is narrowing and argues the party’s best hope lies in economic populism — the same force that powered Trump’s rise but could be reclaimed with a focus on kitchen-table issues and fairness for working Americans. The conversation dives deep into the party’s messaging struggles during the government shutdown, the growing divide between “fight Trump” and “look past Trump” factions, and the need for Democrats to recruit candidates who can win in red and purple states — even if they don’t align perfectly on social issues. Jentleson also offers sharp insights on the filibuster’s evolution from a necessary safeguard to a legislative dead end, and why Democrats need to get more strategic — not louder — if they want to govern effectively and outlast Republican populism. Finally, he answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment and breaks down the latest in college football. Go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Thank you Wildgrain for sponsoring. Visit http://wildgrain.com/TODDCAST and use the code "TODDCAST" at checkout to receive $30 off your first box PLUS free Croissants for life! Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Got injured in an accident? You could be one click away from a claim worth millions. Just visit https://www.forthepeople.com/TODDCAST to start your claim now with Morgan & Morgan without leaving your couch. Remember, it's free unless you win! Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 02:00 New Epstein emails released referencing Trump 03:00 Mike Johnson’s actions are in service to WH, not his members 04:45 Trump has a laundry list of scandals & corrupt pardons, none stuck 07:00 Presidents can go from teflon to velcro 08:30 The bad economy could make Trump less resilient to scandals 10:00 JD Vance tweet demanding Epstein transparency has aged horribly 10:45 Trump’s involvement with Epstein has been baked into public opinion 12:00 High prices and bad economy mean less public patience for Trump 12:45 Every presidency hits their lame duck point, this could be the start 14:00 Winning the midterms for the Democrats means winning the senate 15:15 Trump has treated the party like his casinos, leveraged for his benefit 16:15 Trump is only worried about Trump, not the party or the voters* 17:30 Epstein is one of the only stories that breaks through both sides’ bubble 19:45 You can’t information silo your grocery bill, or the Epstein story 21:00 If Dems sweep midterms, we’ll point to this week as start of lame duck 22:00 By going soft on Ghislaine Maxwell, it just increases suspicion 24:30 Trump would have been better off playing “he said, she said” w/Maxwell 25:45 Stock market booming, but most of the economy is not succeeding 27:00 Trump doesn’t seem well, has aged quite a bit in past six months 29:00 A steady drip of Epstein stories/files will cause R’s to distance 30:30 Trump isn’t doing what he was elected to do, makes him vulnerable 35:45 Adam Jentleson joins the Chuck ToddCast 37:15 Why choose the name “Searchlight Institute? 38:15 How is Searchlight different from the Center for American Progress? 41:45 Ideologically diverse policies tend to be more durable 43:45 Democrats must embrace ideological diversity to win in red states 46:45 Democrats have to make trade offs to win in more places 47:45 Democrats electoral path to presidency gets more narrow in ‘32 48:30 What does Democrats’ path to 60 senate seats look like? 49:30 Economic populism is a powerful force, it’s why Trump won 50:45 Economic populism beat out Republican orthodoxy 52:00 Populism hasn’t been transferable from Trump, but it’s durable 53:00 This economy is ok if you have money and horrid if not 54:45 The Kerry/Edwards economic policies are what are popular today 55:30 When Democrats succeed it’s on economic ideas 56:00 Is an economic downturn the only path for Dems to win presidency? 58:00 Democrats give Republicans ammo on cultural issues 59:00 Mamdani won by relentlessly focusing on kitchen table issues 1:00:15 Why weren’t Democrats able to sell their decision to reopen govt 1:02:00 Congressional leadership & communication are different skills 1:03:00 No side demanding a major concession in a shutdown got it 1:03:45 Dems succeeded in driving a message about healthcare 1:06:15 Divide on left is “look past Trump” or “fight Trump” 1:07:45 Democrats need to find issues they can run on in every state 1:09:30 The litmus test for Dems should be can they take back the senate 1:10:30 The path for Dems to take back the senate 1:12:00 Dems will have to embrace candidates with different social views 1:12:45 Gavin Newsom has been winning lately on tactics not policy 1:13:45 Dem candidates need to be fighters with broadly palatable policy 1:15:30 Any worries about an insurgent third party? 1:18:00 A third party candidate could certainly cause Dems to lose 1:19:30 The filibuster has become a pocket veto 1:21:30 The filibuster should require work and not be used passively 1:23:00 The filibuster started as needed reform, now is a problem 1:24:45 The origin of budget reconciliation 1:27:30 The judiciary was designed to be non-partisan 1:28:45 Vote threshold for judges should be higher to avoid partisans 1:31:15 If you raise the threshold too high there will be judicial backlogs 1:33:30 Do you see Searchlight as an incubator for policy, tactics or both? 1:34:45 What does Graham Platner’s staying power say about him? 1:36:45 Democratic aligned groups need to be smarter about their asks 1:44:45 Chuck’s thoughts on interview with Adam Jentleson 1:45:45 Ask Chuck 1:46:00 Thought’s on Netflix’s Death By Lightning? 1:53:30 Can anything be done in the short term about electricity costs? 2:00:45 What is Trump’s motivation for intervening in Venezuela? 2:06:15 Did NYC Mayoral race show Dems issue with non college voters? 2:12:15 College football committee needs to go 2:19:00 College football previewSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Get original articles, extended podcasts, and direct access to Blendr News on our Substack Channel: blendrnews.substack.com-This episode is brought to you by The Tallowed Truth. Use promo code "Blendr" for 15% off:www.thetallowedtruth.com/blendr-In this episode of "The Blendr Report," Jonathan and Liam discuss:0:00 Intro0:34 Dr. Chase Spears' Military and Journalism Career4:46 Why Chase Ended His 20 Year Military Career10:17 Collapsing Trust in the Military12:54 COVID Propaganda and Mandates17:16 George Orwell on Media Lies During War20:59 Lies Told During the Afghanistan War26:18 How Can Citizens Spot Propaganda?29:19 Is Propaganda Causing People to Go Crazy?34:56 Public School as Tools of Indoctrination39:53 DEI Programs as Ideological Subversion48:17 Are Trump and Hegseth Actually Fixing the Military?52:15 The Generational Communist Assault on the West55:35 What is the Military's Purpose?57:56 Progressivism vs. Christianity1:01:15 Marxism and Progressivism is a Religion-Follow BLENDR News:Twitter - @BlendrNewsInstagram - @blendr.report TikTok - @blendrnews-Follow Jonathan:Instagram - @itsjonathanharveyTikTok - @itsjonathanharvey-Follow Liam:Instagram - @liam.out.loudTwitter - @liam_out_loudYouTube - @liam-out-loud-Follow Dr. Chase Spears:Website: chasespears.comPodcast: open.spotify.com/show/3JMWpgm6oFplluyJCJA3z4?

At the Universidad de la Libertad in Mexico City, Matt Kibbe sat down with Pano Kanelos, chancellor of the University of Austin, to talk about how higher education has gone wrong and what can be done to fix it. In the wake of the horrific murder of Charlie Kirk on a college campus, the fact that universities have become increasingly hostile to open discourse and the pursuit of truth has become more obvious than ever. Ideologically driven curricula, combined with rising costs and the student debt crisis, have made higher education a less appealing prospect, which is a shame when you consider that the purpose of universities was always supposed to be the expansion of human knowledge, not just preparing students for the job market.

Tufts University professor Eitan Hersh says colleges like the one he works at are too ideologically narrow — shutting out ideas from conservatives, religious people and others outside the academic mainstream.

pWotD Episode 3046: Angela Rayner Welcome to popular Wiki of the Day, spotlighting Wikipedia's most visited pages, giving you a peek into what the world is curious about today.With 164,461 views on Wednesday, 3 September 2025 our article of the day is Angela Rayner.Angela Rayner (née Bowen; born 28 March 1980) is a British politician and trade unionist who has served as Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government since July 2024. She has been Deputy Leader of the Labour Party since 2020 and Labour and Co-operative Member of Parliament (MP) for Ashton-under-Lyne since 2015. Ideologically she identifies as a socialist and as being part of Labour's soft left.Rayner was born and raised in Stockport, where she attended the comprehensive Avondale School. She left school aged 16 whilst pregnant and without any qualifications. She later trained in social care at Stockport College and worked for the local council as a care worker. She eventually became a trade union representative within Unison, during which time she joined the Labour Party. She was selected to contest Ashton‑under‑Lyne in 2014 and was elected for the seat at the 2015 general election. From 2016 until 2020 Rayner held several Shadow Cabinet positions under Jeremy Corbyn. She successfully stood for the deputy leadership of the Labour Party in 2020, and held further Shadow Cabinet positions under Keir Starmer.Following Labour's victory in the 2024 general election, Rayner entered government and was appointed Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government by Starmer in his government. Rayner's strong support base and potential as a future leader led to the New Statesman ranking her as the eighth most powerful person in British left-wing politics for 2023. The Spectator named her Politician of the Year at its annual Parliamentarian of the Year awards ceremony in 2024. Rayner is the second woman to serve as deputy prime minister, after Thérèse Coffey.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 02:05 UTC on Thursday, 4 September 2025.For the full current version of the article, see Angela Rayner on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Mastodon at @wikioftheday@masto.ai.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm neural Aria.

Donald Trump's first term in office felt, to many, like a burst of cultural backlash—loud, brash, and ultimately blunted. He entered Washington in 2017 promising to “drain the swamp,” but underestimated how deep and tangled the roots ran. The permanent bureaucracy, the NGO network, and the sprawling infrastructure of media-linked soft power endured. By the time Joe Biden took office in 2021, the so-called “intercom” —the elite feedback loop of agencies, think tanks, activist nonprofits, and friendly press—was back in full control.But Trump's 2024 victory marked a sharp break. This time, he came in not as an insurgent learning the ropes but as a returning general with a kill list. The second term's agenda is unapologetically surgical: cut, cauterize, and rebuild. Where once he allowed careerists to stay on out of caution or optics, now he's purging aggressively. The Department of Justice, State Department, USAID, and even federally funded broadcasters like NPR and PBS are feeling the blowtorch.The method is both ideological and operational. Ideologically, Trump and his allies frame the federal bureaucracy as a hostile occupying force—what he has long branded the “deep state.” Operationally, they are stripping funding, closing offices, and firing tens of thousands of career civil servants. Reports cite over 275,000 federal civil service layoffs since January 2025, not including contractors. Whole agencies, particularly in the foreign aid and NGO sphere, are being gutted. USAID—long accused by critics of being an internationalist activist arm under the guise of development—has been defunded to the bone.In Trump's view, this is not mere budget discipline but necessary surgery to remove “cancer” before it metastasizes again. It's the same logic Elon Musk applied at Twitter—slash headcount under the guise of cost-cutting while gutting the internal political culture. For Trump, that means sweeping out anyone suspected of ideological hostility, no matter their seniority or tenure protections. His allies call it flushing out moles; his critics call it authoritarianism.Symbolic moments punctuate the purge. In Washington, D.C., Sean Dunn—a career DOJ trial lawyer—was filmed throwing a sandwich at federal agents while shouting “fascist.” For Trump supporters, it was proof of rot: a sworn officer of the executive branch openly defying the chain of command, embodying the very subversion they claim is endemic. Dunn was arrested on felony charges and promptly fired—a public scalp meant to signal that no one in the bureaucracy is untouchable.To the administration, the protests outside the White House are not grassroots uprisings but the death throes of the old guard—mostly white, highly educated NGO veterans, retired diplomats, and Beltway lifers. Trump's team insists they are dismantling not democracy but a parallel government that never stood for election.This is the paradox at the heart of Trump's second term. Governing is harder than protesting, and he knows it. But he's betting that a total institutional purge—painful, disruptive, and risky—will finally deliver what “drain the swamp” never could: a federal apparatus aligned with the president's vision, not working to undermine it.In his eyes, cutting out the rot now might save the patient later, even if the surgery leaves scars. Whether history calls it reform or wreckage will depend on who writes the next chapter.

Mi entrevistado en este episodio es Carlos A. Scolari, Catedrático del Departamento de Comunicación de la Universitat Pompeu Fabra – Barcelona. Ha sido Investigador Principal de diversos proyectos de investigación internacionales y estatales, desde el proyecto H2020 TRANSLITERACY (entre 2015 y 2018) hasta el proyecto LITERAC_IA, que comenzó en 2024 y dirige junto a María del Mar Guerrero. Sus últimos libros son Cultura Snack (2020), La guerra de las plataformas (2022) y Sobre la evolución de los medios (2024). Ahora está trabajando en un libro sobre los fósiles mediáticos.Notas del Episodio* Historia de ecologia de los medios* Historia de Carlos* Diferencias entre el anglosfero y el hispanosfero* La coevolucion entre tecnologia y humanos* La democratizacion de los medios* Evolucion de los medios* Alienacion y addiccion* Como usar los medios conscientementeTareaCarlos A. Scolari - Pagina Personal - Facebook - Instagram - Twitter - Escolar GoogleSobre la evolución de los mediosHipermediaciones (Libros)Transcrito en espanol (English Below)Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenido al podcast el fin de turismo Carlos. Gracias por poder hablar conmigo hoy. Es un gran gusto tener tu presencia aquí conmigo hoy. Carlos: No gracias a ti, Chris, por la invitación. Es un enorme placer honor charlar contigo, gran viajero y bueno, yo nunca investigué directamente el tema del turismo.Pero bueno, entiendo que vamos a hablar de ecología de los medios y temas colaterales que nos pueden servir para entender mejor, darle un sentido a todo esto que está pasando en el mundo del turismo. Bueno, yo trabajo en Barcelona. No vivo exactamente en la ciudad, pero trabajo, en la universidad en Barcelona, en la zona céntrica.Y bueno, cada vez que voy a la ciudad cada día se incrementa la cantidad de turistas y se incrementa el debate sobre el turismo, en todas sus dimensiones. Así que es un tema que está la orden del día, no? Chris: Sí, pues me imagino que aunque si no te gusta pensar o si no quieres pensar en el turismo allá, es inevitable tener como una enseñanza [00:01:00] personal de esa industria.Carlos: Sí, hasta que se está convirtiendo casi en un criterio taxonómico, no? ...de clasificación o ciudades con mucho turista ciudades o lugares sin turistas que son los más buscados hasta que se llenan de turistas. Entonces estamos en un círculo vicioso prácticamente. Chris: Ya pues, que en algún memento se que se cambia, se rompe el ciclo, al menos para dar cuenta de lo que estamos haciendo con el comportamiento.Y, yo entiendo que eso también tiene mucho que ver con la ecología de los medios, la falta de capacidad de entender nuestros comportamientos, actitudes, pensamientos, sentimientos, etcétera. Entonces, antes de seguir por tu trabajo y obras, este me gustaría preguntarte de tu camino y de tu vida.Primero me pregunto si podrías definir para nuestros oyentes qué es la ecología de los medios y cómo te [00:02:00] interesó en este campo? Cómo llegaste a dedicar a tu vida a este estudio?Carlos: Sí. A ver un poco. Hay una, esta la historia oficial. Diríamos de la ecología de los medios o en inglés "media ecology," es una campo de investigación, digamos, eh, que nace en los años 60. Hay que tener en cuenta sobre todos los trabajos de Marshall McLuhan, investigador canadiense muy famoso a nivel mundial. Era quizá el filósofo investigador de los medios más famosos en los años 60 y 70.Y un colega de el, Neil Postman, que estaba en la universidad de New York en New York University un poco, digamos entre la gente que rodeaba estos dos referentes, no, en los años 60, de ahí se fue cocinando, diríamos, lo que después se llamó la media ecology. Se dice que el primero que habló de media ecology que aplicó esta metáfora a los medios, fue el mismo Marshall McLuhan en algunas, conversaciones privadas, [00:03:00] cartas que se enviaban finales dos años 50, a principios de los 60, se enviaban los investigadores investigadora de estos temas?Digamos la primera aparición pública del concepto de media ecology fue una conferencia en el año 1968 de Neil Postman. Era una intervención pública que la hablaba de un poco como los medios nos transforman y transforman los medios formar un entorno de nosotros crecemos, nos desarrollamos, no. Y nosotros no somos muy conscientes a veces de ese medio que nos rodea y nos modela.El utilizó por primera vez el concepto de media ecology en una conferencia pública. Y ya, si vamos a principio de los años 70, el mismo Postman crea en NYU, en New York University crea el primer programa en media ecology. O sea que ya en el 73, 74 y 75, empieza a salir lo que yo llamo la segunda generación, de gente [00:04:00] formada algunos en estos cursos de New York.Por ejemplo Christine Nystrom fue la primera tesis doctoral sobre mi ecology; gente como, Paul Levinson que en el año 1979 defiende una tesis doctoral dirigida por Postman sobre evolución de los medios, no? Y lo mismo pasaba en Toronto en los años 70. El Marshall McLuhan falleció en el diciembre del 80.Digamos que los años 70 fueron su última década de producción intelectual. Y hay una serie de colaboradores en ese memento, gente muy joven como Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, que después un poco siguieron trabajando un poco todo esta línea, este enfoque. Y ahí hablamos del frente canadiense, eh?Toda esta segunda generación fue desarrollando, fue ampliando aplicando. No nos olvidemos de Eric McLuhan, el hijo de Marshall, que también fue parte de toda esta movida. [00:05:00] Y si no recuerdo mal en el año 2000, se crea la asociación la Media Ecology Association, que es la Asociación de Ecología de los Medios, que es una organización académica, científica, que nuclea a la gente que se ocupa de media ecology. Si pensamos a nivel más científico epistemológico, podemos pensar esta metáfora de la ecología de los medios desde dos o tres perspectivas. Por un lado, esta idea de que los medios crean ambientes. Esta es una idea muy fuerte de Marsha McLuhan, de Postman y de todo este grupo, no? Los medios - "medio" entendido en sentido muy amplio, no, cualquier tecnología podría ser un medio para ellos.Para Marsha McLuhan, la rueda es un medio. Un un telescopio es un medio. Una radio es un medio y la televisión es un medio, no? O sea, cualquier tecnología puede considerarse un medio. Digamos que estos medios, estas tecnologías, generan un [00:06:00] ambiente que a nosotros nos transforma. Transforma nuestra forma, a veces de pensar nuestra forma de percibir el mundo, nuestra concepción del tiempo del espacio.Y nosotros no somos conscientes de ese cambio. Pensemos que, no sé, antes de 1800, si alguien tenía que hacer un viaje de mil kilómetros (y acá nos acercamos al turismo) kilómetros era un viaje que había que programarlo muchos meses antes. Con la llegada del tren, ya estamos en 1800, esos kilómetros se acortaron. Digamos no? Ahí vemos como si a nosotros hoy nos dicen 1000 kilómetros.Bueno, si, tomamos un avión. Es una hora, una hora y cuarto de viaje. Hoy 1000 kilómetro es mucho menos que hace 200 años y incluso a nivel temporal, se a checo el tiempo. No? Todo eso es consecuencia, digamos este cambio, nuestra percepción es consecuencia de una serie de medios y tecnologías.El ferrocarril. Obviamente, hoy tenemos los aviones. Las mismas redes digitales que, un poco nos han llevado esta idea de "tiempo [00:07:00] real," esta ansiedad de querer todo rápido, no? También esa es consecuencia de estos cambios ambientales generados por los medios y las tecnologías, eh? Esto es un idea muy fuerte, cuando McLuhan y Postman hablaban de esto en los años 60, eran fuertes intuiciones que ellos tenían a partir de una observación muy inteligente de la realidad. Hoy, las ciencias cognitivas, mejor las neurociencia han confirmado estas hipótesis. O sea, hoy existen una serie de eh metodología para estudiar el cerebro y ya se ve como las tecnologías.Los medios afectan incluso la estructura física del cerebro. No? Otro tema que esto es histórico, que los medios afectan nuestra memoria. Esto viene de Platón de hace 2500 años, que él decía que la escritura iba a matar la memoria de los hombres. Bueno, podemos pensar nosotros mismos, no, eh?O por lo menos esta generación, que [00:08:00] vivimos el mundo antes y después de las aplicaciones móviles. Yo hace 30 años, 25 años, tenía mi memoria 30-40 números telefónicos. Hoy no tengo ninguno. Y en esa pensemos también el GPS, no? En una época, los taxistas de Londres, que es una ciudad latica se conocían a memoria la ciudad. Y hoy eso, ya no hace falta porque tienen GPS.Y cuando han ido a estudiar el cerebro de los taxistas de Londres, han visto que ciertas áreas del cerebro se han reducido, digamos, así, que son las áreas que gestionaban la parte espacial. Esto ya McLuhan, lo hablaba en los años 60. Decía como que los cambios narcotizan ciertas áreas de la mente decía él.Pero bueno, vemos que mucha investigación empírica, bien de vanguardia científica de neurociencia está confirmando todas estos pensamientos, todas estas cosas que se decían a los años 60 en adelante, por la media ecology. Otra posibilidad es entender [00:09:00] esto como un ecosistema de medios, Marshall McLuhan siempre decía no le podemos dar significado,no podemos entender un medio aislado de los otros medios. Como que los medios adquieren sentido sólo en relación con otros medios. También Neil Postman y mucha otra gente de la escuela de la media ecology, defiende esta posición, de que, bueno, los medios no podemos entender la historia del cine si no la vinculamos a los videojuegos, si no lo vinculamos a la aparición de la televisión.Y así con todos los medios, no? Eh? Hay trabajos muy interesantes. Por ejemplo, de como en el siglo 19, diferentes medios, podríamos decir, que coevolucionaron entre sí. La prensa, el telégrafo. El tren, que transportaba los diarios también, aparecen las agencias de noticias. O sea, vemos cómo es muy difícil entender el desarrollo de la prensa en el siglo XIX y no lo vinculamos al teléfono, si no lo vinculamos a la fotografía, si no lo vinculamos a la radio fotografía, [00:10:00] también más adelante.O sea, esta idea es muy fuerte. No también es otro de los principios para mí fundamentales de esta visión, que sería que los medios no están solos, forman parte de un ecosistema y si nosotros queremos entender lo que está pasando y cómo funciona todo esto, no podemos, eh, analizar los medios aislados del resto.Hay una tercera interpretación. Ya no sé si es muy metafórica. No? Sobre todo, gente en Italia como el investigador Fausto Colombo de Milán o Michele Cometa, es un investigador de Sicilia, Michele Cometa que él habla de l giro, el giro ecomedial. Estos investigadores están moviéndose en toda una concepción según la cual, estamos en único ecosistema mediático que está contaminado.Está contaminado de "fake news" está contaminado de noticias falsas, está contaminado de discursos de odio, etcétera, etc. Entonces ellos, digamos, retoman esta metáfora ecológica para decir [00:11:00] precisamente tenemos que limpiar este ecosistema así como el ecosistema natural está contaminado, necesita una intervención de limpieza, digamos así de purificación, eh? También el ecosistema mediático corre el mismo peligro, no? Y esta gente también llama la atención, y yo estoy muy cerca de esta línea de trabajo sobre la dimensión material de la comunicación. Y esto también tiene que ver con el turismo, queriendo, no? El impacto ambiental que tiene la comunicación hoy.Entrenar una inteligencia artificial implica un consumo eléctrico brutal; mantener funcionando las redes sociales, eh, tiktok, youtube, lo que sea, implica millones de servidores funcionando que chupan energía eléctrica y hay que enfriarlos además, consumiendo aún más energía eléctrica. Y eso tiene un impacto climático no indiferente.Así que, bueno, digamos, vemos que está metáfora de lo ecológico, aplicado los medios da para dos o tres interpretaciones. Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. Siento que cuando yo empecé tomando ese curso de de Andrew McLuhan, el nieto de Marshall, como te mencioné, cambio mi perspectiva totalmente - en el mundo, en la manera como entiendo y como no entiendo también las nuestras tecnologías, mis movimientos, etcétera, pero ya, por una persona que tiene décadas de estudiando eso, me gustaría saber de de como empezaste. O sea, Andrew, por ejemplo tiene la excusa de su linaje, no de su papá y su abuelo.Pero entonces, como un argentino joven empezó aprendiendo de ecología de medios. Carlos: Bueno, yo te comento. Yo estudié comunicación en argentina en Rosario. Terminé la facultad. El último examen el 24 de junio del 86, que fue el día que nacía el Lionel Messi en Rosario, en Argentina el mismo día. Y [00:13:00] yo trabajaba, colaboraba en una asignatura en una materia que era teorías de la comunicación.E incluso llegué a enseñar hasta el año 90, fueron tres años, porque ya después me fui vivir Italia. En esa época, nosotros leíamos a Marshall McLuhan, pero era una lectura muy sesgada ideológicamente. En América latina, tú lo habrás visto en México. Hay toda una historia, una tradición de críticas de los medios, sobre todo, a todo lo que viene de estados unidos y Canadá está muy cerca de Estados Unidos. Entonces, digamos que en los años 70 y 80 y y hasta hoy te diría muchas veces a Marshall McLuhan se lo criticó mucho porque no criticaba los medios. O sea el te tenía una visión. Él decía, Neil Postman, si tenía una visión muy crítica. Pero en ese caso, este era una de las grandes diferencias entre Postman y McLuhan, que Marshall McLuhan, al menos en [00:14:00] público, él no criticaba los medios. Decía bueno, yo soy un investigador, yo envío sondas. Estoy explorando lo que pasa. Y él nunca se sumó... Y yo creo que eso fue muy inteligente por parte de él... nunca se sumó a este coro mundial de crítica a los medios de comunicación. En esa época, la televisión para mucha gente era un monstruo.Los niños no tenían que ver televisión. Un poco lo que pasa hoy con los móviles y lo que pasa hoy con tiktok. En esa época en la televisión, el monstruo. Entonces, había mucha investigación en Estados Unidos, que ya partía de la base que la televisión y los medios son malos para la gente. Vemos que es una historia que se repite. Yo creo que en ese sentido, Marshall McLuhan, de manera muy inteligente, no se sumó ese coro crítico y él se dedico realmente a pensar los medios desde una perspectiva mucho más libre, no anclada por esta visión yo creo demasiado ideologizada, que en América Latina es muy fuerte. Es muy fuerte. Esto no implica [00:15:00] bajar la guardia, no ser crítico. Al contrario.Pero yo creo que el el verdadero pensamiento crítico parte de no decir tanto ideológica, decimos "esto ya es malo. Vamos a ver esto." Habrá cosas buenas. Habrá cosas mala. Habrá cosa, lo que es innegable, que los medios mas ya que digamos son buenos son va, nos transforman. Y yo creo que eso fue lo importante de la idea McLuhaniana. Entonces mi primer acercamiento a McLuhan fue una perspectiva de los autores críticos que, bueno, sí, viene de Estados Unidos, no critica los medios. Vamos a criticarlo a nosotros a él, no? Y ese fue mi primer acercamiento a Marshall McLuhan. Yo me fui a Italia en la decada de 90. Estuve casi ocho años fuera de la universidad, trabajando en medios digitales, desarrollo de páginas, webs, productos multimédia y pretexto. Y a finales de los 90, dije quiero volver a la universidad. Quiero ser un doctorado. Y dije, "quiero hacer un doctorado. Bueno. Estando en Italia, el doctorado iba a ser de semiótica." Entonces hizo un [00:16:00] doctorado. Mi tesis fue sobre semiótica de las interfaces.Ahi tuve una visión de las interfaces digitales que consideran que, por ejemplo, los instrumentos como el mouse o joystick son extensiones de nuestro cuerpo, no? El mouse prolonga la mano y la mete dentro de la pantalla, no? O el joystick o cualquier otro elemento de la interfaz digital? Claro. Si hablamos de que el mouse es una extensión de la mano, eso es una idea McLuhaniana.Los medios como extensiones del ser humano de sujeto. Entonces, claro ahi yo releo McLuhan en italiano a finales de los años 90, y me reconcilio con McLuhan porque encuentro muchas cosas interesantes para entender precisamente la interacción con las máquinas digitales. En el a 2002, me mudo con mi familia a España. Me reintegro la vida universitaria. [00:17:00] Y ahí me pongo a estudiar la relación entre los viejos y los nuevos medios. Entonces recupero la idea de ecosistema. Recupero toda la nueva, la idea de ecología de mi ecology. Y me pongo a investigar y releer a McLuhan por tercera vez. Y a leerlo en profundidad a él y a toda la escuela de mi ecology para poder entender las dinámicas del actual ecosistema mediático y entender la emergencia de lo nuevo y cómo lo viejo lucha por adaptarse. En el 2009, estuve tres meses trabajando con Bob Logan en the University of Toronto. El año pasado, estuve en el congreso ahí y tuvimos dos pre conferencias con gente con Paolo Granata y todo el grupo de Toronto.O sea que, tengo una relación muy fuerte con todo lo que se producía y se produce en Toronto. Y bueno, yo creo que, a mí hoy, la media ecology, me sirve muchísimo junto a otras disciplina como la semiótica para poder entender el ecosistema [00:18:00] mediático actual y el gran tema de investigación mío hoy, que es la evolución del la ecosistema mediático.Mm, digamos que dentro de la media ecology, empezando de esa tesis doctoral del 79 de Paul Levinson, hay toda una serie de contribuciones, que un poco son los que han ido derivando en mi último libro que salió el año pasado en inglés en Routledge, que se llama The Evolution of Media y acaba de salir en castellano.Qué se llama Sobre La Evolución De los Medios. En la teoría evolutiva de los medios, hay mucha ecología de los medios metidos. Chris: Claro, claro. Pues felicidad es Carlos. Y vamos a volver en un ratito de ese tema de la evolución de medios, porque yo creo que es muy importante y obviamente es muy importante a ti. Ha sido como algo muy importante en tu trabajo. Pero antes de de salir de esa esquina de pensamiento, hubo una pregunta que me mandó Andrew McLuhan para ti, que ya ella contestaste un poco, pero este tiene que ver entre las diferencias en los [00:19:00] mundos de ecología de medios anglofonos y hispánicos. Y ya mencionaste un poco de eso, pero desde los tiempos en los 80 y noventas, entonces me gustaría saber si esas diferencias siguen entre los mundos intelectuales, en el mundo anglofono o hispánico.Y pues, para extender su pregunta un poco, qué piensas sería como un punto o tema o aspecto más importante de lo que uno de esos mundos tiene que aprender el otro en el significa de lo que falta, quizás. Carlos: Si nos focalizamos en el trabajo de Marshall McLuhan, no es que se lo criticó sólo de América Latina.En Europa no caía simpático Marshall McLuhan en los 60, 70. Justamente por lo mismo, porque no criticaba el sistema capitalista de medios. La tradición europea, la tradición de la Escuela de Frankfurt, la escuela de una visión anti [00:20:00] capitalista que denuncia la ideología dominante en los medio de comunicación.Eso es lo que entra en América Latina y ahí rebota con mucha fuerza. Quizá la figura principal que habla desde América Latina, que habló mucho tiempo de América latina es Armand Mattelart. Matterlart es un teórico en la comunicación, investigador de Bélgica. Y él lo encontramos ya a mediados de los años 60 finales de los 60 en Chile en un memento muy particular de la historia de Chile donde había mucha politización y mucha investigación crítica, obviamente con el con con con con el capitalismo y con el imperialismo estadounidense. Quizá la la obra clásica de ese memento es el famoso libro de Mattelart y Dorfman, eh, eh? Para Leer El Pato Donald, que donde ellos desmontan toda la estructura ideológica capitalista, imperialista, que había en los cics en las historietas del pato Donald.Ellos dicen esto se publicó a [00:21:00] principio los 70. Es quizá el libro más vendido de la comic latinoamericana hasta el día de hoy, eh? Ellos dicen hay ideología en la literatura infantil. Con el pato Donald, le están llenando la cabeza a nuestros niños de toda una visión del mundo muy particular.Si uno le el pato Donald de esa época, por lo menos, la mayor parte de las historia del pato Donald, que era, había que a buscar un tesoro y adónde. Eran lugares africana, peruviana, incaica o sea, eran países del tercer mundo. Y ahí el pato Donald, con sus sobrinos, eran lo suficientemente inteligentes para volverse con el oro a Patolandia.Claro. Ideológicamente. Eso no se sostiene. Entonces, la investigación hegemónica en esa época en Europa, en Francia, la semiología pero sobre todo, en América latina, era ésa. Hay que estudiar el mensaje. Hay que estudiar el contenido, porque ahí está la ideología [00:22:00] dominante del capitalismo y del imperialismo.En ese contexto, entra McLuhan. Se traduce McLuhan y que dice McLuhan: el medio es el mensaje. No importa lo que uno lee, lo que nos transforma es ver televisión, leer comics, escuchar la radio. Claro, iba contramano del mainstream de la investigación en comunicación. O sea, digamos que en América latina, la gente que sigue en esa línea que todavía existe y es fuerte, no es una visión muy crítica de todo esto, todavía hoy, a Marshal McLuhan le cae mal, pero lo mismo pasa en Europa y otros países donde la gente que busca una lectura crítica anti-capitalista y anti-sistémica de la comunicación, no la va a encontrar nunca en Marshall McLuhan, por más que sea de América latina, de de de Europa o de Asia. Entonces yo no radicaría todo esto en un ámbito anglosajón y el latinoamericano. Después, bueno, la hora de McLuhan es bastante [00:23:00] polisemica. Admite como cualquier autor así, que tiene un estilo incluso de escritura tan creativo en forma de mosaico.No era un escritor Cartesiano ordenadito y formal. No, no. McLuhan era una explosión de ideas muy bien diseñada a propósito, pero era una explosión de ideas. Por eso siempre refrescan tener a McLuhan. Entonces normal que surjan interpretaciones diferentes, no? En estados unidos en Canadá, en Inglaterra, en Europa continental o en Latinoamérica o en Japón, obviamente, no? Siendo un autor que tiene estas características. Por eso yo no en no anclaría esto en cuestiones territoriales. Cuando uno busca un enfoque que no tenga esta carga ideológica para poder entender los medios, que no se limite sólo a denunciar el contenido.McLuhan y la escuela de la ecología de los medios es fundamental y es un aporte muy, muy importante en ese sentido, no? Entonces, bueno, yo creo que McLuhan tuvo [00:24:00] detractores en Europa, tuvo detractores en América latina y cada tanto aparece alguno, pero yo creo que esto se ido suavizando. Yo quiero que, como que cada vez más se lo reivindica McLuhan.La gente que estudia, por ejemplo, en Europa y en América latina, que quizá en su época criticaron a McLuhan, todas las teorías de la mediatización, por ejemplo, terminan coincidiendo en buena parte de los planteos de la media ecology. Hoy que se habla mucho de la materialidad de la comunicación, los nuevos materialismos, yo incluyo a Marshall McLuhan en uno de los pioneros des esta visión también de los nuevos materialismos. Al descentrar el análisis del contenido, al medio, a la cosa material, podemos considerar a macl también junto a Bruno Latour y otra gente como pionero, un poco de esta visión de no quedarse atrapados en el giro lingüístico, no, en el contenido, en el giro semiótico e incorporar también la dimensión material de la comunicación y el medio en sí.[00:25:00] Chris: Muy bien. Muy bien, ya. Wow, es tanto, pero lo aprecio mucho. Gracias, Carlos. Y me gustaría seguir preguntándote un poco ahora de tu propio trabajo. Tienes un capítulo en tu libro. Las Leyes de la Interfaz titulado "Las Interfaces Co-evolucionan Con Sus Usuarios" donde escribes "estas leyes de la interfaz no desprecian a los artefactos, sus inventores ó las fuerzas sociales. Solo se limitan á insertarlos á una red socio técnica de relaciones, intercambios y transformaciones para poder analizarlos desde una perspectiva eco-evolutiva."Ahora, hay un montón ahí en este paragrafito. Pero entonces, me gustaría preguntarte, cómo vea los humanos [00:26:00] co-evolucionando con sus tecnologías? Por ejemplo, nuestra forma de performatividad en la pantalla se convierte en un hábito más allá de la pantalla.Carlos: Ya desde antes del homo sapiens, los homínidos más avanzados, digamos en su momento, creaban instrumentos de piedra. Hemos descubierto todos los neandertales tenían una cultura muy sofisticada, incluso prácticas casi y religiosas, más allá de la cuestión material de la construcción de artefactos. O sea que nuestra especie es impensable sin la tecnología, ya sea un hacha de piedra o ya sea tiktok o un smartphone. Entonces, esto tenemos que tenerlo en cuenta cuando analizamos cualquier tipo de de interacción cotidiana, estamos rodeados de tecnología y acá, obviamente, la idea McLuhaniana es fundamental. Nosotros creamos estos medios. Nosotros creamos estas tecnologías.Estas tecnologías también nos reformatean. [00:27:00] McLuhan, no me suena que haya usado el concepto de coevolución, pero está ahí. Está hablando de eso. Ahora bien. Hay una coevolución si se quiere a larguísimo plazo, que, por ejemplo, sabemos que el desarrollo de instrumentos de piedra, el desarrollo del fuego, hizo que el homo sapiens no necesitara una mandíbula tan grande para poder masticar los alimentos. Y eso produce todo un cambio, que achicó la mandíbula le dejó más espacio en el cerebro, etcétera, etcétera. Eso es una coevolución en término genético, digamos a larguísimo plazo, okey. También la posición eréctil, etcétera, etcétera. Pero, digamos que ya ahí había tecnologías humanas coevolucionando con estos cambios genéticos muy, muy lentos.Pero ahora tenemos también podemos decir esta co evolución ya a nivel de la estructura neuronal, entonces lo ha verificado la neurociencia, como dije antes. Hay cambio físico en la estructura del cerebro a lo largo de la vida de una persona debido a la interacción con ciertas tecnologías. Y por qué pasa eso?Porque [00:28:00] la producción, creación de nuevos medios, nuevas tecnologías se ido acelerando cada vez más. Ahi podemos hacer una curva exponencial hacia arriba, para algunos esto empezó hace 10,000 años. Para algunos esto se aceleró con la revolución industrial. Algunos hablan de la época el descubrimiento de América.Bueno, para alguno esto es un fenómeno de siglo xx. El hecho es que en términos casi geológicos, esto que hablamos del antropoceno es real y está vinculado al impacto del ser humano sobre nuestro ambiente y lo tecnológico es parte de ese proceso exponencial de co evolución. Nosotros hoy sentimos un agobio frente a esta aceleración de la tecnología y nuestra necesidad. Quizá de adaptarnos y coevolucionar con ella. Como esto de que todo va muy rápido. Cada semana hay un problema nuevo, una aplicación nueva. Ahora tenemos la inteligencia artificial, etc, etcétera. Pero esta sensación [00:29:00] no es nueva. Es una sensación de la modernidad. Si uno lee cosas escritas en 1,800 cuando llega el tren también la gente se quejaba que el mundo iba muy rápido. Dónde iremos a parar con este caballo de hierro que larga humo no? O sea que esta sensación de velocidad de cambio rápido ya generaciones anteriores la vivían. Pero evidentemente, el cambio hoy es mucho más rápido y denso que hace dos siglos. Y eso es real también. Así que, bueno, nuestra fe se va coevolucionando y nos vamos adaptando como podemos, yo esta pregunta se la hice hace 10 años a Kevin Kelly, el primer director de la revista Wire que lo trajimos a Barcelona y el que siempre es muy optimista. Kevin Kelly es determinista tecnológico y optimista al mismo tiempo. Él decía que "que bueno que el homo sapiens lo va llevando bastante bien. Esto de co evolucionar con la tecnología." Otra gente tiene una [00:30:00] visión radicalmente opuesta, que esto es el fin del mundo, que el homo sapiens estamos condenados a desaparecer por esta co evolución acelerada, que las nuevas generaciones son cada vez más estúpidas.Yo no creo eso. Creo, como McLuhan, que los medios nos reforman, nos cambian algunas cosas quizás para vivir otras quizá no tanto, pero no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de esto para nada. Chris: Bien, bien. Entonces cuando mencionaste lo de la televisión, yo me acuerdo mucho de de mi niñez y no sé por qué. Quizás fue algo normal en ese tiempo para ver a tele como un monstruo, como dijiste o quizás porque mis mis papás eran migrantes pero fue mucho de su idea de esa tecnología y siempre me dijo como no, no, no quédate ahí tan cerca y eso.Entonces, aunque lo aceptaron, ellos comprendieron que el poder [00:31:00] de la tele que tenía sobre las personas. Entonces ahora todos, parece a mí, que todos tienen su propio canal, no su propio programación, o el derecho o privilegio de tener su propio canal o múltiples canales.Entonces, es una gran pregunta, pero cuáles crees que son las principales consecuencias de darle a cada uno su propio programa en el sentido de como es el efecto de hacer eso, de democratizar quizás la tecnología en ese sentido? Carlos: Cuando dices su propio canal, te refieres a la posibilidad de emitir o construir tu propia dieta mediática.Chris: Bueno primero, pero puede ser ambos, claro, no? O sea, mi capacidad de tener un perfil o cuenta mía personal. Y luego como el fin del turismo, no? Y luego otro. Carlos: Sí, a ver. Yo creo que, bueno, esto fue el gran cambio radical que empezó a darse a partir la década del 2000 o [00:32:00] sea, hace 25 años. Porque la web al principio sí era una red mundial en los años 90. Pero claro la posibilidad de compartir un contenido y que todo el mundo lo pudiera ver, estaba muy limitado a crear una página web, etcétera. Cuando aparecen las redes sociales o las Web 2.0 como se la llamaba en esa época y eso se suma los dispositivos móviles, ahí se empieza a generar esta cultura tan difundida de la creación de contenido. Hasta digamos que hasta ese momento quien generaba contenido era más o menos un profesional en la radio y en la televisión, pero incluso en la web o en la prensa o el cine. Y a partir de ahí se empieza, digamos, a abrir el juego. En su momento, esto fue muy bien saludado fue qué bueno! Esto va nos va a llevar a una sociedad más democrática. 25 años después, claro, estamos viendo el lado oscuro solamente. Yo creo que el error hace 25 años era pensar solo las posibilidades [00:33:00] buenas, optimistas, de esto. Y hoy me parece que estamos enredados en discursos solamente apocalípticos no?No vemos las cosas buenas, vemos solo las cosas malas. Yo creo que hay de las dos cosas hoy. Claro, hoy cualquier persona puede tener un canal, sí, pero no todo el mundo crea un canal. Los niveles de participación son muy extraños, o sea, la mayor parte de la población de los usuarios y usuarias entre en las redes. Mira. Mete un me gusta. Quizá un comentario. Cada tanto comparte una foto. Digamos que los "heavy users" o "heavy producers" de contenido son siempre una minoría, ya sea profesionales, ya sea influencers, streamers, no? Es siempre, yo no sé si acá estamos en un 20-80 o un 10-90 son estas curvas que siempre fue así? No? Si uno ve la Wikipedia, habrá un 5-10 por ciento de gente que genera contenido mucho menos incluso. Y un 90 por ciento que se [00:34:00] beneficia del trabajo de una minoría. Esto invierte la lógica capitalista? La mayoría vive de la minoría y esto pasaba antes también en otros, en otros sistemas. O sea que en ese sentido, es sólo una minoría de gente la que genera contenido de impacto, llamémoslo así, de alcance mayor.Pero bueno, yo creo que el hecho de que cualquier persona pueda dar ese salto para mí, está bien. Genera otra serie de problemas, no? Porque mientras que genera contenido, es un profesional o un periodista, digamos, todavía queda algo de normas éticas y que deben cumplir no? Yo veo que en el mundo de los streamers, el mundo de los Tik tokers etcétera, etcétera, lo primero que ellos dicen es, nosotros no somos periodistas. Y de esa forma, se inhiben de cualquier, control ético o de respeto a normas éticas profesionales. Por otro lado, las plataformas [00:35:00] Meta, Google, todas. Lo primero que te dicen es nosotros no somos medio de comunicación. Los contenidos los pone la gente.Nosotros no tenemos nada que ver con eso. Claro, ellos también ahí se alejan de toda la reglamentación. Por eso hubo que hacer. Europa y Estados Unidos tuvo que sacar leyes especiales porque ellos decían no, no, las leyes del periodismo a nosotros no nos alcanzan. Nosotros no somos editores de contenidos.Y es una mentira porque las plataformas sí editan contenido a través los algoritmos, porque nos están los algoritmos, nos están diciendo que podemos ver y que no está en primera página. No están filtrando información, o sea que están haciendo edición. Entonces, como que se generan estas equivocaciones.Y eso es uno de los elementos que lleva esta contaminación que mencioné antes en el en los ámbitos de la comunicación. Pero yo, si tuviera que elegir un ecosistema con pocos enunciadores pocos medios controlados por profesionales y este ecosistema [00:36:00] caótico en parte contaminado con muchos actores y muchas voces, yo prefiero el caos de hoy a la pobreza del sistema anterior.Prefiero lidiar, pelearme con y estar buscar de resolver el problema de tener mucha información, al problema de la censura y tener sólo dos, tres puntos donde se genera información. Yo he vivido en Argentina con dictadura militar con control férreo de medios, coroneles de interventores en la radio y la televisión que controlaban todo lo que se decía.Y yo prefiero el caos de hoy, aún con fake news y todo lo que quieras. Prefiero el caos de hoy a esa situación. Chris: Sí, sí, sí, sí. Es muy fuerte de pensar en eso para la gente que no han vivido en algo así, no? Osea algunos familiares extendidos han vivido en mundos comunistas, en el pasado en el este de Europa y no se hablan [00:37:00] exactamente así.Pero, se se hablan, no? Y se se dicen que lo que lo que no tenía ni lo que no tiene por control y por fuerza. Entonces, en ese como mismo sentido de lo que falta de la memoria vivida, me gustaría preguntarte sobre tu nuevo libro. Y sobre la evolución de medios. Entonces me gustaría preguntarte igual por nuestros oyentes que quizás no han estudiado mucho de la ecología de los medios Para ti qué es la evolución de los medios y por qué es importante para nuestro cambiante y comprensión del mundo. O sea, igual al lado y no solo pegado a la ecología de medios, pero la evolución de los medios,Carlos: Sí, te cuento ahí hay una disciplina, ya tradicional que es la historia y también está la historia de la comunicación y historia de los medios. [00:38:00] Hay libros muy interesantes que se titulan Historia de la Comunicación de Gutenberg a Internet o Historia de la Comunicación del Papiro a Tiktok. Entonces, qué pasa? Esos libros te dicen bueno, estaba el papiro, después vino el pergamino, el manuscrito, después en 1450 vino Gutenberg, llegó el libro. Pero eso el libro no te cuentan que pasó con el manuscrito, ni que pasó con el papiro. Y te dicen que llega la radio en 1920 y en 1950 llega la televisión y no te dicen que pasó con la radio, que pasó con el cine.Son historias lineales donde un medio parece que va sustituyendo al otro. Y después tenemos muchos libros muy buenos también. Historia de la radio, historia de la televisión, historia de internet, historia del periodismo. Como dije antes, retomando una idea, de McLuhan no podemos entender los medios aislados.Yo no puedo entender la evolución de la radio si no la vinculo a la prensa, a [00:39:00] la televisión y otro al podcast. Okey, entonces digo, necesitamos un campo de investigación, llamémoslo una disciplina en construcción, que es una teoría y también es metodología para poder entender el cambio mediático, todas estas transformaciones del ecosistema de medios a largo plazo y que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino, ver cómo esa red de medios fue evolucionando. Y eso yo lo llamo una teoría evolutiva o una "media evolution" Y es lo que estoy trabajando ahora. Claro, esta teoría, este enfoque, este campo de investigación toma muchas cosas de la ecología de los medios, empezando por Marshall McLuhan pero también gente de la tradición previa a la media ecology como Harold Innis, el gran historiador, economista de la comunicación y de la sociedad, que fue quizás el intelectual más famoso en Canadá en la primera mitad del siglo XX. Harold Innis que influenció mucho a Marshall McLuhan [00:40:00] Marshall McLuhann en la primera página de Gutenberg Galaxy, dice este libro no es otra cosa que una nota al pie de página de la obra de Harold Innis Entonces, Harold Innis que hizo una historia de los tiempos antiguos poniendo los medios al centro de esa historia. Para mí es fundamental. Incluso te diría a veces más que McLuhan, como referencia, a la hora de hacer una teoría evolutiva del cambio mediático. Y después, obviamente tomo muchas cosas de la historia de los medios.Tomo muchas cosas de la arqueología de los medios (media archeology). Tomo cosas también de la gente que investigó la historia de la tecnología, la construcción social de la tecnología. O sea, la media evolution es un campo intertextual, como cualquier disciplina que toma cosas de todos estos campos para poder construir una teoría, un enfoque, una mirada que sea más a largo plazo, que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino que vea la evolución de todo el ecosistema mediático, prestando mucha atención a las relaciones [00:41:00] entre medios, y con esta visión más compleja sistémica de cómo cambian las cosas.Yo creo que el cambio mediático es muy rápido y necesitamos una teoría para poder darle un sentido a todo este gran cambio, porque si nos quedamos analizando cosas muy micro, muy chiquititas, no vemos los grandes cambios. No nos podemos posicionar... esto un poco como el fútbol. Los mejores jugadores son los que tienen el partido en la cabeza y saben dónde está todo. No están mirando la pelota, pero saben dónde están los otros jugadores? Bueno, yo creo que la media evolution sirve para eso. Más allá de que hoy estemos todos hablando de la IA generativa. No? Tener esta visión de de conjunto de todo el ecosistema mediático y tecnológico, yo creo que es muy útil.Chris: Mm. Wow Increíble, increíble. Sí. Sí. Pienso mucho en como las nuevas generaciones o las generaciones más jóvenes en el día de hoy. O sea, [00:42:00] al menos más joven que yo, que la mayoría, como que tiene 20 años hoy, no tienen una memoria vívida de cómo fuera el mundo, sin redes sociales o sin el internet. Y así como me voy pensando en mi vida y como yo, no tengo una memoria de vida como fuera el mundo sin pantallas de cualquier tipo, o sea de tele de compus. No solo de internet o redes. Carlos: Sí, no, te decia que mi padre vivió, mi padre tiene 90 años y él se recuerda en el año 58, 59, su casa fue la primera en un barrio de Rosario que tuvo televisión y transmitían a partir de la tarde seis, siete de la tarde. Entonces venían todos los vecinos y vecinas a ver televisión a la casa de mi abuela. Entonces cada uno, cada generación tiene sus historias. No? Chris: Ajá. Ajá. Sí. Pues sí. Y también, como dijiste, para [00:43:00] entender los medios como sujetos o objetos individuales, o sea en su propio mundo, no? Este recuerdo un poco de la metáfora de Robin Wall Kimmerer que escribió un libro que se llama Braiding Sweetgrass o Trenzando Pasto Dulce supongo, en español. Y mencionó que para entender el entendimiento indígena, digamos entre comillas de tiempo, no necesitamos pensar en una línea, una flecha desde el pasado hacia el futuro. Pero, un lago, mientras el pasado, presente, y futuro existen, a la vez, en ese lago.Y también pienso como en el lugar, el pasado, presente, y el futuro, como todos esos medios existiendo a la vez, como en un lago y obviamente en una ecología de su evolución de sus cambios. Carlos: Es, muy interesante eso. Después te voy a pedir la referencia del libro porque, claro, [00:44:00] McLuhan siempre decía que el contenido de un medio es otro medio. Entonces, puede pasar que un medio del pasado deja su huella o influye en un medio del futuro. Y entonces ahí se rompe la línea temporal. Y esos son los fenómenos que a mí me interesa estudiar. Chris: Mmm, mmm, pues Carlos para terminar, tengo dos últimas preguntas para ti. Esta vez un poco alineado con el turismo, y aunque no estas enfocado tanto en en el estudio de turismo. Por mis estudios y investigaciones y por este podcast, he amplificado esa definición de turismo para ver cómo existiría más allá de una industria. Y para mí, el turismo incluye también el deseo de ver una persona, un lugar o una cultura como destino, como algo útil, temporal en su valor de uso y por tanto, desechable. Entonces, me gustaría [00:45:00] preguntarte, si para ti parece que nuestros medios populares, aunque esto es un tiempo, digamos con más libertad de otros lugares o tiempos en el pasado, más autoritarianos o totalitarianos? Si te ves la posibilidad o la evidencia de que nuestros medios digamos como mainstream más usados, están creando o promoviendo un , un sentido de alienación en la gente por efectivamente quedarles a distancia al otro o la otra.Carlos: Yo ya te dije no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de los medios. Nunca, la tuve. Esto no quita de que los medios y como dijimos antes, tienen problemas. Generan también contaminación. Llamémoslo así si seguimos con la metáfora, ? El tema de alienación viene desde hace [00:46:00] muchísimos años. Ya cuando estudiaba en la universidad, nunca sintonicé con las teorías de la alienación.El concepto de alienación viene del siglo XIX. Toda una teoría de la conciencia, el sujeto, el proletario, llamémoslo, así que tenía que tomar conciencia de clase. Bueno, las raíces de esa visión del concepto alienación vienen de ahí. Yo, a mí nunca me convenció, justamente. Y acá si interesante.El aporte de América Latina en teorías de la comunicación siempre fue diferente. Fue reivindicar la resignificación, la resemantización el rol activo del receptor, cuando muchas veces las teorías que venían de Europa o Estados Unidos tenían esta visión del receptor de la comunicación como un ser pasivo. En ese sentido, la media ecology nunca entró en ese discurso porque se manejaba con otros parámetros, pero digamos que lo que era el mainstream de la investigación de estados unidos, pero también de Europa, siempre coincidían en esto en considerar el receptor pasivo, alienado, [00:47:00] estupidizado por los medios. Y yo realmente nunca, me convenció ese planteo, ni antes ni hoy, ni con la televisión de los 70 y 80, ni con el tiktok de hoy.Esto no quita que puede haber gente que tenga alguna adicción, etcétera, etcétera. Pero yo no creo que toda la sociedad sea adicta hoy a la pantallita. Deja de ser adicción. Okey. Esto no implica que haya que no tener una visión crítica. Esto no implica que haya que eventualmente regular los usos de ciertas tecnologías, obviamente.Pero de ahí a pensar que estamos en un escenario apocalíptico, de idiotización total del homo sapiens o de alienación. Yo no lo veo, ni creo que lo los estudios empíricos confirmen eso. Más allá que a veces hay elecciones y no nos gusten los resultados.Pero ahí es interesante, porque cuando tu propio partido político pierde, siempre se le echa la culpa a los medios porque ganó el otro. Pero cuando tu partido político gana, nadie dice nada de los medios. Ganamos porque somos mejores, [00:48:00] porque tenemos mejores ideas, porque somos más democráticos, porque somos más bonitos.Entonces, claro te das cuenta que se usan los medios como chivo expiatorio para no reconocer las propias debilidades políticas a la hora de denunciar una propuesta o de seducir al electorado.Chris: Claro, claro. Ya pues estos temas son vastos y complejos. Y por eso me gusta, y por eso estoy muy agradecido por pasar este tiempo contigo, Carlos.Pero los temas requieren un profundo disciplina para comprender, o al menos según yo, como alguien que está muy nuevo a estos temas. Entonces, a nuestra época, parece que somos, según yo, arrastrados a una velocidad sin precedentes. Nuestras tecnologías están avanzando y quizás socavando simultáneamente nuestra capacidad de comprender lo que está sucediendo en el mundo. Los usamos como protesta a veces como, como mencionaste, [00:49:00] pero sin una comprensión más profunda de cómo nos usan también. Entonces tengo la curiosidad por saber qué papel desempeña la ecología de los medios en la redención o curación de la cultura en nuestro tiempo. Cómo podría la ecología de los medios ser un aliado, quizás, en nuestros caminos? Carlos: Sí, yo creo que esta idea estaba presente, no? En los teóricos de la media ecology, digamos la primera generación.Ahora que lo pienso, estaba también en la semiótica de Umberto Eco, no? Cuando decía la semiótica más allá de analizar cómo se construye significado, también aporta a mejorar la vida significativa, o sea, la vida cultural, la vida comunicacional, nuestro funcionamiento como sujeto, digamos. Y yo creo que en ese sentido, la media ecology también.Digamos, si nosotros entendemos el ecosistema mediático, vamos a poder sacarlo mejor [00:50:00] coevolucionar mejor. Vamos a ser más responsables también a la hora de generar contenidos, a la hora de retwittear de manera a veces automática ciertas cosas. Yo creo que es todo un crecimiento de vivir una vida mediática sana, que yo creo que hoy existe esa posibilidad.Yo estoy en Twitter desde el 2008-2009 y sólo dos veces tuve así un encontronazo y bloqueé a una persona mal educada. Después el resto de mi vida en Twitter, es rica de información de contactos. Aprendo muchísimo me entero de cosas que se están investigando. O sea, también están uno elegir otras cosas.Y por ejemplo, donde veo que yo hay que hay redes que no me aportan nada, no directamente ni entro. También es eso de aprender a sacar lo mejor de este ecosistema mediático. Y lo mismo para el ecosistema natural. Así como estamos aprendiendo a preocuparnos de dónde viene la comida, [00:51:00] cuánto tiempo se va a tardar en disolver este teléfono móvil por los componentes que tiene. Bueno, también es tomar conciencia de eso. Ya sea en el mundo natural, como en el mundo de la comunicación. Y yo creo que todos estos conocimientos, en este caso, la media ecology nos sirve para captar eso, no? Y mejorar nosotros también como sujetos, que ya no somos más el centro del universo, que esta es la otra cuestión. Somos un átomo más perdido entre una complejidad muy grande. Chris: Mm. Mm, pues que estas obras y trabajos y estudios tuyos y de los demás nos da la capacidad de leer y comprender ese complejidad, no?O sea, parece más y más complejo cada vez y nos requiere como más y más discernimiento. Entonces, yo creo que pues igual, hemos metido mucho en tu voluntad y capacidad de [00:52:00] hacer eso y ponerlo en el mundo. Entonces, finalmente Carlos me gustaría a extender mi agradecimiento y la de nuestros oyentes por tu tiempo hoy, tu consideración y tu trabajo.Siento que pues, la alfabetización mediática y la ecología de los medios son extremadamente deficientes en nuestro tiempo y su voluntad de preguntar sobre estas cosas y escribir sobre ellas es una medicina para un mundo quebrantado y para mi turístico. Entonces, así que muchísimas gracias, Carlos, por venir hoy.Carlos: Gracias. Te agradezco por las preguntas. Y bueno, yo creo que el tema del turismo es un tema que está ocupa lugar central hoy. Si tú estuvieras en Barcelona, verías que todos los días se está debatiendo este tema. Así que yo creo que bueno, adelante con esa reflexión y esa investigación sobre el turismo, porque es muy pertinente y necesaria.Chris: Pues sí, gracias. [00:53:00] Igual yo siento que hay una conexión fuerte entre esas definiciones más amplias de turismo y la ecología de medios. O sea, ha abierto una apertura muy grande para mí para entender el turismo más profundamente. Igual antes de terminar Carlos, cómo podrían nuestros oyentes encontrar tus libros y tu trabajo?Sé que hemos hablado de dos libros que escribiste, pero hay mucho más. Muchísimo más. Entonces, cómo se pueden encontrarlos y encontrarte?Carlos: Lo más rápido es en en mi blog, que es hipermediaciones.com Ahí van a encontrar información sobre todos los libros que voy publicando, etcétera, etc. Y después, bueno, yo soy muy activo, como dije en Twitter X. Me encuentran la letra CEscolari y de Carlos es mi Twitter. Y bueno, también ahí trato de difundir información sobre estos [00:54:00] temas.Como dije antes, aprendo mucho de esa red y trato de también devolver lo que me dan poniendo siempre información pertinente. Buenos enlaces. Y no pelearme mucho.Chris: Muy bien, muy bien, pues voy a asegurar que esos enlaces y esas páginas estén ya en la sección de tarea el sitio web de El fin del turismo cuando sale el episodio. Igual otras entrevistas y de tus libros. No hay falta. Entonces, con mucho gusto, los voy compartiendo. Bueno, Carlos, muchísimas gracias y lo aprecio mucho.Carlos: Muchas gracias y nos vemos en México.English TranscriptionChris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the podcast The End of Tourism, Carlos. Thank you for being able to speak with me today. It's a great pleasure to have you here with me today.Carlos: No, thank you, Chris, for the invitation. It is a great pleasure and honor to chat with you, a great traveler and, well, I have never directly investigated the subject of tourism.Well, I understand that we are going to talk about media ecology and collateral issues that can help us better understand, give meaning to all that is happening in the world of tourism. Well, I work in Barcelona. I don't live in the city exactly, but I work at the university in Barcelona, in the central area.Well, every time I go to the city, the number of tourists increases every day and the debate on tourism in all its dimensions increases. So it is a topic that is on the agenda, right?Chris: Yes, well I imagine that even if you don't like to think or if you don't want to think about tourism there, it is inevitable to have a personal lesson [00:01:00] from that industry.Carlos: Yes, to the point that it is almost becoming a taxonomic criterion, right? ...of classification or cities with a lot of tourists, cities or places without tourists that are the most sought after until they are filled with tourists. So we are practically in a vicious circle.Chris: Well, at some point I know that it changes, the cycle breaks, at least to account for what we are doing with the behavior.And I understand that this also has a lot to do with the ecology of the media, the lack of ability to understand our behaviors, attitudes, thoughts, feelings, etc. So, before continuing with your work and deeds, I would like to ask you about your path and your life.First, I wonder if you could define for our listeners what media ecology is and how you [00:02:00] became interested in this field? How did you come to dedicate your life to this study?Carlos: Yes. Let's see a little bit. There is one, this is the official history. We would say media ecology, it is a field of research, let's say, that was born in the 60s. We must take into account above all the work of Marshall McLuhan, a Canadian researcher who is very famous worldwide. He was perhaps the most famous media researcher philosopher in the 60s and 70s.And a colleague of his, Neil Postman, who was at New York University, was a bit, let's say, among the people who surrounded these two references, no, in the 60s, from there it was brewing, let's say, what was later called media ecology. It is said that the first person to talk about media ecology, who applied this metaphor to the media, was Marshall McLuhan himself in some private conversations, [00:03:00] letters that were sent to each other in the late 50s, early 60s, by researchers on these topics?Let's say the first public appearance of the concept of media ecology was a lecture in 1968 by Neil Postman. It was a public speech that talked about how the media transforms us and how the media transforms us, forming an environment in which we grow, develop, and so on. And we are sometimes not very aware of this environment that surrounds us and shapes us.He first used the concept of media ecology in a public lecture. And then, if we go back to the early 70s, Postman himself created the first program in media ecology at NYU, at New York University. So, in 73, 74 and 75, what I call the second generation began to emerge, of people [00:04:00] some of whom were trained in these courses in New York.For example, Christine Nystrom was the first PhD thesis on my ecology; people like Paul Levinson who in 1979 defended a PhD thesis directed by Postman on the evolution of the media, right? And the same thing happened in Toronto in the 70s. Marshall McLuhan died in December 80.Let's say that the 70s were his last decade of intellectual production. And there are a number of collaborators at that time, very young people like Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, who later continued to work a bit along these lines, along these lines. And there we talk about the Canadian front, eh?This whole second generation was developing, expanding and applying. Let's not forget Eric McLuhan, Marshall's son, who was also part of this whole movement. [00:05:00] And if I remember correctly, in 2000, the Media Ecology Association was created, which is the Media Ecology Association, which is an academic, scientific organization that brings together people who deal with media ecology.If we think at a more scientific epistemological level, we can think of this metaphor of media ecology from two or three perspectives. On the one hand, this idea that media create environments. This is a very strong idea of Marsha McLuhan, of Postman and of this whole group, isn't it? The media - "medium" understood in a very broad sense, no, any technology could be a medium for them.For Marsha McLuhan, the wheel is a medium. A telescope is a medium. A radio is a medium and television is a medium, right? I mean, any technology can be considered a medium. Let's say that these media, these technologies, generate a [00:06:00] environment that transforms us. It transforms our way, sometimes our way of thinking, our way of perceiving the world, our conception of time and space.And we are not aware of that change. Let's think that, I don't know, before 1800, if someone had to make a trip of a thousand kilometers (and here we are approaching tourism) kilometers was a trip that had to be planned many months in advance. With the arrival of the train, we are already in 1800, those kilometers were shortened. Let's say no? There we see as if today they tell us 1000 kilometers.Well, yes, we take a plane. It's an hour, an hour and a quarter of a journey. Today, 1000 kilometres is much less than 200 years ago and even in terms of time, time has changed. Right? All of that is a consequence, let's say, of this change, our perception is a consequence of a series of media and technologies.The railroad. Obviously, today we have airplanes. The same digital networks that have somewhat brought us this idea of "time [00:07:00] real," this anxiety of wanting everything fast, right? That is also a consequence of these environmental changes generated by the media and technologies, eh? This is a very strong idea, when McLuhan and Postman talked about this in the 60s, they were strong intuitions that they had from a very intelligent observation of reality. Today, cognitive sciences, or rather neuroscience, have confirmed these hypotheses. In other words, today there are a series of methodologies to study the brain and we can already see how technologies...The media even affects the physical structure of the brain. Right? Another thing that is historical is that the media affects our memory. This comes from Plato 2,500 years ago, who said that writing would kill the memory of men. Well, we can think for ourselves, right?Or at least this generation, who [00:08:00] lived in a world before and after mobile apps. 30 years ago, 25 years ago, I had 30-40 phone numbers in my memory. Today I don't have any. And let's also think about GPS, right? At one time, taxi drivers in London, which is a Latin city, knew the city by heart. And today, that's no longer necessary because they have GPS.And when they went to study the brains of London taxi drivers, they saw that certain areas of the brain had shrunk, so to speak, which are the areas that manage the spatial part. McLuhan already talked about this in the 60s. He said that changes narcotize certain areas of the mind, he said.But well, we see that a lot of empirical research, very cutting-edge neuroscience research is confirming all these thoughts, all these things that were said in the 60s onwards, by media ecology. Another possibility is to understand [00:09:00] this as a media ecosystem, Marshall McLuhan always said we cannot give it meaning,We cannot understand a medium in isolation from other media. It is as if media only acquire meaning in relation to other media. Neil Postman and many other people from the school of media ecology also defend this position, that, well, we cannot understand the history of cinema if we do not link it to video games, if we do not link it to the appearance of television.And so with all the media, right? Eh? There are some very interesting works. For example, about how in the 19th century, different media, we could say, co-evolved with each other. The press, the telegraph. The train, which also transported newspapers, news agencies appeared. I mean, we see how it is very difficult to understand the development of the press in the 19th century and we don't link it to the telephone, if we don't link it to photography, if we don't link it to radio photography, [00:10:00] also later on.I mean, this idea is very strong. It is also one of the principles that I consider fundamental to this vision, which would be that the media are not alone, they are part of an ecosystem and if we want to understand what is happening and how all this works, we cannot, uh, analyze the media in isolation from the rest.There is a third interpretation. I don't know if it's too metaphorical, right? Above all, people in Italy like the researcher Fausto Colombo from Milan or Michele Cometa, he is a researcher from Sicily, Michele Cometa who talks about the turn, the ecomedia turn. These researchers are moving in a whole conception according to which, we are in a unique media ecosystem that is contaminated.It is contaminated by "fake news" it is contaminated by false news, it is contaminated by hate speech, etc., etc. So they, let's say, take up this ecological metaphor to say [00:11:00] We have to clean this ecosystem just as the natural ecosystem is contaminated, it needs a cleaning intervention, let's say a purification, eh?The media ecosystem is also in the same danger, isn't it? And these people are also calling attention, and I am very close to this line of work on the material dimension of communication. And this also has to do with tourism, right? The environmental impact that communication has today.Training an artificial intelligence involves a huge amount of electricity; keeping social networks running, eh, TikTok, YouTube, whatever, involves millions of servers running that suck up electricity and also have to be cooled, consuming even more electricity. And that has a significant impact on the climate.So, well, let's say, we see that this metaphor of the ecological, applied to the media, gives rise to two or three interpretations.Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. I feel like when I started taking that course from Andrew McLuhan, Marshall's grandson, as I mentioned, it changed my perspective completely - on the world, on the way I understand and how I don't understand our technologies, my movements, etc. But now, from a person who has been studying this for decades, I would like to know how you started. I mean, Andrew, for example, has the excuse of his lineage, not his father and his grandfather.But then, as a young Argentine, he began learning about media ecology.Carlos: Well, I'll tell you. I studied communication in Argentina, in Rosario. I finished college. The last exam was on June 24, 1986, which was the day that Lionel Messi was born in Rosario, Argentina, on the same day. And [00:13:00] I worked, I collaborated in a class in a subject that was communication theories.And I even taught until 1990, three years, because after that I went to live in Italy. At that time, we read Marshall McLuhan, but it was a very ideologically biased reading. In Latin America, you must have seen it in Mexico. There is a whole history, a tradition of criticism from the media, especially of everything that comes from the United States, and Canada is very close to the United States.So, let's say that in the 70s and 80s and until today I would tell you that Marshall McLuhan was often criticized because he did not criticize the media. I mean, he had a vision. He said, Neil Postman, yes, he had a very critical vision. But in that case, this was one of the big differences between Postman and McLuhan, that Marshall McLuhan, at least in [00:14:00] public, he did not criticize the media. He said, well, I am a researcher, I send out probes. I am exploring what is happening.And he never joined in... And I think that was very clever of him... he never joined in this worldwide chorus of criticism of the media. At that time, television was a monster for many people.Children were not supposed to watch television. A bit like what happens today with cell phones and what happens today with TikTok. At that time, television was the monster. At that time, there was a lot of research in the United States, which was already based on the premise that television and the media are bad for people.We see that it is a story that repeats itself. I think that in that sense, Marshall McLuhan, very intelligently, did not join that critical chorus and he really dedicated himself to thinking about the media from a much freer perspective, not anchored by this vision that I believe is too ideologized, which is very strong in Latin America. It is very strong. This does not imply [00:15:00] letting down one's guard, not being critical. On the contrary.But I think that true critical thinking starts from not saying so much ideology, we say "this is already bad. Let's look at this." There will be good things. There will be bad things. There will be things, which is undeniable, that the media, even if we say they are good, will transform us. And I think that was the important thing about the McLuhanian idea.So my first approach to McLuhan was from the perspective of critical authors who, well, yes, come from the United States, they don't criticize the media. We're going to criticize him, right? And that was my first approach to Marshall McLuhan.I went to Italy in the 90s. I was out of college for almost eight years, working in digital media, web development, multimedia products, and pretext. And in the late 90s, I said, I want to go back to college. I want to be a PhD. And I said, "I want to do a PhD. Well. Being in Italy, the PhD was going to be in semiotics." So I did a [00:16:00] PhD. My thesis was on semiotics of interfaces.There I had a vision of digital interfaces that consider, for example, instruments like the mouse or joystick as extensions of our body, right? The mouse extends the hand and puts it inside the screen, right? Or the joystick or any other element of the digital interface? Of course. If we talk about the mouse being an extension of the hand, that is a McLuhanian idea.The media as extensions of the human being as a subject. So, of course, I reread McLuhan in Italian at the end of the 90s, and I reconciled with McLuhan because I found many interesting things to understand precisely the interaction with digital machines.In 2002, I moved with my family to Spain. I returned to university life. [00:17:00] And there I began to study the relationship between old and new media. Then I recovered the idea of ecosystem. I recovered the whole new idea, the id

Fair warning for indie artists: this episode may cause an extreme bout of optimism about the future. And not because the big institutions are coming to save us.And not because the government is funding art as if it's a societal good.And not because somehow the American economy now works.Nope! None of those things, as far as I can see, are on the horizon.But this week's episode of Let's Go Again with guests Joshua Morgan and Mike Labbadia is going to change your life with all the power of a guided ayahuasca experience because it imagines a way to redistribute power back to indie artists available to us right now.Here's what you get when you press play:* The new work of the indie artist is not to “break through” but to put themselves “in context”.* Ideologically aligned projects might be more powerful than production companies. * Your artistic identity doesn't need to make sense.* The new mode of organization is not found in institutional hierarchy, it's found in the ideas shared between like-minded artists.* When artists align, the validation of previously isolated experiences creates a flywheel of self-motivation.* Long-term alignment among artists can lead to financial returns, prestige, momentum, and creative growth.* To work in a collective does not mean you have to give up your individuation.* A running debate about whether or not I'm FBI.

Ideologically motivated, violent extremist groups, use different kinds of hate to recruit followers and inspire violence. A report dated May 2024 released under the access to information law by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) says Extremist groups are also tapping into current events to build support. Alex Guye reached Brad Galloway to talk about this. He is the coordinator at the Centre On Hate, Bias & Extremism at Ontario Tech University.

WarRoom Battleground EP 730: Lefts Contradiction To The Wealthy; Ideologically Possesed Judges

On this episode of "The Federalist Radio Hour," Daniel Cameron, former attorney general of Kentucky and CEO of the 1792 Exchange, joins The Federalist's Senior Elections Correspondent Matt Kittle to discuss the dangers of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies and analyze the shift away from woke corporations. If you care about combating the corrupt media that continue to inflict devastating damage, please give a gift to help The Federalist do the real journalism America needs.

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” Daniel Cameron, former attorney general of Kentucky and CEO of the 1792 Exchange, joins The Federalist’s Senior Elections Correspondent Matt Kittle to discuss the dangers of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies and analyze the shift away from woke corporations.

Focusing on the exploits of Hans Reinerth and the prehistoric archaeological research undertaken under Nazi rule, it is evident that the abuse and manipulation of archaeological evidence can be dangerously instrumental in ideological propaganda. The field of archaeology must not only endeavour to learn from this to implement guidelines and precautions to mitigate the abuse of the past, but actively amend erroneous research, with public sites becoming more transparent about how they were previously misused for corrupt political motives. To read the transcript visit https://www.sphinxthinks.com/post/archaeological-abuse-in-nationalist-propaganda

"Elon Musk has allegedly exposed an ideologically motivated cover-up of sexual abuse in Britain that was reportedly permitted by British authorities, including PM Starmer." 1650 Trial of Charles I

Last time we spoke about the fourth encirclement campaign against the CCP. In 1931, the CCP survived brutal encirclement campaigns while the threat of Japanese invasion in Manchuria shifted focus in China. The new leadership, known as the 28 Bolsheviks, seized control after the downfall of Li Lisan, leading to infighting within the CCP. Despite initial successes, Mao Zedong opposed the aggressive military strategies favored by the Bolsheviks. As the Red Army expanded, Mao's calls for caution clashed with the Central Committee's ambitions, highlighting the struggle for power and differing strategies within the party during a time of upheaval. As the 28th Bolsheviks gained power, they stripped Mao Zedong of key positions, deeming his strategies outdated. The Red Army, while suffering losses, adapted tactics and launched further offensives. Political tensions rose, leading to purges and reorganization under more orthodox leadership. Ultimately, despite setbacks, the CCP's resilience and guerrilla tactics allowed them to persist against KMT forces.   #128 the fifth encirclement campaign Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. So the CCP had just survived 4 encirclement campaigns. Now each time an encirclement campaign was unleashed, it was done so during a very tumultuous time to say the least. The first three were done between 1930-1931 where the Central Plains War and multiple large scale rebellions were kicking off. It was also on the cusp of the re-unification of China, thus Chiang Kai-Shek arguably had bigger fish to fry. During the fourth encirclement campaign Chiang Kai-Shek was very much taking notice of the red menace in his interior, however a rather earth shattering moment occurred, the Japanese had invaded Manchuria. And yes, we will get to the 15 year war in good time no worries folks your boy has a lot of goodies coming. So one can understand Chiang Kai-Shek could not very well fully go after the Reds when the Japanese had invaded northeast China and there was absolutely no telling where or when they would stop. Well the fourth encirclement campaign did not provide the results the KMT needed, so obviously there was to be a fifth…and guess what, the Japanese began an invasion of North China that same year of 1933. Now if you really are itching to hear more about these events we will tackle in a few episodes, over at the Pacific War Channel on Youtube or on all major podcast platforms might I suggest the following: my Kanji Ishiwara series covering his entire involvement in these events and during WW2, my full documentary/podcast on the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and lastly my full podcast on the Japanese invasion of North China. I am a very busy boy over there as you can see.  In the late winter and early spring of 1933, the Kwantung Army had begun an invasion of North China. They specifically began by invading the province of Rehe, modern day Jehol. After this they attacked the Great Wall of China, a pretty insane story to be honest, and descended further into north china. Understandably Chiang Kai-Shek shifted his focus from the Red menace to the Japanese at his front door. Beginning in July, the KMT established a review team to examine why the encirclement campaigns were failing to provide real results and what improvements could be made. They also established division level training units to retrain the forces with the lessons learned against the Reds. There was also a lot of integration of foreign military advisers, particularly Germans who helped develop better tactics and strategies. The Germans immediately proposed a more deliberate strategy against the Soviets. The first step they argued was to establish an economic blockade. Raw materials and durable goods could not be allowed to enter or leave the Soviet areas. Foods like rice and salt were especially targeted, there was to be an absolute ban on them going in or out. The second step was to establish a series of fortifications, basically blockhouses made out of concrete to provide fire support to offensive operations in nearby cities. As NRA forces advanced into areas to clear them, the previous blockhouses would be abandoned as new ones were built. There also needed to be lines of operation, requiring road development in rear areas to expedite logistical needs to the front. Now none of this sounds new compared to what we spoke about in the previous campaigns, but what was the issue was that it was not being done by all units prior. The KMT was also going to introduce political reforms that complemented the new standardized military strategies. New slogans arose such as “Thirty Percent Military, Seventy Percent Political,”. They were going to revive the baojia system.  The Baojia system was an administrative structure that emerged during the Song Dynasty 960–1279 AD and was prevalent in various forms throughout subsequent dynasties. Its primary purpose was to enhance local governance, community responsibility, and social stability. The system was based on the grouping of households into units known as "bao" and "jia". Each bao typically consisted of ten households, while a jia consisted of ten baos, totaling about one hundred households. This hierarchical structure allowed for more manageable governance and oversight, facilitating communication and administration at the local level. Under the Baojia system, each household was assigned to a bao, and the head of the bao was responsible for maintaining order, collecting taxes, and ensuring the compliance of families with local laws and regulations. The heads of the baojia units worked in conjunction with local officials to enforce state policies and maintain social harmony. This system not only provided a means for effective local governance but also fostered a sense of community among families. Neighbors were encouraged to cooperate and support one another, creating a network of mutual responsibility. In addition to its administrative functions, the Baojia system played a significant role in maintaining social order. By organizing families into these small units, it facilitated surveillance and mutual accountability among community members. Residents were motivated to monitor each other's behavior, discouraging misconduct and promoting adherence to social norms. As a result, the system contributed to the overall stability and cohesion of society, particularly in rural areas where government presence was often limited. Now to get all of this done, the KMT increased the NRA forces deployed to Jiangxi to nearly 700,000 who were broken down into 4 area armies and 5 air corps. They deployed the Northern Route NRA Army consisting of 33 divisions in Jinzhi, Jishui, Nangeng and the Le'an front; and the Southern Route NRA Army, consisting of eleven Guangdong divisions and one independent regiment, established a blocking position along a line connecting the cities of Wuping, Anyuan, Shangyou and Ganxian. The Southern Route NRA army would move to the blocking positions north in coordination with the other NRA forces to try and squeeze the Reds. The Western Route NRA army consisting of 9 Hunanese divisions and 3 independent regiments were responsible for blocking the Reds from advancing west of the Gan River. The Fujian-Zhejiang-Jiangxi area army HQ was assigned 11 divisions and 4 security regiments to block any Reds from escaping through northeast Jiangxi. All of this encompassed the fifth encirclement campaign.  When the NRA was ready to commence the campaign, it was too late for the Reds to properly mount a counter encirclement campaign. The only thing the Reds had going for them was their recruitment efforts that saw them grow perhaps 100,000 strong. The Red Army even began touting a slogan “Million Man Army” to further recruit. By late October 1933, the Reds were certainly numerous, but this also meant they needed more supplies and equipment. With their Eastern Front Army now in Fujian, the Central Front Army and local populace should have been raising revenues and stockpiling supplies, especially rice and salt, but that is of course if they knew a fifth encirclement campaign was coming.  On September 25th, the NRA deployed 3 divisions south from Nanchang to attack Lichuan. Within 3 days of battle, the city fell, which greatly shocked the CCP. The Central Front Red Army fell back, waiting for the Eastern Front Red Army to rush back over from Fujian to meet the threat. By October 6th both front Red armies consolidated to perform a counterattack. They first attacked Xunkou, where they annihilated 3 NRA brigades. However the success was to be short lived. For the proceeding two months, the Red Army attacked multiple NRA blockhouses in Zixi, Huwan Bajiaoting, Xiaoshi, Daxiongguan and Yuangai Mountain. Yet they were unsuccessful at breaching the defensive line. The concrete block houses were acting as pillboxes allowing the NRA to concentrate fire using brand new German made machine guns. They also were utilizing new Krupp artillery pieces and German made aerial bombs against the Red army formations whenever they assaulted the blockhouse line. By November the KMT's attention was slightly diverted as Fujian had just seen a full blown rebellion, more about that in the next episode, but to summarize a bit. On November 30th, the KMT 19th route army in conjunction with the Fujian provincial government rebelled against the KMT and set up an independent government. As you might be guessing, they were also working with the CCP. Back in October they had formed a military alliance, better said cease fire. This little arrangement did not last long and there even emerged hostilities. During this chaos the revolutionary military council held an emergency meeting to figure out a course of action. Otto Braun advocated for a strong offensive to decisively defeat the KMT. He argued the golden age of guerrilla warfare in China was over and now the Red Army must conduct convention warfare against NRA positions. Thus Mao Zedong's “lure the enemy in deep” strategy was replaced by “defending against the enemy outside the Soviet”. In January of 1934 the second soviet congress was held where a series of resolutions were passed to focus the Red Army against the fifth encirclement campaign. The resolutions reiterated Otto Braun's offensive strategy and repeatedly attacked Mao Zedong's strategies. Building upon the strategy of defending against the enemy outside the Soviets, Otto Braun also proposed using “short, swift thrusts”. This would see the employment of repeated infantry assaults to overwhelm the NRA blockhouse lines. Otto Braun also advocated for continuing the mass recruitment efforts and brought up perhaps beginning a system of conscription to fill the ranks. After the Fujian rebellion situation simmered down, the NRA refocused their attention against the Reds. The NRA established a line of blockhouses going from Lichuan to Le'an and began clearing out the area south of Ruijin using 35 divisions. The NRA forces first targeted Guangchang, lying about halfway between Nanchang and Ruijin. The NRA's Eastern Front also began advancing west, totaling some 14 divisions. By March of 1934 the NRA Northern and Eastern Fronts linked up at Deshengguan where they began coordinated efforts towards Guangchang. In response to the NRA advances towards Guangchang, the Red Army built a series of fortifications and trenchworks to defend the area. On April 9th, the NRA began its attack on Guangchang, deploying the 3rd Route army's 10 divisions from Nanfeng with heavy artillery and aircraft support. The NRA forces advanced south along both sides of the Xu River leading towards Guangchang. The Northern Route NRA Army established new blockhouses on one side of the river before clearing the other side. It took the NRA forces roughly 2 weeks to advance down the riverway to Guangchang. By April 23rd, they breached the Red Army's defensive lines and seized control over some high ground surrounding the area. The Reds were forced to pull back into the city where they continued to build fortifications and trench lines. On the 27th the NRA began to artillery and aerially bomb the city, easily destroying the wooden fortifications and trench lines constructed by the Reds. On the 28th, the NRA stormed the city forcing the Reds to retreat south. The Reds had suffered 5093 casualties, roughly 20% of their defending force at Guangcheng whereas the NRA suffered 2000 casualties. It was very evident, the NRA were wielding superior equipment, notably the heavy artillery and aircrafts that the Red's had no real answer for.  After Guangchang the NRA advanced in all four directions. By May 1, NRA forces from the Western Front had taken control of both Shaxi and Longgang. Meanwhile, the Eastern Route NRA forces advanced and captured Jianning by May 16. By June, the CCP began feeling the strain from these assaults. A combination of the blockade and the baojia system was gradually eroded local support for the CCP. The attrition warfare strategy also took a toll on the quality of leadership and experience in the Red Army, as more inexperienced soldiers filled the ranks. Under pressure, many of these recruits deserted, further weakening the Red Army's effectiveness. Additionally, the shortage of supplies and food lowered morale and diminished public support for the Red Army's offensive. Even military and party publications gradually withdrew their support for the offensive, shifting focus to the promotion of guerrilla warfare to conserve resources. Recruitment efforts to replenish losses had little impact as the NRA's superior strategy continued to stifle the Soviet, reducing its control from seventeen counties to ten. In the summer of 1934, the Red Army began exploring new strategies, establishing a defensive perimeter stretching from Ninghua to Ningdu and Xingguo. By May, the Central Committee convened and concluded that the current offensive strategy was ineffective, likely necessitating the Red Army's evacuation from the Soviet area. They sought approval from the COMINTERN to change their approach, which was granted a few days later, stressing that the CCP's priority should be preserving the Red Army's combat strength. However, Braun and Bo Gu proposed a different method. Instead of immediately preparing to withdraw from the Soviet, they advocated for a final stand, urging everyone to give their all to defend the territory and secure victory. Alongside this shift in rhetoric, the Red Army maintained its defensive posture, constructing wooden blockhouses and trenches. Additionally, the CCP approved an expansion of guerrilla warfare across multiple fronts to defeat the NRA. In July, the NRA launched another offensive, focusing this time on the city of Shicheng, positioned between Ninghua and Ningdu as their entry point. The two forces clashed fiercely along this final line of defense for nearly a month. In early August, the Red Army mounted a strong counteroffensive during the battle of Gaohunao, inflicting over 4,000 casualties on the NRA. However, the Red Army also suffered heavy losses and was forced to retreat to the last defensive line just north of Shicheng. At Shicheng, the Red Army managed to hold the NRA in a stalemate. Ultimately, the NRA deployed twelve large howitzers, breaking through the defensive line in August. Shicheng eventually fell in October. The defense cost the Red Army 5,000 casualties, leaving it severely weakened and forcing its leaders to consider drastic actions. By this point, the Jiangxi Soviet had been reduced to a small area around Ruijin and Xingguo. With mounting casualties and the imminent threat of an NRA assault on Ruijin, the Red Army made a bold decision to retreat from Jiangxi on October 10, 1934, ending the Fifth Extermination Campaign. There has been a lot of thorough investigative work into why the CCP failed during the fifth encirclement campaign. This episode will be a bit different then previous ones as I thought it might be interesting to tell the overall story and then explain the finer details as to why it went down this way. Going back to when I discussed the NRA analyzing why their fourth encirclement campaign had failed. The analytics from that were incorporated into plans formed by the German advisers such as Hans von Seeckt and Alexander von Faulkenhausen. The Germans dramatically improved the NRA's performance across the board. This was seen in terms of training, the employment of more modern military tactics and of course the Germans sold the NRA some really good toys. Now again this was done in the vacuum of the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and Northern China. The real aim of the Germans' assistance was directed against the Japanese, but the advisers acknowledged how China must combat the external aggressor while not succumbing to internal threats. Ironically it was that exact situation that had toppled multiple Chinese dynasties in the past, take the Ming for example.  The NRA also employed effective counterinsurgent strategies that complimented their conventional warfare strategies. Beginning back in 1928 the KMT gradually re-instituted the baojia system. The NRA first cleared out Red areas and then established local administrators who were loyal to the KMT, protected by local militias. Through this the NRA was able to hold cleared areas and block any Red infiltration. Many residents in these areas actively began providing intel to the NRA. The Baojia system also supported the economic blockade, providing a system of sentries at the entrance of villages placing a lot of pressure on the Red Army and local populations. Chiang Kai-Shek's political reform “70% political, 30% military” also helped incorporate many disenfranchised Chinese, taking their support away from the Reds. The NRA also adopted a methodical, patient approach to tackle the Reds. The NRA quickly found out the Reds did not have the necessary weaponry to take out their concrete blockhouses, thus a war of attrition was on the table. Electing for a long campaign rather than a short one severely hurt the Reds who were incapable of conducting prolonged operations. The NRA also had learnt from the Red's usage of diversionary and feint attacks, not falling for them this time around. There was also obviously their NRA enormous advantage in numbers, they did toss nearly a million men at the Soviets. On the other side the Red Army suffered from numerous internal problems. The Red Army had undergone numerous measures to reform and professionalize the army, under the leadership of the 28 bolsheviks whom dominated the Central Committee. The mass recruitment efforts were directly primarily on uneducated peasants who required intensive training. Meanwhile the offensive strategy was decimating Red Army forces, many new recruits were tossed straight into the front lines without any training. The lack of training and political guidance, accompanied with low morale led to mass desertions. By the end of the fifth encirclement campaign the Red Army could not generate the proper forces to fill its demand and simply kept tossing more and more untrained peasants into the lines, degrading the combat effectiveness. The arrival of the Twenty-eight Bolsheviks in the CCP led to significant changes in the overall military strategy of the Red Army. Much of the new leadership's perspectives were shaped by Stalinist Soviet ideology, which markedly contrasted with the views of both Li Lisan and Mao Zedong, particularly in relation to Mao Zedong's approach, which was influenced by political considerations. These ideological differences also resulted in a substantial gap in military tactics. Nevertheless, both the Bolsheviks and Mao shared a similar stance on the expansion and training of the Red Army, emphasizing the vital importance of political training in building a robust party army. Ultimately, the CCP believed that the success of the Red Army hinged on the professionalization of the force, ensuring unity of command, a shared understanding of the mission, and an enhanced capacity to execute that mission. The primary advocate for the professionalization strategy of the Red Army was the Soviet Union. Stalin's interest in the Red Army was driven by both external and internal factors. The Soviet Union viewed an imminent threat from both Japan and Germany. Japan, a longstanding adversary of Russia, had expanded its presence in China, particularly following the 1932 occupation of Manchuria, which posed a direct risk to Russia's southern flank and national security. The Soviets believed that a large, professional Red Army, loyal to the Soviet Union, would serve as a formidable defense against Japanese aggression, and later, German threats. Additionally, the Soviets resumed discussions with the Nationalist government after years of silence to help ensure the security of their Chinese flank. For Stalin, the struggle for control over the CCP was intertwined with a broader power struggle within the Soviet Union against Trotsky. His internal conflicts with Trotsky solidified his communist ideology, resulting in a stringent approach within the COMINTERN and the new CCP. Through the COMINTERN and Bolsheviks, Stalin aimed to consolidate his power by eliminating Trotskyists in China. These internal Soviet political dynamics ultimately influenced the choice of Chinese political and military strategies, which had detrimental effects on the Red Army. At first glance, the policies of the Twenty-eight Bolsheviks closely resembled those of Li Lisan. Both groups viewed the urban proletariat as the central force in the communist revolution. They shared the conviction that merging the revolutionary spirit of the proletariat with modern strategies would empower the Red Army to achieve victory. Additionally, they felt that the conditions were ripe for revolution to spread into urban areas, emphasizing the necessity for the Red Army to engage in the cities to support students and workers involved in the movement. Wang Ming even remarked that although the 1930 assault on Changsha was a mistake, he did not see this failure as evidence against the soundness of the strategy of targeting urban centers. Upon closer inspection, the distinctions between the two factions were quite pronounced. Disputes between them arose early on; in June 1930, Li Lisan criticized Wang Ming, Bo Gu, and two other group members for opposing his plans. However, their differences ran deeper than mere political conflict. Ideologically, the Bolsheviks challenged Li Lisan's characterization of the bourgeoisie. In Wang Ming's The Two Lines, he asserted that all "capitalist bourgeois reformers were counterrevolutionary." This broadened the definition to encompass wealthy and middle-class peasants, who became targets during land reform efforts. Additionally, their strategies for confronting urban centers differed significantly. The factions also had contrasting views on the role of the Red Army: Li Lisan believed it should support urban proletariat uprisings to capture the cities, while the Bolsheviks regarded it as the primary force for seizing the metropolis. The distinctions between Mao Zedong and the 28 Bolsheviks were significant. Unlike Mao Zedong, the Bolshevik-led CCP rejected any form of alliance, insisting on the defeat of both the Nationalists and the Japanese. In their view, both groups were imperialists and posed equal threats to the Soviet Union and the communist movement. During the Mukden Incident, many nationalists and communists sought to forge a united front against Japanese aggression. However, the CCP opposed this, advocating for the overthrow of what they considered the agent of imperialism—the KMT.  The Bolsheviks also held a strong opposition to Maoist military strategies. They believed that an incorrect guerrilla warfare approach had infiltrated the Red Army, epitomized by the "lure the enemy in deep" tactic. Wang Ming likened this strategy to a form of "retreat" or "escape." The Bolsheviks advocated for the significant expansion and professionalization of the Red Army, aiming to move away from a peasant mentality. With a larger force, the Red Army could adopt an offensive stance, employing Soviet tactics to capture urban centers and extend Soviet influence. While guerrilla warfare was not entirely dismissed, it was relegated to local militias in rear and flank areas. In contrast, Mao had a more practical perspective on the capabilities of Red Army soldiers. He recognized that the Red Army lacked the technology necessary for conventional warfare. Moreover, Mao believed that achieving victory was not the sole priority; sustainability after victory and ensuring that the gains outweighed the losses were also crucial considerations. In hindsight, the positional warfare and offensive tactics advocated by Otto Braun and the students proved to be ineffective against the NRA. However, at the time, it is understandable why this approach was favored over Mao Zedongs strategy of "luring the enemy deep." This new offensive military strategy was predicated on the belief that the Red Army was strong and capable of launching attacks against the NRA. Although this assessment may have been overstated, the victories achieved during the Extermination Campaigns did boost the morale of the Red Army. Furthermore, their later success in resisting the Fourth Extermination Campaign reinforced the capabilities of the Communist military forces. This offensive strategy also marked a departure from the tactic of conceding territory, which had always posed challenges for the local population. The CCP garnered more support for its strategy by asserting that the Red Army was now strong enough to defend their territory and confront the enemy directly, allowing locals to remain in their homes. This simple shift fostered greater support for their cause. Conversely, Mao Zedong had a keen understanding of local conditions and recognized the detrimental effects of Bolshevik policies on land redistribution. The Bolshevik approach increased the burden on a larger portion of the local populace and threatened the fragile support necessary for waging a "people's war." Mao Zedong and his followers also aimed to delay and hinder large recruitment efforts, arguing that expansion would be an unnecessary distraction for locals who were already busy with agricultural work. Moreover, the Bolshevik offensive strategy was more conventional compared to Mao Zedongs concept of mobile warfare. At that time, Mao Zedongs approach of "luring the enemy deep" and other mobile warfare tactics were revolutionary in China and faced considerable criticism and skepticism. Even after the significant defeat of the Li Lisan line, the ability of the Bolsheviks and Otto Braun to revive a similar strategy two years later demonstrated the ongoing support for a more conventional military approach. In its new strategy, the Red Army blended traditional and modern tactics to engage the enemy. On the one hand, it maintained its reliance on established strengths in intelligence gathering and deception to outmaneuver the NRA. However, with the introduction of the Twenty-eight Bolsheviks and Otto Braun, the Red Army transitioned from a mobile defense approach to employing “short, swift thrusts” as offensive tactics against the NRA blockhouses during the Fifth Extermination Campaign. The Red Army also capitalized on advantages gained from previous campaigns. Improvements in signal intelligence, particularly through increased collection of wireless communications and the creation of training schools, enabled the Red Army to closely monitor NRA movements during the Fourth Extermination Campaign. Additionally, the Red Army integrated tactical intelligence into its operations, using plain-clothed soldiers and deploying double agents within KMT units to gather intelligence and disrupt them. The thoroughness of the Red Army's intelligence collection was a notable strength. For instance, an intelligence report on the KMT's Seventy-ninth NRA Division analyzed the background and motivations of its soldiers, revealing that many hailed from the same area as their commander, which fostered strong loyalties. This insight made the unit a less appealing target for subversion, given the traditional Confucian emphasis on hierarchical loyalty. The Red Army continued to execute feints and deceptive operations throughout its campaigns. The Eleventh Red Army effectively served as the main effort on two occasions. Moreover, the Red Army sent misleading communications to confuse NRA forces. For instance, while near Huangpi, NRA scouts “intercepted” a message claiming that the Red Army's main forces were positioned in Nanchang, prompting the division units to lower their guard in the city, only to be ambushed. The biggest change to Red Army tactics was the introduction of what Otto Braun described as “short, swift thrusts,” while Lin Biao defined this tactic as “sudden, rapid raids launched against the enemy who emerges from their blockhouses to advance the fortification line by a short distance, specifically between 2½ to 5 kilometers or even less. These thrusts aim to eliminate the main enemy forces before they can solidify their position. Although the tactics appeared straightforward, significant differences emerged in their application, particularly between Braun's theoretical approach and Lin Biao's practical execution. Firstly, the ultimate objectives of the tactics differed greatly. Braun's approach was part of a broader strategy aimed at safeguarding Soviet territory. Rather than seeking a decisive victory over the numerically superior NRA forces, the Red Army focused on defending territory and achieving small tactical victories that could translate into operational and strategic advantages. In contrast, Lin Biao viewed this tactic as a means to “annihilate the enemy or secure victory in the entire battle.”His emphasis was on defeating the enemy and achieving a decisive victory. Secondly, Braun promoted a more methodical strategy, where the Red Army would establish strong points with small clusters of fortifications. These areas provided defensive protection against artillery and air assaults, creating conditions conducive for the Red Army to launch rapid attacks on the NRA when they were away from their blockhouses. During an attack, Braun suggested that the Red Army should first fix the NRA in its rear, flank, or even front, followed by a strike aimed at weakening the enemy to disrupt its forces. Conversely, Lin Biao had a different perspective on the assault, prioritizing mobility and movement for the Red Army during these thrusts. The Red Army's primary defense relied on secrecy, moving quietly to occupy high ground while only establishing makeshift defensive structures for air and artillery protection. When the enemy entered their territory, the Red Army would encircle their forces, cutting off their retreat and swiftly attacking their flanks before they could construct fortifications. He advocated for the pursuit, believing it was the most effective way to convert a tactical victory into operational or strategic success. In contrast, Lin Biao rejected the idea of pursuit, reasoning that if his tactics were executed effectively, the enemy would have no escape route, making a pursuit unnecessary. These differing views on tactics underscored the challenges of translating theoretical military concepts into practical application. Otto Braun's offensive strategy stemmed from his experiences and understanding of Western military traditions. When applied to the Chinese battlefield, Lin Biao adapted his own experiences to formulate his interpretation of “short, swift thrusts,” which incorporated several of Mao's tactical principles. Given the circumstances of the Red Army, Lin Biao aimed for a quick, decisive victory, steering clear of prolonged battles with the NRA. He utilized intelligence and terrain—particularly through reconnaissance—to gain an advantage over the enemy. His strategy prioritized focusing on the enemy rather than merely securing territory, enabling his unit to engage in battle on favorable ground. While the localization of “short, swift thrusts” did not provide the Red Army with the decisive edge needed to overcome the NRA, it illustrated how the Red Army continued to adapt concepts to local conditions to achieve success in combat. Between 1932 and 1934, the Red Army reached its maximum size and level of professionalism, only to be outmatched by a stronger NRA force. With the rise of the Twenty-eight Bolsheviks, the Red Army adopted a more aggressive, offensive strategy. Although this approach would later be deemed a mistake, it initiated a series of reforms that enhanced the Red Army's professionalism. During this period, the Red Army nearly doubled its strength to six army corps. To promote uniformity and centralize command, all Red Army units, including local militia groups, were standardized. Additionally, the Red Army founded the Red Academy and the Red Army War College, alongside specialized schools to train and develop its officers. These reforms contributed to the Red Army's success in the Fourth Extermination Campaign against the NRA and facilitated the expansion of Soviet influence into four provinces. However, following their defeat, the NRA adapted and developed a more effective strategy against the Red Army. Lacking the necessary heavy weapons and supplies, the Red Army could not prevent the systematic encirclement of the Jiangxi Soviet during the Fifth Extermination Campaign. In order to survive the Red Army would have to embark on arguably one of the most important historic moments of the CCP's history, it was a notably very long march. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. The 28 Bolsheviks wrestled control over the CCP and this had rather dramatic consequences. For one, Mao Zedong's strategies were thrown to the wind as full on offensive strategies took the center stage. In the face of the most intense NRA encirclement campaign as of yet, the CCP crumbled and would now have to march to away trying to survive.

Tony talks more about Jack Smith dropping the January 6th charges against Donald Trump. Tony also talks about Scott Jenning's comments on CNN about X being ideologically balanced and Jim Geraghty talking about censorship and being disagreeable.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

5pm: Matt Markovich - Cathy Moore's makes her case for Seattle Capital Gains Tax // Chris Reykdal’s reelection proves that ideologically “failing up” is the law of the land in Washington // Letters

Trade is under tremendous threat from both major political parties in the United States and their presidential candidates. In this episode, Mark Thornton discusses his new paper, "Ludwig von Mises on Trade, Human Development, and Human Progress," explains how Mises examined trade holistically and integrated it into a powerful social theory. Ideologically, the commitment to free trade must be understood and sustained in order for us to continue to receive the benefits of trade in the international division of labor.Download Dr. Thornton's paper, "Ludwig von Mises on Trade, Human Development, and Human Progress" at Mises.org/MI_78_AOrder a free paperback copy of Murray Rothbard's What Has Government Done to Our Money? at Mises.org/IssuesFree.Follow Minor Issues at Mises.org/MinorIssues.

David Bailey is the owner of Bitcoin Magazine. Ideologically, he is a Bitcoin maximalist who wants everything to happen on Bitcoin and get traded for BTC. During this episode, we also mint a special ordinal... which you can buy for 3.125 BTC!

An audiobook taster of James's new book So You've Been Ideologically Discredited PLUS an invitation for all our listeners, to the book launch at the Stapleton Tavern, Finsbury Park, Monday April 15th/7pm.

Tune in here for this Monday edition of the Vince Coakley Radio Program! Vince starts the show by talking about where Charlotte recently ranked in a study about the "most moved to," big cities in the country + what is contributing to that growth. Then we share a story about a Kentucky woman who won a lottery jackpot of $90,000 and what she's going to do since she won.  Later we dive into the report about South Carolina finding nearly $2 billion in a bank account with mysterious origins and unknown purpose + how the state is going about trying to identify where the money came from and what it is intended for before Vince explains why he thinks that the Republican party is "ideologically dead." In the second half of the program Vince talks about where he was at the end of last week before giving another update on the situation in Haiti.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

#Israel: What drives the antisemitism of the young and ideologically educated? Peter Berkowitz, Hoover Institution. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2024/03/17/the_public_interest_fellowship_in_israel_150657.html#2 undated Jerusalem

The Heartland POD for Friday, February 23, 2024A flyover from this weeks top heartland stories including:Primary voting is underway in Texas | Kansas Medicaid expansion update | Illinois Gov J.B. Pritzker lays out priorities as a progressive pragmatist | Missouri Democrats filibuster ballot candy | KS Gov Laura Kelly's veto will stand Primary voting is underway in Texashttps://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/21/julie-johnson-brian-williams-congressional-district-32-colin-allred/BY SEJAL GOVINDARAOFEB. 21, 2024WASHINGTON — In 2018, Rep. Colin Allred flipped Texas' 32nd Congressional District, turning the Dallas-based district into a blue stronghold. Now, as the Democrat vies to unseat U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a crowded field of 10 Democrats is lining up to replace him.Dr. Brian Williams, a trauma surgeon, and State Rep. Julie Johnson, of Farmers Branch, are leading the field in the Democratic primary with their fundraising efforts, each amassing about a million dollars in campaign donations since their campaigns were registered at the beginning of last summer.Ideologically, Williams and Johnson are aligned. They both rank health care a top priority if elected, and have touted their ability to work across the aisle.Johnson, a trial lawyer in her third term in the state House rode the 2019 blue wave to unseat hardline conservative incumbent Matt Rinaldi, by 13 points. Rinaldi now chairs the state GOP. In her three terms, at least 40 of the bills Johnson has co-authored or joint-authored have been signed into law.As a Democrat in the Republican-dominated state Legislature, Johnson has played a lot of defense trying to kill bills she and other progressives deem harmful. Johnson, who is gay, said she and other members of the House's LGBTQ caucus have had success in killing anti-LGBTQ bills by mastering the rules of procedure and “being better at the rules than the other side.” In 2019, she took down a House version of the so-called “Save Chick-fil-A bill” on a rule technicality. The bill was a response to a San Antonio airport kicking out the fast food restaurant over criticism of its religiously affiliated donations to anti-LGBTQ groups. It was revived in another bill and passed into law.If elected, Johnson would be the first openly LGBTQ member of Congress from a Southern state. She's drawn notable endorsements from Beto O'Rourke, Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, EMILY's List, Equality PAC, and several labor unions.Matt Angle, director of Lone Star Project, a Texas group that works to boost Democrats, said Johnson is the frontrunner in the race, but Williams is a formidable challenger.“Make no mistake about it though,” Angle said. “Julie Johnson has a voter base within the district not only from her old district, but also just from years of being an active Democratic activist and a donor and really a couple of just outstanding terms in the legislature.”While he may be new to the Texas political arena, Williams is no stranger to the halls of Congress.Williams was a health policy adviser to U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy — who endorsed him — to help pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in 2022 – the farthest reaching gun safety legislation in decades. The legislation, crafted in the aftermath of the shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo New York, allocated millions of dollars to expand mental health resources, strengthens background checks and tightens the boyfriend loophole. U.S. Sen. John Cornyn was a lead negotiator on the bill with Murphy, and Williams worked closely with Cornyn's office. In his role as a health policy advisor for Murphy, he worked across the aisle with Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana on mental health legislation.Williams also worked with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California to pass federal health care legislation related to pandemic preparedness and reducing health care costs.Williams said his experience as a trauma surgeon — operating on victims of gun violence and women experiencing reproductive health emergencies — has fueled his priorities to fight for gun restrictions and increase access to abortions and other womens' health. Williams added his perspective as a Black doctor seeing racial disparities in health care will resonate with the district's diverse constituency, given that the district is now a majority-minority district with a 37% Hispanic or Latino population, 22% Black population and 8% Asian population.“They're excited that there's someone that looks like them that can represent them in Congress,” Williams said in an interview.As Allred opted to stay neutral in the race to succeed him – Williams said he had pursued his endorsement while Johnson said she had not – the tension between Johnson and Williams has been heating up.Williams has publicly criticized Johnson for a vote she took that would have made some changes and tweaks to the state's Alternatives to Abortions program, which provides information about resources to women seeking the procedure.“I draw contrast between myself and Representative Johnson about how I am the better candidate,” Williams said.Johnson, who is endorsed by Planned Parenthood, said Williams misrepresented the vote, which she said she cast to bring the already-funded program under the scope of the Health and Human Services Commission so it could be subject to public transparency. Her campaign published a fact-check on her website, likening Williams' misrepresentation of her record to “Trumpian-style, false attacks.”Planned Parenthood was critical of the legislation.Johnson said women's health is also a priority for her, and she stands by her record.“Texas leads the nation of uninsured folks, and in maternal mortality, and in infant mortality. Obviously, we're leading the nation in an attack on women's freedom for women's reproductive health, and I've been a champion of a lot of these issues,” she said.Other candidates vying for the open seat in the March 5 primary include businessman Raja Chaudhry, tech entrepreneur Alex Cornwallis, former Dallas City Councilman and real estate broker Kevin Felder and attorney Callie Butcher, who would be the first openly transgender member of Congress if elected.If no candidate gets a majority of the vote, there will be a runoff in May. The winner of the Democratic primary will face off against the winner of the Republican primary in November but is likely to win given that the district is solidly blue.And, from Dallas we go to Houston whereAfter bruising loss in Houston mayoral race, U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee faces her toughest reelection yetJackson Lee faces off against Amanda Edwards, her most formidable congressional opponent in three decades.https://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/19/sheila-jackson-lee-amanda-edwards-democratic-primary-houston/BY SEJAL GOVINDARAOFEB. 19, 2024In 1994, Sheila Jackson Lee, then a 44-year-old Houston city councilwoman, unseated four-term U.S. Rep. Craig Washington in the Democratic primary, securing a seat she'd come to hold for the next 30 years.This March, former Houston City Councilwoman Amanda Edwards, 42, is hoping to replicate that political upset as she faces off against Jackson Lee in the Democratic primary for Congressional District 18.Jackson Lee, who did not respond to requests for an interview, has only drawn four primary challengers over her 14-term career, all of whom she defeated by landslide margins.She's a household name in her Houston-based district, known for her frequent visibility at constituent graduations, funerals and baby showers.But last year she ran for Houston mayor against then-state Sen. John Whitmire. It was a bruising primary — unfamiliar territory for Jackson Lee — and her campaign was roiled with negative media after audio of her berating her congressional staffers was leaked. She ended up losing the race by 30 points and then immediately announced she was running for reelection to the U.S. House.Amanda Edwards, a former intern in Jackson Lee's office, initially announced she was running for Houston mayor until the congresswoman threw her hat in the ring. At that point, Edwards pivoted — endorsing Jackson Lee as mayor and beginning her own bid for Congress.By the time Jackson Lee announced she was running for her House seat again, Edwards had already gained momentum. In the fourth quarter of last year, Edwards outraised the congresswoman 10 to 1 — $272,000 to Jackson Lee's $23,000.Mark Jones, Baker Institute fellow in political science at Rice University said, “This could be the year that Congresswoman Jackson Lee loses. And given that as a safe, Democratic, seat whoever wins the primary will be headed to Washington in January of 2025”Jackson Lee holds a narrow lead in primary polls, while 16% of voters remain undecided. Edwards, a native Houstonian, said her commitment to public service is propelled by her father's battle with cancer when she was a teenager, where she learned firsthand about the cracks in the health care system and how “policy could be a matter of life and death.” She served as an at-large Houston City Council member from 2016 to 2020, where she represented a constituency of more than 2 million people.In her race to beat Jackson Lee, Edwards has garnered some notable endorsements including the Harris County Young Democrats, and the Harris County chapter of the Texas Coalition of Black Democrats – both of which endorsed Jackson Lee in past races.The Harris County Young Democrats rescinded its endorsement of Jackson Lee in the mayoral race — citing a “zero tolerance policy” for staff abuse.Lenard Polk, Harris County chapter president of the Texas Coalition of Black Democrats, said Jackson Lee's leaked audio tape controversy also factored into the committee's decision to not endorse her. On the recording Jackson Lee berates a staffer for not having a document she was looking for and calls two of her staffers “Goddamn big-ass children, fuckin' idiots who serve no Goddamn purpose.”He said endorsement committee members were still “quite upset” over the tape and it “wasn't a good look” for Jackson Lee. The leaked tape fueled discourse about Jackson Lee's reputation as an unkind boss on Capitol Hill – she regularly makes Washingtonian Magazine's worst of Congress list and her office has high turnover rates.Polk added that voters felt abandoned by Jackson Lee, who jumped into the mayor's race without endorsing someone to take her place, only to file for reelection a day after losing.Jackson Lee's battle to retain her seat is made tougher by 2021 redistricting, because the 18th district now includes more young white professionals who do not have the same level of loyalty to her as longtime district residents.But despite any damage she may have incurred from her mayoral run, Jackson Lee remains a powerful political force in her district.County Commissioner Rodney Ellis, who is backing Jackson Lee, said he doesn't know anyone in local politics with her “energy level,” and that Jackson Lee has secured meaningful federal grants for her district – most recently $20.5 million to Harris County Public Health Department's Uplift Harris Guaranteed Income Pilot project. He also said she has a reputation for being a reliably progressive voice in Congress.Jackson Lee has a long list of powerful endorsements from House Democratic leaders like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Minority Whip Katherine Clarke. She's backed by Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo and former Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and other members of Texas' Washington delegation including Democratic Reps. Lizzie Fletcher of Houston, Lloyd Doggett of Austin, Henry Cuellar of Laredo and Joaquin Castro of San Antonio.Ellis said Jackson Lee may not be a strong fundraiser but she will benefit from her incumbency advantage.Linda Bell-Robinson, a Houston Democratic precinct chair, said she is fighting for Jackson Lee to retain her seat because seniority in Congress is important and Edwards would be learning the ropes as a freshman if elected.“We need fighters,” she said. “We don't need people trying to learn how to fight on the battlefield. We need people who are already fighting and know how to fight their fight.SEAN: Super interesting race. For my part, I don't have any problem with members of Congress being extremely tough to work for. I have problems with lying, fraud, criminal activity, and squishy voting records. Congresswoman Jackson Lee has 100% ratings from Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and AFL-CIO. She has a 95% rating from League of Conservation VotersNew estimate predicts Medicaid expansion would serve 152K at no cost to stateA $509M federal incentive would help offset state cost for first eight yearsBY: SHERMAN SMITH - FEBRUARY 22, 2024 4:22 PMhttps://kansasreflector.com/2024/02/22/new-estimate-predicts-medicaid-expansion-would-serve-152k-at-no-cost-to-state/TOPEKA — The Kansas Health Institute on Thursday unveiled its analysis of Gov. Laura Kelly's proposal to expand Medicaid, predicting 152,000 Kansans would enroll in the first year with no additional cost to the state government.The Democratic governor has made passage of Medicaid expansion a top legislative priority this year, following her statewide campaign to promote the policy last fall. But Republican leadership in the Legislature opposes the policy and has blocked hearings on Medicaid expansion for four years.Kansas is one of just 10 states that still haven't expanded Medicaid since President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act in 2010.The state-run version of Medicaid, called KanCare, provides health care services to low-income families, seniors and people with disabilities. Currently, those who earn less than 38% of the federal poverty level are eligible. For a family of four, the annual income limit is $11,400.Under the ACA, also known as Obamacare, the federal government offers to cover 90% of the cost of Medicaid services in exchange for expanding eligibility to 138% of the federal poverty rate. The annual income threshold for a family of four would be $41,400.Kelly's proposal includes a work requirement with exceptions for full-time students, veterans, caregivers, people with partial disabilities, and former foster kids. Her plan also would add a new surcharge for hospitals.KHI predicts the change in income eligibility would result in 151,898 people enrolling in KanCare — 106,450 adults and 45,448 children. Those numbers include 68,236 adults and 16,377 children who are currently uninsured.About 68.9% of the adults are already working at least part-time, according to the KHI analysis. Of the remaining 31.1% KHI determined 19.1% of the unemployed adults have a disability, 16.1% are students and 3.8% are veterans.KHI calculated the cost to the state for expanding Medicaid over the first eight years would be fully offset — mostly because of a $509 million incentive included in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Other savings would come from the federal government picking up more of the tab on existing services, as well as the new surcharge on hospitals. The Kansas Sunflower Foundation on Thursday released findings from surveys that found 68% of Kansas voters, including 51% of Republicans and 83% of small business owners support Medicaid expansion.Steve Baccus, an Ottawa County farmer and former president of Kansas Farm Bureau, said in a news release that expanding Medicaid was about “investing in the well-being of our communities.”Baccus said “Our rural communities are often struggling to keep Main Street open and to continue to offer the necessary services to the surrounding agricultural enterprises. A community that can offer a total health care package has an advantage in maintaining a viable town.”The findings are consistent with a Fort Hays State University poll that was released in October.With budget proposal and fiery address, Pritzker paints himself as progressive pragmatistThursday, February 22, 2024Governor's spending plan advances progressive-backed policies in tight fiscal landscapeBy HANNAH MEISELCapitol News Illinoishmeisel@capitolnewsillinois.comhttps://capitolnewsillinois.com/NEWS/with-budget-proposal-and-fiery-address-pritzker-paints-himself-as-progressive-pragmatistSPRINGFIELD – In delivering his annual State of the State and budget address on Wednesday, Gov. JB Pritzker cast his administration as both progressive and pragmatic – a balance he's worked to strike as his national profile has grown.Some elements of the governor's proposed spending plan, like using $10 million in state funds to eliminate $1 billion worth of Illinoisans' medical debt, are hardline progressive ideas. Others, including a goal to achieve “universal preschool” by 2027, fit in with a more traditional liberal platform.But Pritzker has also defined his success in traditional economic terms, putting particular stock into how New York City-based credit ratings agencies view Illinois' finances, while also positioning Illinois as a hub for emerging technologies like electric vehicles and quantum computing. As Illinois faces an influx of migrants from the southern U.S. border Pritzker has leaned into a leadership style that prioritizes progressive ideals while projecting an image of fiscal responsibility.As he outlined a proposal to add $182 Million toward the state's migrant response, Gov. Pritzker said, “We didn't ask for this manufactured crisis, But we must deal with it all the same.”“Children, pregnant women, and the elderly have been sent here in the dead of night, left far from our designated welcome centers, in freezing temperatures, wearing flip flops and T-shirts,” Pritzker said. “Think about that the next time a politician from Texas wants to lecture you about being a good Christian.”The governor was met with big applause from Democrats in laying out his proposed “Healthcare Consumer Access and Protection Act,” which would, in part, ban “prior authorization” requirements for mental health treatment.Pritzker characterized the practice of prior authorization as a way for insurance companies to deny the care that doctors have prescribed.Pritzker is also proposing spending $10 million in state funds to buy Illinoisans' past-due medical debt that's been sent to collections. Partnering with national nonprofit RIP Medical Debt, which buys debt for pennies on the dollar on the same market that collections agencies purchase the rights to the debts, the governor said Illinois could “relieve nearly $1 billion in medical debt for the first cohort of 340,000 Illinoisans.”The governor spent time noting two key places he said Illinois fails its Black citizens:  maternal mortality and disproportionate rates of homelessness. To combat Black maternal mortality rates, Pritzker proposed helping more community-based reproductive health centers to open, citing Illinois' first freestanding nonprofit birthing center in Berwyn as a model.He said, “Black women in our state are three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women.” Pritzker proposed spending an additional $50 million on the state's “Home Illinois” program launched in 2021, in part to “attack the root causes of housing insecurity for Black Illinoisans.” He cited a statistic that Black people make up 61 percent of Illinois' homeless population despite only being 14 percent of the state's general population.Additionally, the governor proposed a $1 million pilot program for free diapers for low-income families, as well as a $5 million increased investment in an existing home visit program “for our most vulnerable families” with babies in their first year.His budget also includes $12 million to create a child tax credit for families with children under three with incomes below a certain threshold. Among the successes Pritzker pointed to, perhaps the most salient is his claim that Illinois' new “Smart Start” early childhood program – proposed last year in the governor's second inaugural address – had exceeded its first-year goals.The program aimed to create 5,000 new preschool seats last year, but ended up creating 5,823, Pritzker said – a 15 percent overperformance. “As a result, right now we have over 82,000 publicly-funded preschool classroom seats – the highest number in our state's history. Staying on the Smart Start plan, we will achieve universal preschool by 2027.”Echoing his 2022 election-year call for a temporary pause on the state's 1 percent tax on groceries, Pritzker on Wednesday proposed nixing the grocery tax altogether.He said “It's one more regressive tax we just don't need. If it reduces inflation for families from 4 percent to 3 percent, even if it only puts a few hundred bucks back in families' pockets, it's the right thing to do.”Even while proposing a series of progressive expenditures, the governor also sought to cast himself as a pragmatist when it comes to state finances. The state has seen strong revenue performances in the past few years, But in November, the governor's own economic forecasting office predicted a nearly $900 million deficit in the fiscal year that begins July 1.“Our FY25 budget proposal makes some hard choices,” Pritzker said Wednesday. “I wish we had big surpluses to work with this year to take on every one of the very real challenges we face.”Illinois' once-paltry “rainy day” fund now has $2 billion socked away, the governor noted, and the state has paid off high-interest debt during his five years in office.To mitigate Illinois' previously projected deficit, Pritzker is proposing to more than double the tax rate paid by sportsbooks on profits – a change that would bring in an estimated $200 million annually. He also proposed extending an existing cap on operating losses that businesses can claim on taxes, which could help generate more than $500 million, the governor's office claims.Another revenue generator proposed by the governor: raising $101 million by capping a sales tax credit retailers are allowed to claim. But business groups on Wednesday signaled they'd put up a fight. In his first few months in office in 2019, Pritzker used his fresh political capital to muscle a $15 minimum wage ramp through the legislature – a long-fought-for progressive policy goal – followed closely by a trip to New York City to meet with executives at the influential big three credit ratings agencies.When Pritzker took office, Illinois' credit ratings were hovering around “junk” status after a two-year budget impasse under his predecessor, Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner. And though Illinois suffered a final credit downgrade in the early months of COVID, the state has since received nine upgrades.The governor on Wednesday held those upgrades in high regard, saying“My one line in the sand is that I will only sign a budget that is responsibly balanced and that does not diminish or derail the improving credit standing we have achieved for the last five years,”Andrew Adams contributed.Missouri Senate Dems Hold The Line In Ballot Fighthttps://missouriindependent.com/2024/02/20/democrat-filibuster-forces-removal-of-ballot-candy-from-senate-initiative-petition-bill/BY: RUDI KELLER - FEBRUARY 20, 2024 5:15 PM     A Democratic filibuster that stretched more than 20 hours ended this week when Senate Republicans stripped provisions critics derided as “ballot candy” from a proposal to make it harder to pass constitutional amendments proposed by initiative petitions.Ballot candy refers to language designed to trick voters - into thinking the initiative is about ensuring only citizens vote, for instance - when that's totally irrelevant to the question voters are deciding.By an 18-12 vote, with nine Republicans and nine Democrats forming the majority, language that stated non-citizens could not vote on constitutional amendments was removed, as were sections barring foreign governments and political parties from taking sides in Missouri ballot measures.The Senate then, by a voice vote, gave first-round approval to the bill that would require both a statewide majority and a majority vote in five of the state's eight congressional districts to pass future constitutional amendments.The proposal would alter the way Missourians have approved constitutional changes since the first statewide vote on a constitution in 1846.Senate Minority Leader John Rizzo of Independence, a Democrat, said, “All we're asking for is a fair fight. And the Republicans know if it's a fair fight, they lose, which is why they have to pump it full of ballot candy and mislead voters.”Meanwhile, the House spent much of Tuesday morning debating legislation that would make changes to the signature gathering process for initiative petition campaigns.Among numerous provisions, the bill would require signatures be recorded using black or dark ink and that signature gatherers be citizens of the United States, residents of Missouri or physically present in Missouri for at least 30 consecutive days prior to the collection of signatures.Its most sweeping provision grants new authority to the secretary of state and attorney general to review initiative and referendum petitions for compliance with the Missouri Constitution.The effort to make it harder to get on the ballot and harder to pass a constitutional amendment has been a GOP priority for several years. In the past two election cycles, voters have expanded Medicaid coverage and legalized recreational marijuana, circumventing the GOP majority that opposed both. The push to raise the threshold on amendments proposed by initiative has taken on a new urgency for Republicans as abortion-rights supporters move ahead with a signature campaign to make this year's ballot.The results on abortion amendments in other states has Missouri abortion foes anxious about whether they can defend the state's almost total ban in a statewide election. Voters in Ohio last year rejected an effort to increase the majority needed to pass constitutional amendments before voting 57% in favor of abortion rights. And in 2022, Kansas voters defeated an attempt to restrict abortion rights by a landslide vote.Gov. Kelly Keep Kansas GOP In Linehttps://kansasreflector.com/2024/02/20/kansas-house-republicans-fail-to-override-governors-veto-on-massive-tax-reform-bill/Kansas House Republicans fail to override governor's veto on massive tax reform billBY: TIM CARPENTER - FEBRUARY 20, 2024 12:41 PM     TOPEKA — The Republican-led Kansas House failed Tuesday to override Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly ‘s veto of a tax reform bill anchored by implementation of a single, flat state income tax rate of 5.25% in addition to elimination of the state sales tax on groceries and creation of a tax exemption for all Social Security income.The GOP holds supermajorities in the House and Senate, but there was skepticism that both chambers could muster two-thirds majorities necessary to rebuke Kelly given opposition among conservative and moderate Republicans to parts of the three-year, $1.6 billion tax cut favoring the state's most wealthy. Kelly said the decision of House members to sustain her veto was a win for working-class Kansans who would have seen “little relief under this irresponsible flat tax experiment.” The Legislature should move ahead with her proposal for reducing $1 billion in taxes over three years.The governor said “I urge legislators to work together to cut taxes in a way that continues our economic growth and maintains our solid fiscal foundation while benefitting all Kansans, not just those at the top,”.Rep. Tom Sawyer, D-Wichita, said the cost of the tax reform bill could reach $600 million annually when fully implemented, and the plan didn't do enough for the middle class in Kansas. He said a married couple earning $42,000 to $75,000 per year would only see an income tax reduction of about 75 cents.Rep. Trevor Jacobs of Fort Scott was among Republicans who opposed overriding Kelly's veto. He said the flat tax would force the state's working class to carry a larger burden of the state tax load. And the 2024 Legislature had sufficient time to develop an alternative that provided tax relief to all Kansans rather than just a select few.Good thinking! See it's not just Democrats who think KS Gov Laura Kelly knows what she's doing. Welp, that's it for me! From Denver I'm Sean Diller. Stories in today's show appeared first in the Missouri Independent, Kansas Reflector, Texas Tribune, and Capitol News Illinois. Thanks for listening, see you next time.  @TheHeartlandPOD on Twitter and ThreadsCo-HostsAdam Sommer @Adam_Sommer85 (Twitter) @adam_sommer85 (Post)Rachel Parker @msraitchetp (Post) Sean Diller (no social)The Heartland Collective - Sign Up Today!JOIN PATREON FOR MORE - AND JOIN OUR SOCIAL NETWORK!“Change The Conversation”Outro Song: “The World Is On Fire” by American Aquarium http://www.americanaquarium.com/

The Heartland POD for Friday, February 23, 2024A flyover from this weeks top heartland stories including:Primary voting is underway in Texas | Kansas Medicaid expansion update | Illinois Gov J.B. Pritzker lays out priorities as a progressive pragmatist | Missouri Democrats filibuster ballot candy | KS Gov Laura Kelly's veto will stand Primary voting is underway in Texashttps://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/21/julie-johnson-brian-williams-congressional-district-32-colin-allred/BY SEJAL GOVINDARAOFEB. 21, 2024WASHINGTON — In 2018, Rep. Colin Allred flipped Texas' 32nd Congressional District, turning the Dallas-based district into a blue stronghold. Now, as the Democrat vies to unseat U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a crowded field of 10 Democrats is lining up to replace him.Dr. Brian Williams, a trauma surgeon, and State Rep. Julie Johnson, of Farmers Branch, are leading the field in the Democratic primary with their fundraising efforts, each amassing about a million dollars in campaign donations since their campaigns were registered at the beginning of last summer.Ideologically, Williams and Johnson are aligned. They both rank health care a top priority if elected, and have touted their ability to work across the aisle.Johnson, a trial lawyer in her third term in the state House rode the 2019 blue wave to unseat hardline conservative incumbent Matt Rinaldi, by 13 points. Rinaldi now chairs the state GOP. In her three terms, at least 40 of the bills Johnson has co-authored or joint-authored have been signed into law.As a Democrat in the Republican-dominated state Legislature, Johnson has played a lot of defense trying to kill bills she and other progressives deem harmful. Johnson, who is gay, said she and other members of the House's LGBTQ caucus have had success in killing anti-LGBTQ bills by mastering the rules of procedure and “being better at the rules than the other side.” In 2019, she took down a House version of the so-called “Save Chick-fil-A bill” on a rule technicality. The bill was a response to a San Antonio airport kicking out the fast food restaurant over criticism of its religiously affiliated donations to anti-LGBTQ groups. It was revived in another bill and passed into law.If elected, Johnson would be the first openly LGBTQ member of Congress from a Southern state. She's drawn notable endorsements from Beto O'Rourke, Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, EMILY's List, Equality PAC, and several labor unions.Matt Angle, director of Lone Star Project, a Texas group that works to boost Democrats, said Johnson is the frontrunner in the race, but Williams is a formidable challenger.“Make no mistake about it though,” Angle said. “Julie Johnson has a voter base within the district not only from her old district, but also just from years of being an active Democratic activist and a donor and really a couple of just outstanding terms in the legislature.”While he may be new to the Texas political arena, Williams is no stranger to the halls of Congress.Williams was a health policy adviser to U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy — who endorsed him — to help pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in 2022 – the farthest reaching gun safety legislation in decades. The legislation, crafted in the aftermath of the shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo New York, allocated millions of dollars to expand mental health resources, strengthens background checks and tightens the boyfriend loophole. U.S. Sen. John Cornyn was a lead negotiator on the bill with Murphy, and Williams worked closely with Cornyn's office. In his role as a health policy advisor for Murphy, he worked across the aisle with Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana on mental health legislation.Williams also worked with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California to pass federal health care legislation related to pandemic preparedness and reducing health care costs.Williams said his experience as a trauma surgeon — operating on victims of gun violence and women experiencing reproductive health emergencies — has fueled his priorities to fight for gun restrictions and increase access to abortions and other womens' health. Williams added his perspective as a Black doctor seeing racial disparities in health care will resonate with the district's diverse constituency, given that the district is now a majority-minority district with a 37% Hispanic or Latino population, 22% Black population and 8% Asian population.“They're excited that there's someone that looks like them that can represent them in Congress,” Williams said in an interview.As Allred opted to stay neutral in the race to succeed him – Williams said he had pursued his endorsement while Johnson said she had not – the tension between Johnson and Williams has been heating up.Williams has publicly criticized Johnson for a vote she took that would have made some changes and tweaks to the state's Alternatives to Abortions program, which provides information about resources to women seeking the procedure.“I draw contrast between myself and Representative Johnson about how I am the better candidate,” Williams said.Johnson, who is endorsed by Planned Parenthood, said Williams misrepresented the vote, which she said she cast to bring the already-funded program under the scope of the Health and Human Services Commission so it could be subject to public transparency. Her campaign published a fact-check on her website, likening Williams' misrepresentation of her record to “Trumpian-style, false attacks.”Planned Parenthood was critical of the legislation.Johnson said women's health is also a priority for her, and she stands by her record.“Texas leads the nation of uninsured folks, and in maternal mortality, and in infant mortality. Obviously, we're leading the nation in an attack on women's freedom for women's reproductive health, and I've been a champion of a lot of these issues,” she said.Other candidates vying for the open seat in the March 5 primary include businessman Raja Chaudhry, tech entrepreneur Alex Cornwallis, former Dallas City Councilman and real estate broker Kevin Felder and attorney Callie Butcher, who would be the first openly transgender member of Congress if elected.If no candidate gets a majority of the vote, there will be a runoff in May. The winner of the Democratic primary will face off against the winner of the Republican primary in November but is likely to win given that the district is solidly blue.And, from Dallas we go to Houston whereAfter bruising loss in Houston mayoral race, U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee faces her toughest reelection yetJackson Lee faces off against Amanda Edwards, her most formidable congressional opponent in three decades.https://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/19/sheila-jackson-lee-amanda-edwards-democratic-primary-houston/BY SEJAL GOVINDARAOFEB. 19, 2024In 1994, Sheila Jackson Lee, then a 44-year-old Houston city councilwoman, unseated four-term U.S. Rep. Craig Washington in the Democratic primary, securing a seat she'd come to hold for the next 30 years.This March, former Houston City Councilwoman Amanda Edwards, 42, is hoping to replicate that political upset as she faces off against Jackson Lee in the Democratic primary for Congressional District 18.Jackson Lee, who did not respond to requests for an interview, has only drawn four primary challengers over her 14-term career, all of whom she defeated by landslide margins.She's a household name in her Houston-based district, known for her frequent visibility at constituent graduations, funerals and baby showers.But last year she ran for Houston mayor against then-state Sen. John Whitmire. It was a bruising primary — unfamiliar territory for Jackson Lee — and her campaign was roiled with negative media after audio of her berating her congressional staffers was leaked. She ended up losing the race by 30 points and then immediately announced she was running for reelection to the U.S. House.Amanda Edwards, a former intern in Jackson Lee's office, initially announced she was running for Houston mayor until the congresswoman threw her hat in the ring. At that point, Edwards pivoted — endorsing Jackson Lee as mayor and beginning her own bid for Congress.By the time Jackson Lee announced she was running for her House seat again, Edwards had already gained momentum. In the fourth quarter of last year, Edwards outraised the congresswoman 10 to 1 — $272,000 to Jackson Lee's $23,000.Mark Jones, Baker Institute fellow in political science at Rice University said, “This could be the year that Congresswoman Jackson Lee loses. And given that as a safe, Democratic, seat whoever wins the primary will be headed to Washington in January of 2025”Jackson Lee holds a narrow lead in primary polls, while 16% of voters remain undecided. Edwards, a native Houstonian, said her commitment to public service is propelled by her father's battle with cancer when she was a teenager, where she learned firsthand about the cracks in the health care system and how “policy could be a matter of life and death.” She served as an at-large Houston City Council member from 2016 to 2020, where she represented a constituency of more than 2 million people.In her race to beat Jackson Lee, Edwards has garnered some notable endorsements including the Harris County Young Democrats, and the Harris County chapter of the Texas Coalition of Black Democrats – both of which endorsed Jackson Lee in past races.The Harris County Young Democrats rescinded its endorsement of Jackson Lee in the mayoral race — citing a “zero tolerance policy” for staff abuse.Lenard Polk, Harris County chapter president of the Texas Coalition of Black Democrats, said Jackson Lee's leaked audio tape controversy also factored into the committee's decision to not endorse her. On the recording Jackson Lee berates a staffer for not having a document she was looking for and calls two of her staffers “Goddamn big-ass children, fuckin' idiots who serve no Goddamn purpose.”He said endorsement committee members were still “quite upset” over the tape and it “wasn't a good look” for Jackson Lee. The leaked tape fueled discourse about Jackson Lee's reputation as an unkind boss on Capitol Hill – she regularly makes Washingtonian Magazine's worst of Congress list and her office has high turnover rates.Polk added that voters felt abandoned by Jackson Lee, who jumped into the mayor's race without endorsing someone to take her place, only to file for reelection a day after losing.Jackson Lee's battle to retain her seat is made tougher by 2021 redistricting, because the 18th district now includes more young white professionals who do not have the same level of loyalty to her as longtime district residents.But despite any damage she may have incurred from her mayoral run, Jackson Lee remains a powerful political force in her district.County Commissioner Rodney Ellis, who is backing Jackson Lee, said he doesn't know anyone in local politics with her “energy level,” and that Jackson Lee has secured meaningful federal grants for her district – most recently $20.5 million to Harris County Public Health Department's Uplift Harris Guaranteed Income Pilot project. He also said she has a reputation for being a reliably progressive voice in Congress.Jackson Lee has a long list of powerful endorsements from House Democratic leaders like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Minority Whip Katherine Clarke. She's backed by Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo and former Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and other members of Texas' Washington delegation including Democratic Reps. Lizzie Fletcher of Houston, Lloyd Doggett of Austin, Henry Cuellar of Laredo and Joaquin Castro of San Antonio.Ellis said Jackson Lee may not be a strong fundraiser but she will benefit from her incumbency advantage.Linda Bell-Robinson, a Houston Democratic precinct chair, said she is fighting for Jackson Lee to retain her seat because seniority in Congress is important and Edwards would be learning the ropes as a freshman if elected.“We need fighters,” she said. “We don't need people trying to learn how to fight on the battlefield. We need people who are already fighting and know how to fight their fight.SEAN: Super interesting race. For my part, I don't have any problem with members of Congress being extremely tough to work for. I have problems with lying, fraud, criminal activity, and squishy voting records. Congresswoman Jackson Lee has 100% ratings from Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and AFL-CIO. She has a 95% rating from League of Conservation VotersNew estimate predicts Medicaid expansion would serve 152K at no cost to stateA $509M federal incentive would help offset state cost for first eight yearsBY: SHERMAN SMITH - FEBRUARY 22, 2024 4:22 PMhttps://kansasreflector.com/2024/02/22/new-estimate-predicts-medicaid-expansion-would-serve-152k-at-no-cost-to-state/TOPEKA — The Kansas Health Institute on Thursday unveiled its analysis of Gov. Laura Kelly's proposal to expand Medicaid, predicting 152,000 Kansans would enroll in the first year with no additional cost to the state government.The Democratic governor has made passage of Medicaid expansion a top legislative priority this year, following her statewide campaign to promote the policy last fall. But Republican leadership in the Legislature opposes the policy and has blocked hearings on Medicaid expansion for four years.Kansas is one of just 10 states that still haven't expanded Medicaid since President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act in 2010.The state-run version of Medicaid, called KanCare, provides health care services to low-income families, seniors and people with disabilities. Currently, those who earn less than 38% of the federal poverty level are eligible. For a family of four, the annual income limit is $11,400.Under the ACA, also known as Obamacare, the federal government offers to cover 90% of the cost of Medicaid services in exchange for expanding eligibility to 138% of the federal poverty rate. The annual income threshold for a family of four would be $41,400.Kelly's proposal includes a work requirement with exceptions for full-time students, veterans, caregivers, people with partial disabilities, and former foster kids. Her plan also would add a new surcharge for hospitals.KHI predicts the change in income eligibility would result in 151,898 people enrolling in KanCare — 106,450 adults and 45,448 children. Those numbers include 68,236 adults and 16,377 children who are currently uninsured.About 68.9% of the adults are already working at least part-time, according to the KHI analysis. Of the remaining 31.1% KHI determined 19.1% of the unemployed adults have a disability, 16.1% are students and 3.8% are veterans.KHI calculated the cost to the state for expanding Medicaid over the first eight years would be fully offset — mostly because of a $509 million incentive included in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Other savings would come from the federal government picking up more of the tab on existing services, as well as the new surcharge on hospitals. The Kansas Sunflower Foundation on Thursday released findings from surveys that found 68% of Kansas voters, including 51% of Republicans and 83% of small business owners support Medicaid expansion.Steve Baccus, an Ottawa County farmer and former president of Kansas Farm Bureau, said in a news release that expanding Medicaid was about “investing in the well-being of our communities.”Baccus said “Our rural communities are often struggling to keep Main Street open and to continue to offer the necessary services to the surrounding agricultural enterprises. A community that can offer a total health care package has an advantage in maintaining a viable town.”The findings are consistent with a Fort Hays State University poll that was released in October.With budget proposal and fiery address, Pritzker paints himself as progressive pragmatistThursday, February 22, 2024Governor's spending plan advances progressive-backed policies in tight fiscal landscapeBy HANNAH MEISELCapitol News Illinoishmeisel@capitolnewsillinois.comhttps://capitolnewsillinois.com/NEWS/with-budget-proposal-and-fiery-address-pritzker-paints-himself-as-progressive-pragmatistSPRINGFIELD – In delivering his annual State of the State and budget address on Wednesday, Gov. JB Pritzker cast his administration as both progressive and pragmatic – a balance he's worked to strike as his national profile has grown.Some elements of the governor's proposed spending plan, like using $10 million in state funds to eliminate $1 billion worth of Illinoisans' medical debt, are hardline progressive ideas. Others, including a goal to achieve “universal preschool” by 2027, fit in with a more traditional liberal platform.But Pritzker has also defined his success in traditional economic terms, putting particular stock into how New York City-based credit ratings agencies view Illinois' finances, while also positioning Illinois as a hub for emerging technologies like electric vehicles and quantum computing. As Illinois faces an influx of migrants from the southern U.S. border Pritzker has leaned into a leadership style that prioritizes progressive ideals while projecting an image of fiscal responsibility.As he outlined a proposal to add $182 Million toward the state's migrant response, Gov. Pritzker said, “We didn't ask for this manufactured crisis, But we must deal with it all the same.”“Children, pregnant women, and the elderly have been sent here in the dead of night, left far from our designated welcome centers, in freezing temperatures, wearing flip flops and T-shirts,” Pritzker said. “Think about that the next time a politician from Texas wants to lecture you about being a good Christian.”The governor was met with big applause from Democrats in laying out his proposed “Healthcare Consumer Access and Protection Act,” which would, in part, ban “prior authorization” requirements for mental health treatment.Pritzker characterized the practice of prior authorization as a way for insurance companies to deny the care that doctors have prescribed.Pritzker is also proposing spending $10 million in state funds to buy Illinoisans' past-due medical debt that's been sent to collections. Partnering with national nonprofit RIP Medical Debt, which buys debt for pennies on the dollar on the same market that collections agencies purchase the rights to the debts, the governor said Illinois could “relieve nearly $1 billion in medical debt for the first cohort of 340,000 Illinoisans.”The governor spent time noting two key places he said Illinois fails its Black citizens:  maternal mortality and disproportionate rates of homelessness. To combat Black maternal mortality rates, Pritzker proposed helping more community-based reproductive health centers to open, citing Illinois' first freestanding nonprofit birthing center in Berwyn as a model.He said, “Black women in our state are three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women.” Pritzker proposed spending an additional $50 million on the state's “Home Illinois” program launched in 2021, in part to “attack the root causes of housing insecurity for Black Illinoisans.” He cited a statistic that Black people make up 61 percent of Illinois' homeless population despite only being 14 percent of the state's general population.Additionally, the governor proposed a $1 million pilot program for free diapers for low-income families, as well as a $5 million increased investment in an existing home visit program “for our most vulnerable families” with babies in their first year.His budget also includes $12 million to create a child tax credit for families with children under three with incomes below a certain threshold. Among the successes Pritzker pointed to, perhaps the most salient is his claim that Illinois' new “Smart Start” early childhood program – proposed last year in the governor's second inaugural address – had exceeded its first-year goals.The program aimed to create 5,000 new preschool seats last year, but ended up creating 5,823, Pritzker said – a 15 percent overperformance. “As a result, right now we have over 82,000 publicly-funded preschool classroom seats – the highest number in our state's history. Staying on the Smart Start plan, we will achieve universal preschool by 2027.”Echoing his 2022 election-year call for a temporary pause on the state's 1 percent tax on groceries, Pritzker on Wednesday proposed nixing the grocery tax altogether.He said “It's one more regressive tax we just don't need. If it reduces inflation for families from 4 percent to 3 percent, even if it only puts a few hundred bucks back in families' pockets, it's the right thing to do.”Even while proposing a series of progressive expenditures, the governor also sought to cast himself as a pragmatist when it comes to state finances. The state has seen strong revenue performances in the past few years, But in November, the governor's own economic forecasting office predicted a nearly $900 million deficit in the fiscal year that begins July 1.“Our FY25 budget proposal makes some hard choices,” Pritzker said Wednesday. “I wish we had big surpluses to work with this year to take on every one of the very real challenges we face.”Illinois' once-paltry “rainy day” fund now has $2 billion socked away, the governor noted, and the state has paid off high-interest debt during his five years in office.To mitigate Illinois' previously projected deficit, Pritzker is proposing to more than double the tax rate paid by sportsbooks on profits – a change that would bring in an estimated $200 million annually. He also proposed extending an existing cap on operating losses that businesses can claim on taxes, which could help generate more than $500 million, the governor's office claims.Another revenue generator proposed by the governor: raising $101 million by capping a sales tax credit retailers are allowed to claim. But business groups on Wednesday signaled they'd put up a fight. In his first few months in office in 2019, Pritzker used his fresh political capital to muscle a $15 minimum wage ramp through the legislature – a long-fought-for progressive policy goal – followed closely by a trip to New York City to meet with executives at the influential big three credit ratings agencies.When Pritzker took office, Illinois' credit ratings were hovering around “junk” status after a two-year budget impasse under his predecessor, Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner. And though Illinois suffered a final credit downgrade in the early months of COVID, the state has since received nine upgrades.The governor on Wednesday held those upgrades in high regard, saying“My one line in the sand is that I will only sign a budget that is responsibly balanced and that does not diminish or derail the improving credit standing we have achieved for the last five years,”Andrew Adams contributed.Missouri Senate Dems Hold The Line In Ballot Fighthttps://missouriindependent.com/2024/02/20/democrat-filibuster-forces-removal-of-ballot-candy-from-senate-initiative-petition-bill/BY: RUDI KELLER - FEBRUARY 20, 2024 5:15 PM     A Democratic filibuster that stretched more than 20 hours ended this week when Senate Republicans stripped provisions critics derided as “ballot candy” from a proposal to make it harder to pass constitutional amendments proposed by initiative petitions.Ballot candy refers to language designed to trick voters - into thinking the initiative is about ensuring only citizens vote, for instance - when that's totally irrelevant to the question voters are deciding.By an 18-12 vote, with nine Republicans and nine Democrats forming the majority, language that stated non-citizens could not vote on constitutional amendments was removed, as were sections barring foreign governments and political parties from taking sides in Missouri ballot measures.The Senate then, by a voice vote, gave first-round approval to the bill that would require both a statewide majority and a majority vote in five of the state's eight congressional districts to pass future constitutional amendments.The proposal would alter the way Missourians have approved constitutional changes since the first statewide vote on a constitution in 1846.Senate Minority Leader John Rizzo of Independence, a Democrat, said, “All we're asking for is a fair fight. And the Republicans know if it's a fair fight, they lose, which is why they have to pump it full of ballot candy and mislead voters.”Meanwhile, the House spent much of Tuesday morning debating legislation that would make changes to the signature gathering process for initiative petition campaigns.Among numerous provisions, the bill would require signatures be recorded using black or dark ink and that signature gatherers be citizens of the United States, residents of Missouri or physically present in Missouri for at least 30 consecutive days prior to the collection of signatures.Its most sweeping provision grants new authority to the secretary of state and attorney general to review initiative and referendum petitions for compliance with the Missouri Constitution.The effort to make it harder to get on the ballot and harder to pass a constitutional amendment has been a GOP priority for several years. In the past two election cycles, voters have expanded Medicaid coverage and legalized recreational marijuana, circumventing the GOP majority that opposed both. The push to raise the threshold on amendments proposed by initiative has taken on a new urgency for Republicans as abortion-rights supporters move ahead with a signature campaign to make this year's ballot.The results on abortion amendments in other states has Missouri abortion foes anxious about whether they can defend the state's almost total ban in a statewide election. Voters in Ohio last year rejected an effort to increase the majority needed to pass constitutional amendments before voting 57% in favor of abortion rights. And in 2022, Kansas voters defeated an attempt to restrict abortion rights by a landslide vote.Gov. Kelly Keep Kansas GOP In Linehttps://kansasreflector.com/2024/02/20/kansas-house-republicans-fail-to-override-governors-veto-on-massive-tax-reform-bill/Kansas House Republicans fail to override governor's veto on massive tax reform billBY: TIM CARPENTER - FEBRUARY 20, 2024 12:41 PM     TOPEKA — The Republican-led Kansas House failed Tuesday to override Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly ‘s veto of a tax reform bill anchored by implementation of a single, flat state income tax rate of 5.25% in addition to elimination of the state sales tax on groceries and creation of a tax exemption for all Social Security income.The GOP holds supermajorities in the House and Senate, but there was skepticism that both chambers could muster two-thirds majorities necessary to rebuke Kelly given opposition among conservative and moderate Republicans to parts of the three-year, $1.6 billion tax cut favoring the state's most wealthy. Kelly said the decision of House members to sustain her veto was a win for working-class Kansans who would have seen “little relief under this irresponsible flat tax experiment.” The Legislature should move ahead with her proposal for reducing $1 billion in taxes over three years.The governor said “I urge legislators to work together to cut taxes in a way that continues our economic growth and maintains our solid fiscal foundation while benefitting all Kansans, not just those at the top,”.Rep. Tom Sawyer, D-Wichita, said the cost of the tax reform bill could reach $600 million annually when fully implemented, and the plan didn't do enough for the middle class in Kansas. He said a married couple earning $42,000 to $75,000 per year would only see an income tax reduction of about 75 cents.Rep. Trevor Jacobs of Fort Scott was among Republicans who opposed overriding Kelly's veto. He said the flat tax would force the state's working class to carry a larger burden of the state tax load. And the 2024 Legislature had sufficient time to develop an alternative that provided tax relief to all Kansans rather than just a select few.Good thinking! See it's not just Democrats who think KS Gov Laura Kelly knows what she's doing. Welp, that's it for me! From Denver I'm Sean Diller. Stories in today's show appeared first in the Missouri Independent, Kansas Reflector, Texas Tribune, and Capitol News Illinois. Thanks for listening, see you next time.  @TheHeartlandPOD on Twitter and ThreadsCo-HostsAdam Sommer @Adam_Sommer85 (Twitter) @adam_sommer85 (Post)Rachel Parker @msraitchetp (Post) Sean Diller (no social)The Heartland Collective - Sign Up Today!JOIN PATREON FOR MORE - AND JOIN OUR SOCIAL NETWORK!“Change The Conversation”Outro Song: “The World Is On Fire” by American Aquarium http://www.americanaquarium.com/

Some of Chomsky's notable works on Amazon: Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media – https://amzn.to/3Q9N6zv Who Rules the World? – https://amzn.to/3UkA0BU On Palestine – https://amzn.to/4aZrH3N All of Noam Chomsky's books – https://amzn.to/444Te1C Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you which will help fund current and future projects that I believe you'll love. Thanks for your support. __________________________________________________ Avram Noam Chomsky (born December 7, 1928) is an American professor and public intellectual known for his work in linguistics, political activism, and social criticism. Sometimes called "the father of modern linguistics", Chomsky is also a major figure in analytic philosophy and one of the founders of the field of cognitive science. He is a laureate professor of linguistics at the University of Arizona and an institute professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Among the most cited living authors, Chomsky has written more than 150 books on topics such as linguistics, war, and politics. Ideologically, he aligns with anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian socialism. Born to Ashkenazi Jewish immigrants in Philadelphia, Chomsky developed an early interest in anarchism from alternative bookstores in New York City. He studied at the University of Pennsylvania. During his postgraduate work in the Harvard Society of Fellows, Chomsky developed the theory of transformational grammar for which he earned his doctorate in 1955. That year he began teaching at MIT, and in 1957 emerged as a significant figure in linguistics with his landmark work Syntactic Structures, which played a major role in remodeling the study of language. From 1958 to 1959 Chomsky was a National Science Foundation fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study. He created or co-created the universal grammar theory, the generative grammar theory, the Chomsky hierarchy, and the minimalist program. Chomsky also played a pivotal role in the decline of linguistic behaviorism, and was particularly critical of the work of B. F. Skinner. An outspoken opponent of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, which he saw as an act of American imperialism, in 1967 Chomsky rose to national attention for his anti-war essay "The Responsibility of Intellectuals". Becoming associated with the New Left, he was arrested multiple times for his activism and placed on President Richard Nixon's list of political opponents. While expanding his work in linguistics over subsequent decades, he also became involved in the linguistics wars. In collaboration with Edward S. Herman, Chomsky later articulated the propaganda model of media criticism in Manufacturing Consent, and worked to expose the Indonesian occupation of East Timor. His defense of unconditional freedom of speech, including that of Holocaust denial, generated significant controversy in the Faurisson affair of the 1980s. Chomsky's commentary on the Cambodian genocide also generated controversy. Since retiring from active teaching at MIT, he has continued his vocal political activism, including opposing the 2003 invasion of Iraq and supporting the Occupy movement. An anti-Zionist, Chomsky considers Israel's treatment of Palestinians to be worse than South African-style apartheid, and criticizes U.S. support for Israel. Chomsky is widely recognized as having helped to spark the cognitive revolution in the human sciences, contributing to the development of a new cognitivistic framework for the study of language and the mind. Chomsky remains a leading critic of U.S. foreign policy, contemporary capitalism, U.S. involvement and Israel's role in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and mass media. __________________________________________________ Buy me a coffee Audio source Noam Chomsky - Wikipedia Internet Archive --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theunadulteratedintellect/support

Did you know that the large Satmar Hasidic group, and the tiny Naturei Karta group, hold very different views about anti-zionism? Ideologically, the two agree up to a point. They both are anti-zionist until the Messiah comes, and both see Zionism as a secular movement. But Satmar is not the group that is seen on Iranian TV and running around with some pretty disturbing anti-semitic groups. In this segment, I go into the difference a little bit. For several reasons, including resource constraints, I have decided not to develop this segment into video. So for now I am only sharing it in podcast audio form.

This week, Mike and Elizabeth talk about research linking ideology to our habits of attention and memory, including our interpretation of cues related to social status and behaviors.  The episode was recorded before Harvard's president resigned, but our discussion is relevant to the ongoing controversy about her path to leadership and short lived tenure as president.  The conversation was inspired by a popular online opinion piece proposing that “pathological kindness” (the author's term, not ours!) leads individuals to act in ways that are ultimately unproductive or socially harmful.   Institute for Liberal Values Podcast notes: Waldfogel, H. B., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., Hauser, O. P., Ho, A. K., & Kteily, N. S. (2021). Ideology selectively shapes attention to inequality. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(14). https://doi-org.libserv-prd.bridgew.edu/10.1073/pnas.2023985118 https://unherd.com/2023/10/the-tyranny-of-pathological-kindness/

#GAZA:   Houthis are risk-takers., ideologically driven. Michael Knights is the Jill and Jay Bernstein Fellow at The Washington Institute, specializing in the military and security affairs of Iraq, Iran, and the Gulf states. He is a co-founder of the Militia Spotlight platform, which offers in-depth analysis of developments related to the Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria. Malcolm Hoenlein @Conf_of_pres @mhoenlein1 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/27/us-navy-thwarts-attempted-seizure-of-israel-linked-cargo-ship https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-775848 https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/iranian-escalation-iraq-and-syria-implications-and-us-options 1962 Sanaa

In this episode of The P.A.S. Report Podcast, Professor Nick Giordano dons his detective hat to crack the case of the scandalous “White House cocaine gate.” It's a real whodunnit. Is it the sneaky Secretary of Treasury Janet Yellen or the mischievous Secretary of State Tony Blinken? Or could it possibly be the President himself? This is a whodunnit. But hold on tight, because this wild mystery unravels a more significant problem: our institutions are like a bunch of wannabe magicians, constantly pulling cover-ups out of their hats as they try to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.”   More Information If you enjoyed this episode and found it useful, please give The P.A.S. Report Podcast a 5-star rating and take 30 seconds to write a review. Make sure to hit the follow button so you never miss an episode. Please share this episode on social media and with your family and friends. Support The P.A.S. Report Podcast by Visiting Our Advertisers Stock up on all your survival needs and visit 4Patriots. 4Patriots champions freedom and self-reliance. Use code PAS to get 10% off your order. Protect your money from the out-of-control Washington D.C. spending. Visit Goldco today to get the Gold IRA Kit Americans are using to protect their retirement savings. Goldco is offering up to $10,000 in bonus silver when opening a qualified IRA account, just for being a P.A.S. Report listener. Visit Goldco at https://goldco.com/pasreport Don't forget to visit https://pasreport.com. *PA Strategies, LLC. may earn advertising revenue or a small commission for promoting products or when you make a purchase through any affiliate links on this website and within this post.

In this episode of New Ideal Live, Ben Bayer and Sam Weaver discuss Ron DeSantis' push to ideologically transform Florida colleges, and evaluate its potential to bring about greater freedom in the realm of education. While some of DeSantis' actions should be evaluated as positive, there are ominous signs that they could also entrench further state control of education. Among the topics covered: The toxic monoculture in American higher education; The need for a separation of education and state; Using the “Fairness Doctrine” to reverse state control in education; Aspects of DeSantis' proposal that could help introduce ideological diversity; How DeSantis' proposals could entrench a different kind of ideological monoculture; What arguing for freedom in education requires. Mentioned in this podcast and relevant to the discussion is Ayn Rand's essay “Fairness Doctrine for Education” in Philosophy: Who Needs It. The podcast was recorded on February 17, 2023. Listen to the discussion below. Listen and subscribe from your mobile device on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify or Stitcher. Watch archived podcasts here. Podcast audio:

Alliance for Market Solutions executive director Alex Flint on Speaker Kevin McCarthy recognizing the need for the GOP to change the party's ideology on climate change. Listen to the entire episode: https://republicen.org/podcast!

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” Ginny Gentles, director of the Education Freedom Center at the Independent Women's Forum, joins Federalist Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to discuss the breakdown of educational and medical institutions thanks to radical gender ideology and evaluate what parents should do when their children are inevitably faced with woke dogma.

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” Ginny Gentles, director of the Education Freedom Center at the Independent Women's Forum, joins Federalist Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to discuss the breakdown of educational and medical institutions thanks to radical gender ideology and evaluate what parents should do when their children are inevitably faced with woke dogma.

The Jafa brings you Paul Hester comedy gold and Chicago memories. Dublin 1992: tall trees, world where you live, in the lowlands, dr livingston. Chicago 2004: six months in a leaky boat, a life between us.You can significantly support the continuation of the 240 podcast for a donation of just a couple dollars per month. This goes directly towards covering the podcast hosting fees. Big thank yous if you are in a position to help. Head over here to: http://patreon.com/240neilfinn

That's right - the legend Noam Chomsky joins Inside the War Room to talk about the decline of America, China, Russia, and the Middle East. Links from the show:The Withdrawal: Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and the Fragility of US PowerNoam's booksSubscribe to the newsletterConnect with RyanAbout my guest:Avram Noam Chomsky (/ˈnoʊm ˈtʃɒmski/; born December 7, 1928) is an American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, historian, logician, social critic, and political activist. Sometimes described as "the father of modern linguistics", Chomsky is also a major figure in analytic philosophy, and one of the founders of the field of cognitive science. He has spent more than half a century at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he is Institute Professor Emeritus, and is the author of over 100 books on topics such as linguistics, war, politics, and mass media. Ideologically, he aligns with anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian socialism. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dispatchesfromthewarroom.substack.com

In this episode Dennis discusses the issues surrounding abortion and the Roe v. Wade leak. He discusses why pro-choice and pro-life people disagree and presents the idea that the disagreement arises not so much over legal rulings but because of foundational disagreements that the two sides have. Any legal rulings that come down the pike will be reflective of those foundational beliefs and there will be disagreements over whichever way the Courts decide to go. Will the country divide over this issue? The sad reality is that we actually are already divided. Ideologically we live in two different countries that hold different self-evident truths about what it means to be created, what constitutes life, and the unalienable valuable attributed to that life. Unless we can agree on those issues we will never resolve the pro-life/pro-choice debate. If you have any questions or comments that you'd like Dennis to address you can shoot him an email to dennissutherby@infaith.orgSubscribe to the "Faith in Focus" substack by following the link here to get articles directly to your inboxAnd if you'd like to support his ministry with InFaith you can text the word "discipleship" to 41444 or head over to https://infaith.org/dennis-sutherby and give there. Support the show

This week on MOATS: The Podcast Bonus Episode This week's guest is Director of The Tricontinental Institute for Social Research, Vijay Prashad on the death anniversary of Professor Patrice Lumumba Patrice Émery Lumumba was a Congolese politician and independence leader who served as the first prime minister of the independent Democratic Republic of the Congo from June until September 1960. He played a significant role in the transformation of the Congo from a colony of Belgium into an independent republic. Ideologically an African nationalist and pan-Africanist, he led the Congolese National Movement (MNC) party from 1958 until he was assassinated. The Mother of all Talk Shows" is broadcast live every Sunday 7pm GMT on Youtube and Sputnik Radio. MOATS is the open university of the airwaves to millions of people all over the world @moatstv @vijayprashad This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Podcorn - https://podcorn.com/privacy Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacy