Podcasts about Western Europe

Is Civil War Coming to the West? | Prof. David Betz | Heretics with Andrew Gold

After a long-awaited phone call between President Trump and President Xi Jinping and as Trump tries to iron out the kinks of his trade war with China, Ely Ratner,  Biden's Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Indo-Pacific with close ties to Trump's Pentagon, argues that America needs a new NATO-like defense pact in Asia to counter the growing threat from Beijing. Plus, award-winning author and professor Ibram X. Kendi talks to Bianna about his new biography for young readers exploring the complex nature of Malcom X's legacy. Also, CNN's Mike Valerio breaks down what South Korea's new leader Lee Jae-myung means for the country's democracy following its martial law crisis, and the implications of this election for its relations with the United States and the region. Then, investigative Russian journalists Irina Borogan and Andrei Soldatov, now living in exile, discuss their new book, "Our Dear Friends in Moscow," about how their former colleagues in the Russian press came to enable Vladimir Putin's regime. From the archives, decades after allied forces landed on the beaches of Normandy to rid Western Europe of Nazi control, history buff and World War Two chronicler Tom Hanks on why the stories of D-Day's heroic generation must be told. As theatre's leading men and reigning divas head to the Tony Awards this weekend, one of the nominees, David Yazbek speaks to Bianna Golodryga about his play, "Dead Outlaw."  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This book examines the dynamic evolution of Western détente policies which sought to transform Europe and overcome its Cold War division through more communication and engagement. Kieninger challenges the traditional Cold War narrative that détente prolonged the division of Europe and precipitated America's decline in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. Rather, he argues that policymakers in the U.S. Department of State and in Western Europe envisaged the stability enabled by détente as a precondition for change, as Communist regimes saw a sense of security as a prerequisite for opening up their societies to Western influence over time. Kieninger identifies the Helsinki Accords, Lyndon Johnson's bridge building, and Willy Brandt's Ostpolitik as efforts aimed at constructive changes in Eastern Europe through a multiplication of contacts, communication, and cooperation on all societal levels. This study also illuminates the longevity of America's policy of peaceful change against the background of the nuclear stalemate and the military status quo. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

This book examines the dynamic evolution of Western détente policies which sought to transform Europe and overcome its Cold War division through more communication and engagement. Kieninger challenges the traditional Cold War narrative that détente prolonged the division of Europe and precipitated America's decline in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. Rather, he argues that policymakers in the U.S. Department of State and in Western Europe envisaged the stability enabled by détente as a precondition for change, as Communist regimes saw a sense of security as a prerequisite for opening up their societies to Western influence over time. Kieninger identifies the Helsinki Accords, Lyndon Johnson's bridge building, and Willy Brandt's Ostpolitik as efforts aimed at constructive changes in Eastern Europe through a multiplication of contacts, communication, and cooperation on all societal levels. This study also illuminates the longevity of America's policy of peaceful change against the background of the nuclear stalemate and the military status quo. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Can movies mirror the reality of war? Should war movies be entertaining or horrifying? Today is June 6, the anniversary of the Invasion of Normandy in 1944. Films like The Longest Day and Saving Private Ryan capture the heroism and epic sweep of the D-Day invasion to liberate Western Europe from the Nazis, but what do such films leave out of the story? How do popular movies subtly influence our attitudes toward or perceptions of the past, as individuals and in collective memory? In this episode, historian Kevin Ruane reflects on the educational, entertainment, and political angles of our favorite D-Day films. Kevin Ruane is a By-Fellow of Churchill College, University of Cambridge, a Professor Emeritus of Canterbury Christ Church University, and the Director of the Graham Greene International Festival. He has written and taught on various international topics, including the Second World War, the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the Nuclear Age, and postwar European unity and security. His books include Churchill and the Bomb in War and Cold War (2016). Kevin is also a regular contributor to television, radio, and online history programmes, including, most recently, Churchill at War (Netflix), Britain's Nuclear Bomb Scandal (BBC), and The Manhattan Project in Colour (Channel 4, UK).

Serbia's government has come under intense pressure since a deadly disaster at Novi Sad's main railway station last November. Student-led protests have spiralled into a nation-wide resistance movement and for months, Serbians have been speaking out against corruption, a lack of accountability, and a culture of impunity in Aleksandar Vučić's regime. But if you're listening to this from Western Europe, or indeed much of the rest of the world, the odd headline is probably all you've seen.    What are these protests really about? And what makes them different? This week, an in-depth conversation about what it's like to be living through a potential turning point in Serbian history.   Thanks for listening. If you enjoy our podcasts, we'd love it if you'd consider supporting our work. You can chip in to help us cover the weekly research and production of The Europeans at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/europeanspodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (many currencies are available), or gift a donation to a super fan here. We'd also love it if you could tell two friends about this podcast!   This podcast was brought to you in cooperation with Euranet Plus, the leading radio network for EU news.   Co-hosts: Wojciech Oleksiak and Katy Lee Editorial support: Morgan Childs, Dominic Kraemer and Katz Laszlo Production, scoring and mixing: Wojciech Oleksiak  Music by Jim Barne, Mobygratis and Epidemic Sounds With thanks to Nikola Radić YouTube | Bluesky | Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | Mastodon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | hello@europeanspodcast.com

Why does Britain lock up so many people and is there a better way?   The UK has the highest incarceration rate in Western Europe, yet reoffending remains rampant and prisons are at breaking point. What's gone wrong in our approach to crime and punishment - and is the public ready for a smarter, more effective system?   Former Justice Secretary David Gauke, chair of the Independent Sentencing Review, joins Double Jeopardy to examine the findings and implications of the Review, a landmark report that lays bare the dysfunction of the current UK law and criminal justice framework. From overreliance on short custodial sentences to the urgent need for investment in community penalties and a revitalised probation service, the conversation pulls no punches.   Ken Macdonald KC and Tim Owen KC explore the report's five key recommendations with David Gauke, the media and political issues in Britain, and the public's resistance to reform. They discuss the misuse of short prison sentences, the potential of technology like electronic tagging, and the need for coherence between the Ministry of Justice and the Home Office.   They also highlight topics including voluntary chemical suppressants for sex offenders and the disconnect between policy and public opinion. As they explain, true reform requires courage, leadership, and a commitment to the rule of law but in a febrile political climate, that's easier said than done.   You can find the link to David Gauke's report here. --- Covering the critical intersections of law and politics in the UK with expert commentary on high-profile legal cases, political controversies, prisons and sentencing, human rights law, current political events and the shifting landscape of justice and democracy. With in-depth discussions and influential guests, Double Jeopardy is the podcast that uncovers the forces shaping Britain's legal and political future.   What happens when law and politics collide? How do politics shape the law - and when does the law push back? What happens when judicial independence is tested, human rights come under attack, or freedom of expression is challenged? And who really holds power in Britain's legal and political system?   Get answers to questions like these weekly on Wednesdays.   Double Jeopardy is presented by Ken Macdonald KC, former Director of Public Prosecutions, and Tim Owen KC, as they break down the legal and political issues in Britain. From high-profile legal cases to the evolving state of British democracy, Double Jeopardy offers expert legal commentary on the most pressing topics in UK law, politics, and human rights.   Ken Macdonald KC served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2003-2008, shaping modern prosecutorial policy and advocating for the rule of law. He is a former Warden of Wadham College, Oxford, a crossbench member of the House of Lords, and a leading writer, commentator and broadcaster on politics and the rule of law.   Tim Owen KC has been involved in many of the most significant public, criminal and human rights law cases over the past four decades.    Both bring unparalleled experience from the frontline of Britain's legal and political landscape.   If you like The Rest Is Politics, Talking Politics, Law Pod UK and Today in Focus, you'll love Double Jeopardy.

It's a very special live show as Matthias Trum from legendary German Brewery Schlenkerla joins us for a tasting and chat at the Flem/Ken Bowls Club! He takes us on an aural tour around the brewery, the city of Bamberg and in fact many other parts of Western Europe too as he explains the origins of the many beers styles he produces and the history of German beer. And of course there's a heap of discussion about the brewing techniques that Schlenkerla use to make their distinctive beers and how Matthias strives to meld elements of the modern to their traditional methods. Don't forget to join us over the Kings Birthday long weekend back at the Bowls Club as we're spinning the Wheel of Beery Mystery - for just $9 you never know which fun beers you might land!

Edition No149 | 03-06-2025 - Finland is ‘preparing for the worst' as Russia expands military presence near border. Finland has said it expects Russia to further build up troops along their shared border when the war in Ukraine ends, after reports that Moscow had strengthened its military bases near the NATO frontier. Head of strategy of Finnish defense forces says they are monitoring Moscow's maneuvering ‘very closely'. Of all countries in Europe, Finland seems to have the healthiest dose of cynicism towards Russia and its long-term historical intentions. Dealing with Russia from a position of strength and unity is Finland's skill, making the best of a tough geographic situation, while preparing for the worst. This preparedness, resilience and unity of purpose is something Western Europe ought to pay more attention to and seek to emulate. ----------Links: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/21/finland-expects-russia-to-build-up-troops-at-border-after-ukraine-war-endshttps://kyivindependent.com/finland-to-send-ammunition-to-ukraine-using-proceeds-from-frozen-russian-assets/https://english.nv.ua/nation/trump-downplays-russian-military-buildup-near-finland-and-norway-calls-both-nations-safe-50515719.html----------SUMMER FUNDRAISERSNAFO & Silicon Curtain community - Let's help help 5th SAB together https://www.help99.co/patches/nafo-silicon-curtain-communityWe are teaming up with NAFO 69th Sniffing Brigade to provide 2nd Assault Battalion of 5th SAB with a pickup truck that they need for their missions. With your donation, you're not just sending a truck — you're standing with Ukraine.https://www.help99.co/patches/nafo-silicon-curtain-communityWhy NAFO Trucks Matter:Ukrainian soldiers know the immense value of our NAFO trucks and buses. These vehicles are carefully selected, produced between 2010 and 2017, ensuring reliability for harsh frontline terrain. Each truck is capable of driving at least 20,000 km (12,500 miles) without major technical issues, making them a lifeline for soldiers in combat zones.In total we are looking to raise an initial 19 500 EUR in order to buy 1 x NAFO truck 2.0 Who is getting the aid? 5 SAB, 2 Assault Battalion, UAV operators‍.https://www.help99.co/patches/nafo-silicon-curtain-community----------Car for Ukraine has once again joined forces with a group of influencers, creators, and news observers during this summer. Sunshine here serves as a metaphor, the trucks are a sunshine for our warriors to bring them to where they need to be and out from the place they don't.https://car4ukraine.com/campaigns/summer-sunshine-2025This time, we focus on the 6th Detachment of HUR, 93rd Alcatraz, 3rd Assault Brigade, MLRS systems and more. https://car4ukraine.com/campaigns/summer-sunshine-2025- bring soldiers to the positions- protect them with armor- deploy troops with drones to the positions----------SILICON CURTAIN FILM FUNDRAISERA project to make a documentary film in Ukraine, to raise awareness of Ukraine's struggle and in supporting a team running aid convoys to Ukraine's front-line towns.https://buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtain/extras----------SUPPORT THE CHANNEL:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtainhttps://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain----------TRUSTED CHARITIES ON THE GROUND:Save Ukrainehttps://www.saveukraineua.org/Superhumans - Hospital for war traumashttps://superhumans.com/en/UNBROKEN - Treatment. Prosthesis. Rehabilitation for Ukrainians in Ukrainehttps://unbroken.org.ua/Come Back Alivehttps://savelife.in.ua/en/Chefs For Ukraine - World Central Kitchenhttps://wck.org/relief/activation-chefs-for-ukraineUNITED24 - An initiative of President Zelenskyyhttps://u24.gov.ua/Serhiy Prytula Charity Foundationhttps://prytulafoundation.org-----------

Between the 1860s and the early 1920s, more than two million Jews moved from Eastern Europe to the United States while smaller groups moved to other destinations, such as Western Europe, Palestine, and South Africa. During and after the First World War hundreds of thousands of Jews were permanently displaced across Eastern Europe. Migration restrictions that were imposed after 1914, especially in the United States, prevented most from reaching safe havens, and an unknown but substantial number of Jews perished during the Holocaust-as they had been displaced in Eastern Europe years before they were deported to ghettos and killing sites. Even after the Holocaust, tens of thousands of Jewish survivors were stranded in permanent transit for many years.Between Borders: The Great Jewish Migration from Eastern Europe tells and contextualizes the stories of these Jewish migrants and refugees before and after the First World War. It explains how immigration laws in countries such as the United States influenced migration routes around the world. Using memoirs, letters, and accounts by investigative journalists and Jewish aid workers, Tobias Brinkmann sheds light on the experiences of individual migrants, some of whom laid the foundation for migration and refugee studies as a field of scholarship, even coining terms such as "displaced person," and contributing to its legal definition at the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention. The stories of these migrants and refugees were used to propose a new future for the United States, reimagining it as a pluralistic society-one comprised of immigrants. Tobias Brinkmann is Malvin and Lea Bank Associate Professor of Jewish Studies and History at Pennsylvania State University. He is the author of Sundays at Sinai: A Jewish Congregation in Chicago. Geraldine Gudefin is a French-born modern Jewish historian researching Jewish family life, legal pluralism, and the migration experiences of Jews in France and the United States. She is currently a research fellow at the Hebrew University's Avraham Harman Research Institute of Contemporary Jewry, and is completing a book titled An Impossible Divorce? East European Jews and the Limits of Legal Pluralism in France, 1900-1939. https://huji.academia.edu/GeraldineGudefin * Mentioned in the podcast: Mary Antin, From Plotzk to Boston (Boston: W. B. Clarke, 1899). Abraham Cahan, Bleter fun mein Lebn (New York: Forverts, 1926-1931). Todd Endelman, Leaving the Jewish Fold: Conversion and Radical Assimilation in Modern Jewish History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016). Semion Goldin, The Russian Army and the Jewish Population, 1914-17: Libel, Persecution, Reaction (Palgrave Macmillan, 2022). Bernard Horwich, My First Eighty Years (Chicago: Argus Books, 1939). John D. Klier, Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881-1882 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). Eugene Kulischer, Jewish Migrations: Past Experiences and Post- War Prospects (New York: American Jewish Committee, 1943). Eugene Kulischer, Europe on the Move: War and Population Changes, 1917-1947 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948). Joel Perlmann, America Classifies the Immigrants: From Ellis Island to the 2020 Census (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018). David Rechter, The Jews of Vienna and the First World War (Oxford: Littman, 2001). Mark Wischnitzer, To Dwell in Safety: The Story of Jewish Migration since 1800 (Philadelphia: JPS, 1948). Polly Zavadivker, A Nation of Refugees: Russia's Jews in World War I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024). 1921 cartoons in YIVO Library collection: “Nowhere Can One Set a Foot Down” and “If the statue of liberty were a living person.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Between the 1860s and the early 1920s, more than two million Jews moved from Eastern Europe to the United States while smaller groups moved to other destinations, such as Western Europe, Palestine, and South Africa. During and after the First World War hundreds of thousands of Jews were permanently displaced across Eastern Europe. Migration restrictions that were imposed after 1914, especially in the United States, prevented most from reaching safe havens, and an unknown but substantial number of Jews perished during the Holocaust-as they had been displaced in Eastern Europe years before they were deported to ghettos and killing sites. Even after the Holocaust, tens of thousands of Jewish survivors were stranded in permanent transit for many years.Between Borders: The Great Jewish Migration from Eastern Europe tells and contextualizes the stories of these Jewish migrants and refugees before and after the First World War. It explains how immigration laws in countries such as the United States influenced migration routes around the world. Using memoirs, letters, and accounts by investigative journalists and Jewish aid workers, Tobias Brinkmann sheds light on the experiences of individual migrants, some of whom laid the foundation for migration and refugee studies as a field of scholarship, even coining terms such as "displaced person," and contributing to its legal definition at the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention. The stories of these migrants and refugees were used to propose a new future for the United States, reimagining it as a pluralistic society-one comprised of immigrants. Tobias Brinkmann is Malvin and Lea Bank Associate Professor of Jewish Studies and History at Pennsylvania State University. He is the author of Sundays at Sinai: A Jewish Congregation in Chicago. Geraldine Gudefin is a French-born modern Jewish historian researching Jewish family life, legal pluralism, and the migration experiences of Jews in France and the United States. She is currently a research fellow at the Hebrew University's Avraham Harman Research Institute of Contemporary Jewry, and is completing a book titled An Impossible Divorce? East European Jews and the Limits of Legal Pluralism in France, 1900-1939. https://huji.academia.edu/GeraldineGudefin * Mentioned in the podcast: Mary Antin, From Plotzk to Boston (Boston: W. B. Clarke, 1899). Abraham Cahan, Bleter fun mein Lebn (New York: Forverts, 1926-1931). Todd Endelman, Leaving the Jewish Fold: Conversion and Radical Assimilation in Modern Jewish History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016). Semion Goldin, The Russian Army and the Jewish Population, 1914-17: Libel, Persecution, Reaction (Palgrave Macmillan, 2022). Bernard Horwich, My First Eighty Years (Chicago: Argus Books, 1939). John D. Klier, Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881-1882 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). Eugene Kulischer, Jewish Migrations: Past Experiences and Post- War Prospects (New York: American Jewish Committee, 1943). Eugene Kulischer, Europe on the Move: War and Population Changes, 1917-1947 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948). Joel Perlmann, America Classifies the Immigrants: From Ellis Island to the 2020 Census (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018). David Rechter, The Jews of Vienna and the First World War (Oxford: Littman, 2001). Mark Wischnitzer, To Dwell in Safety: The Story of Jewish Migration since 1800 (Philadelphia: JPS, 1948). Polly Zavadivker, A Nation of Refugees: Russia's Jews in World War I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024). 1921 cartoons in YIVO Library collection: “Nowhere Can One Set a Foot Down” and “If the statue of liberty were a living person.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

Between the 1860s and the early 1920s, more than two million Jews moved from Eastern Europe to the United States while smaller groups moved to other destinations, such as Western Europe, Palestine, and South Africa. During and after the First World War hundreds of thousands of Jews were permanently displaced across Eastern Europe. Migration restrictions that were imposed after 1914, especially in the United States, prevented most from reaching safe havens, and an unknown but substantial number of Jews perished during the Holocaust-as they had been displaced in Eastern Europe years before they were deported to ghettos and killing sites. Even after the Holocaust, tens of thousands of Jewish survivors were stranded in permanent transit for many years.Between Borders: The Great Jewish Migration from Eastern Europe tells and contextualizes the stories of these Jewish migrants and refugees before and after the First World War. It explains how immigration laws in countries such as the United States influenced migration routes around the world. Using memoirs, letters, and accounts by investigative journalists and Jewish aid workers, Tobias Brinkmann sheds light on the experiences of individual migrants, some of whom laid the foundation for migration and refugee studies as a field of scholarship, even coining terms such as "displaced person," and contributing to its legal definition at the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention. The stories of these migrants and refugees were used to propose a new future for the United States, reimagining it as a pluralistic society-one comprised of immigrants. Tobias Brinkmann is Malvin and Lea Bank Associate Professor of Jewish Studies and History at Pennsylvania State University. He is the author of Sundays at Sinai: A Jewish Congregation in Chicago. Geraldine Gudefin is a French-born modern Jewish historian researching Jewish family life, legal pluralism, and the migration experiences of Jews in France and the United States. She is currently a research fellow at the Hebrew University's Avraham Harman Research Institute of Contemporary Jewry, and is completing a book titled An Impossible Divorce? East European Jews and the Limits of Legal Pluralism in France, 1900-1939. https://huji.academia.edu/GeraldineGudefin * Mentioned in the podcast: Mary Antin, From Plotzk to Boston (Boston: W. B. Clarke, 1899). Abraham Cahan, Bleter fun mein Lebn (New York: Forverts, 1926-1931). Todd Endelman, Leaving the Jewish Fold: Conversion and Radical Assimilation in Modern Jewish History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016). Semion Goldin, The Russian Army and the Jewish Population, 1914-17: Libel, Persecution, Reaction (Palgrave Macmillan, 2022). Bernard Horwich, My First Eighty Years (Chicago: Argus Books, 1939). John D. Klier, Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881-1882 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). Eugene Kulischer, Jewish Migrations: Past Experiences and Post- War Prospects (New York: American Jewish Committee, 1943). Eugene Kulischer, Europe on the Move: War and Population Changes, 1917-1947 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948). Joel Perlmann, America Classifies the Immigrants: From Ellis Island to the 2020 Census (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018). David Rechter, The Jews of Vienna and the First World War (Oxford: Littman, 2001). Mark Wischnitzer, To Dwell in Safety: The Story of Jewish Migration since 1800 (Philadelphia: JPS, 1948). Polly Zavadivker, A Nation of Refugees: Russia's Jews in World War I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024). 1921 cartoons in YIVO Library collection: “Nowhere Can One Set a Foot Down” and “If the statue of liberty were a living person.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

Between the 1860s and the early 1920s, more than two million Jews moved from Eastern Europe to the United States while smaller groups moved to other destinations, such as Western Europe, Palestine, and South Africa. During and after the First World War hundreds of thousands of Jews were permanently displaced across Eastern Europe. Migration restrictions that were imposed after 1914, especially in the United States, prevented most from reaching safe havens, and an unknown but substantial number of Jews perished during the Holocaust-as they had been displaced in Eastern Europe years before they were deported to ghettos and killing sites. Even after the Holocaust, tens of thousands of Jewish survivors were stranded in permanent transit for many years.Between Borders: The Great Jewish Migration from Eastern Europe tells and contextualizes the stories of these Jewish migrants and refugees before and after the First World War. It explains how immigration laws in countries such as the United States influenced migration routes around the world. Using memoirs, letters, and accounts by investigative journalists and Jewish aid workers, Tobias Brinkmann sheds light on the experiences of individual migrants, some of whom laid the foundation for migration and refugee studies as a field of scholarship, even coining terms such as "displaced person," and contributing to its legal definition at the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention. The stories of these migrants and refugees were used to propose a new future for the United States, reimagining it as a pluralistic society-one comprised of immigrants. Tobias Brinkmann is Malvin and Lea Bank Associate Professor of Jewish Studies and History at Pennsylvania State University. He is the author of Sundays at Sinai: A Jewish Congregation in Chicago. Geraldine Gudefin is a French-born modern Jewish historian researching Jewish family life, legal pluralism, and the migration experiences of Jews in France and the United States. She is currently a research fellow at the Hebrew University's Avraham Harman Research Institute of Contemporary Jewry, and is completing a book titled An Impossible Divorce? East European Jews and the Limits of Legal Pluralism in France, 1900-1939. https://huji.academia.edu/GeraldineGudefin * Mentioned in the podcast: Mary Antin, From Plotzk to Boston (Boston: W. B. Clarke, 1899). Abraham Cahan, Bleter fun mein Lebn (New York: Forverts, 1926-1931). Todd Endelman, Leaving the Jewish Fold: Conversion and Radical Assimilation in Modern Jewish History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016). Semion Goldin, The Russian Army and the Jewish Population, 1914-17: Libel, Persecution, Reaction (Palgrave Macmillan, 2022). Bernard Horwich, My First Eighty Years (Chicago: Argus Books, 1939). John D. Klier, Russians, Jews, and the Pogroms of 1881-1882 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). Eugene Kulischer, Jewish Migrations: Past Experiences and Post- War Prospects (New York: American Jewish Committee, 1943). Eugene Kulischer, Europe on the Move: War and Population Changes, 1917-1947 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948). Joel Perlmann, America Classifies the Immigrants: From Ellis Island to the 2020 Census (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018). David Rechter, The Jews of Vienna and the First World War (Oxford: Littman, 2001). Mark Wischnitzer, To Dwell in Safety: The Story of Jewish Migration since 1800 (Philadelphia: JPS, 1948). Polly Zavadivker, A Nation of Refugees: Russia's Jews in World War I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024). 1921 cartoons in YIVO Library collection: “Nowhere Can One Set a Foot Down” and “If the statue of liberty were a living person.”

Volodymyr Zelenskyy had a choice: to help negotiate a ceasefire to no longer subject his people to the consequences of the war with Russia or continue to elevate the conflict. Choosing the latter, the Ukraine president bragged about recent drone strikes in Russian territory while much of Western Europe eggs him on. While it is logical to assume Zelenskyy is trying hard to escalate the conflict, ,but what should be asked is "why?" at the expense of his own people. Dr. Corsi breaks down what's happening and the potential fallout on Corsi Nation.Also:Looking into the Boulder, Colorado terror attack by an illegal immigrant from Egypt.How long before Paris and other once-great Western European cities are totally destroyed?Poland's election upsets globalists.Visit The Corsi Nation website: https://www.corsination.comIf you like what we are doing, please support our Sponsors:Get RX Meds Now: https://www.getrxmedsnow.comMyVitalC https://www.thetruthcentral.com/myvitalc-ess60-in-organic-olive-oil/Swiss America: https://www.swissamerica.com/offer/CorsiRMP.phpGet Dr. Corsi's new book, The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis: Forensic Analysis of the JFK Autopsy X-Rays Proves Two Headshots from the Right Front and One from the Rear, here: https://www.amazon.com/Assassination-President-John-Kennedy-Headshots/dp/B0CXLN1PX1/ref=sr_1_1?crid=20W8UDU55IGJJ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ymVX8y9V--_ztRoswluApKEN-WlqxoqrowcQP34CE3HdXRudvQJnTLmYKMMfv0gMYwaTTk_Ne3ssid8YroEAFg.e8i1TLonh9QRzDTIJSmDqJHrmMTVKBhCL7iTARroSzQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=jerome+r.+corsi+%2B+jfk&qid=1710126183&sprefix=%2Caps%2C275&sr=8-1Join Dr. Jerome Corsi on Substack: https://jeromecorsiphd.substack.com/Visit The Truth Central website: https://www.thetruthcentral.comGet your FREE copy of Dr. Corsi's new book with Swiss America CEO Dean Heskin, How the Coming Global Crash Will Create a Historic Gold Rush by calling: 800-519-6268Follow Dr. Jerome Corsi on X: @corsijerome1Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/corsi-nation--5810661/support.

Proverbs 13:20-14:4, 2 Samuel 1:1-2:7, John 20:11-31. There are many blessings to living in Western Europe in the twenty-first century However, we live in a society in which respect, awe and reverence do not seem to be as valued as they once were

Proverbs 13:20, 14:2-3, 2 Samuel 1:12-14, 2:1, John 20:11-28. There are many blessings to living in Western Europe in the twenty-first century However, we live in a society in which respect, awe and reverence do not seem to be as valued as they once were

Proverbs 13:20, 14:2-3, 2 Samuel 1:12-14, 2:1, John 20:11-28. There are many blessings to living in Western Europe in the twenty-first century However, we live in a society in which respect, awe and reverence do not seem to be as valued as they once were

With rising secularization in large urban centers of Western Europe during the 18th century, it would take a concerted effort by the traditional rabbinical establishment to formulate an appropriate response towards the growing trend of secularization. Rav Rafael Cohen of Hamburg (1722-1803), was a Polish rabbi who was appointed rabbi in 1776, of the three united communities of Hamburg, Alton and Wandsbek, collectively known by its acronym AHU. Facing a new reality where secularization was emerging as a reality within the Jewish community, Rav Rafael confronted in its various forms. The story of how he strengthened rabbinical authority in the face of an onslaught against this authority, and his many confrontations with a variety of manifestations of the new secularist trends in his city and across Western Europe, made his responses a prototype for the emerging Orthodoxy of the coming centuries.   Subscribe to Jewish History Soundbites Podcast on: PodBean: https://jsoundbites.podbean.com/ or your favorite podcast platform Follow us on LinkedIn, Twitter or Instagram at @Jsoundbites For sponsorship opportunities about your favorite topics of Jewish history or feedback contact Yehuda at:  yehuda@yehudageberer.com  

The major trends which will not change this year or next regardless of new trade deals and Congressional programs: lower dollar, higher inflation, higher unemployment, higher gold prices and, importantly, a U.S. vs. BRICS+ divided world. The most recent data continues to demonstrate a weakening employment picture in the context of another round of high inflation and deteriorating real estate prices for both commercial and residential. All in all, the blend of many more home foreclosures hitting the market, little or no new full time job creation, higher consumer prices, and the continuing need to finance new and rollover government debt will keep the overall economy from growing. Add to this the serious economic downturns in China, Japan, and Western Europe we have a most volatile year or more ahead with little to start any new recovery. Regardless of individual listener political leanings, the good news is that the present administration seems to be making headway in improving relationships with the countries that hold vast amounts of dollars as well as needed natural resources. I'll take whatever we can get during this historically unsettled global economic period.

My guest today is Eric Rice – back for his second appearance on the podcast.When we first spoke, he was running one of the only public equity funds in the impact space available to retail investors. Now, that fund has been shut down, the capital returned, and Eric has moved to private equity – specifically, to SEAF, an investor in emerging market SMEs.This time, we talked about what happened, why it happened, and what it says about the current state of impact.Eric's core thesis hasn't changed. The theory of change he developed at Wellington and BlackRock was simple: invest in companies doing socially useful work – even if they don't realize it yet – and help them grow into that identity.This was never ESG, and Eric is clear on the difference. ESG, he says, is about how a company operates. Impact is about what it does. “We weren't ESG investors by any means. We were thematic investors – we only invested in companies solving social or environmental problems.”That distinction got lost. Once the political backlash against ESG took hold, especially in the U.S., nuance didn't matter.Texas and a group of red states targeted a handful of BlackRock funds they deemed “too woke” to qualify for state investment. Among the six funds flagged, three were ones Eric had led. The result was that legitimate impact strategies became collateral damage in a culture war that had little to do with what those funds were actually doing.As Eric puts it, they were “a different animal from the beginning”, but their message got hijacked.After that, the pivot to private markets wasn't just strategic – it was necessary.At SEAF (Small Enterprise Assistance Funds), Eric is focused on small enterprises in emerging Europe, particularly in agriculture and food. Why? Because productivity in that sector is 40% of Western Europe's – and no one has modernized it.Eric and I talked about the limits of measurement frameworks, the role of trust in evaluating managers, and why so many funds labeled “impact” aren't actually doing anything different.This conversation is about what happens when a theory of change collides with political reality. It's about staying true to the work in an industry that often prioritizes marketing. And it's about the shift from public markets to private ones – not because it's easier, but because it offers more clarity, more control, and maybe even more impact.Listen to the full story.—Connect with SRI360°:Sign up for the free weekly email updateVisit the SRI360° PODCASTVisit the SRI360° WEBSITEFollow SRI360° on XFollow SRI360° on FACEBOOK—Additional Resources:

Good Sunday morning to you,I am just on a train home from Glasgow, where I have been gigging these past two nights. I've had a great time, as I always seem to do when I go north of the wall.But Glasgow on a Saturday night is something else. My hotel was right next to the station and so I was right in the thick of it. If I ever get to make a cacatopian, end-of-days, post-apocalyptic thriller, I'll just stroll through Glasgow city centre on a Friday or Saturday night with a camera to get all the B roll. It was like walking through a Hieronymus Bosch painting only with a Scottish accent. Little seems to have changed since I wrote that infamous chapter about Glasgow in Life After the State all those years ago. The only difference is that now it's more multi-ethnic. So many people are so off their heads. I lost count of the number of randoms wandering about just howling at the stars. The long days - it was still light at 10 o'clock - make the insanity all the more visible. Part of me finds it funny, but another part of me finds it so very sad that so many people let themselves get into this condition. It prompted me to revisit said chapter, and I offer it today as your Sunday thought piece.Just a couple of little notes, before we begin. This caught my eye on Friday. Our favourite uranium tech company, Lightbridge Fuels (NASDAQ:LTBR), has taken off again with Donald Trump's statement that he is going to quadruple US nuclear capacity. The stock was up 45% in a day. We first looked at it in October at $3. It hit $15 on Friday. It's one to sell on the spikes and buy on the dips, as this incredible chart shows.(In other news I have now listened twice to the Comstock Lode AGM, and I'll report back on that shortly too). ICYMI here is my mid-week commentary, which attracted a lot of attentionRight - Glasgow.(NB I haven't included references here. Needless to say, they are all there in the book. And sorry I don't have access to the audio of me reading this from my laptop, but, if you like, you can get the audiobook at Audible, Apple Books and all good audiobookshops. The book itself available at Amazon, Apple Books et al).How the Most Entrepreneurial City in Europe Became Its SickestThe cause of waves of unemployment is not capitalism, but governments …Friedrich Hayek, economist and philosopherIn the 18th and 19th centuries, the city of Glasgow in Scotland became enormously, stupendously rich. It happened quite organically, without planning. An entrepreneurial people reacted to their circumstances and, over time, turned Glasgow into an industrial and economic centre of such might that, by the turn of the 20th century, Glasgow was producing half the tonnage of Britain's ships and a quarter of all locomotives in the world. (Not unlike China's industrial dominance today). It was regarded as the best-governed city in Europe and popular histories compared it to the great imperial cities of Venice and Rome. It became known as the ‘Second City of the British Empire'.Barely 100 years later, it is the heroin capital of the UK, the murder capital of the UK and its East End, once home to Europe's largest steelworks, has been dubbed ‘the benefits capital of the UK'. Glasgow is Britain's fattest city: its men have Britain's lowest life expectancy – on a par with Palestine and Albania – and its unemployment rate is 50% higher than the rest of the UK.How did Glasgow manage all that?The growth in Glasgow's economic fortunes began in the latter part of the 17th century and the early 18th century. First, the city's location in the west of Scotland at the mouth of the river Clyde meant that it lay in the path of the trade winds and at least 100 nautical miles closer to America's east coast than other British ports – 200 miles closer than London. In the days before fossil fuels (which only found widespread use in shipping in the second half of the 19th century) the journey to Virginia was some two weeks shorter than the same journey from London or many of the other ports in Britain and Europe. Even modern sailors describe how easy the port of Glasgow is to navigate. Second, when England was at war with France – as it was repeatedly between 1688 and 1815 – ships travelling to Glasgow were less vulnerable than those travelling to ports further south. Glasgow's merchants took advantage and, by the early 18th century, the city had begun to assert itself as a trading hub. Manufactured goods were carried from Britain and Europe to North America and the Caribbean, where they were traded for increasingly popular commodities such as tobacco, cotton and sugar.Through the 18th century, the Glasgow merchants' business networks spread, and they took steps to further accelerate trade. New ships were introduced, bigger than those of rival ports, with fore and aft sails that enabled them to sail closer to the wind and reduce journey times. Trading posts were built to ensure that cargo was gathered and stored for collection, so that ships wouldn't swing idly at anchor. By the 1760s Glasgow had a 50% share of the tobacco trade – as much as the rest of Britain's ports combined. While the English merchants simply sold American tobacco in Europe at a profit, the Glaswegians actually extended credit to American farmers against future production (a bit like a crop future today, where a crop to be grown at a later date is sold now). The Virginia farmers could then use this credit to buy European goods, which the Glaswegians were only too happy to supply. This brought about the rise of financial institutions such as the Glasgow Ship Bank and the Glasgow Thistle Bank, which would later become part of the now-bailed-out, taxpayer-owned Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS).Their practices paid rewards. Glasgow's merchants earned a great deal of money. They built glamorous homes and large churches and, it seems, took on aristocratic airs – hence they became known as the ‘Tobacco Lords'. Numbering among them were Buchanan, Dunlop, Ingram, Wilson, Oswald, Cochrane and Glassford, all of whom had streets in the Merchant City district of Glasgow named after them (other streets, such as Virginia Street and Jamaica Street, refer to their trade destinations). In 1771, over 47 million pounds of tobacco were imported.However, the credit the Glaswegians extended to American tobacco farmers would backfire. The debts incurred by the tobacco farmers – which included future presidents George Washington and Thomas Jefferson (who almost lost his farm as a result) – grew, and were among the grievances when the American War of Independence came in 1775. That war destroyed the tobacco trade for the Glaswegians. Much of the money that was owed to them was never repaid. Many of their plantations were lost. But the Glaswegians were entrepreneurial and they adapted. They moved on to other businesses, particularly cotton.By the 19th century, all sorts of local industry had emerged around the goods traded in the city. It was producing and exporting textiles, chemicals, engineered goods and steel. River engineering projects to dredge and deepen the Clyde (with a view to forming a deep- water port) had begun in 1768 and they would enable shipbuilding to become a major industry on the upper reaches of the river, pioneered by industrialists such as Robert Napier and John Elder. The final stretch of the Monkland Canal, linking the Forth and Clyde Canal at Port Dundas, was opened in 1795, facilitating access to the iron-ore and coal mines of Lanarkshire.The move to fossil-fuelled shipping in the latter 19th century destroyed the advantages that the trade winds had given Glasgow. But it didn't matter. Again, the people adapted. By the turn of the 20th century the Second City of the British Empire had become a world centre of industry and heavy engineering. It has been estimated that, between 1870 and 1914, it produced as much as one-fifth of the world's ships, and half of Britain's tonnage. Among the 25,000 ships it produced were some of the greatest ever built: the Cutty Sark, the Queen Mary, HMS Hood, the Lusitania, the Glenlee tall ship and even the iconic Mississippi paddle steamer, the Delta Queen. It had also become a centre for locomotive manufacture and, shortly after the turn of the 20th century, could boast the largest concentration of locomotive building works in Europe.It was not just Glasgow's industry and wealth that was so gargantuan. The city's contribution to mankind – made possible by the innovation and progress that comes with booming economies – would also have an international impact. Many great inventors either hailed from Glasgow or moved there to study or work. There's James Watt, for example, whose improvements to the steam engine were fundamental to the Industrial Revolution. One of Watt's employees, William Murdoch, has been dubbed ‘the Scot who lit the world' – he invented gas lighting, a new kind of steam cannon and waterproof paint. Charles MacIntosh gave us the raincoat. James Young, the chemist dubbed as ‘the father of the oil industry', gave us paraffin. William Thomson, known as Lord Kelvin, developed the science of thermodynamics, formulating the Kelvin scale of absolute temperature; he also managed the laying of the first transatlantic telegraph cable.The turning point in the economic fortunes of Glasgow – indeed, of industrial Britain – was WWI. Both have been in decline ever since. By the end of the war, the British were drained, both emotionally and in terms of capital and manpower; the workers, the entrepreneurs, the ideas men, too many of them were dead or incapacitated. There was insufficient money and no appetite to invest. The post-war recession, and later the Great Depression, did little to help. The trend of the city was now one of inexorable economic decline.If Glasgow was the home of shipping and industry in 19th-century Britain, it became the home of socialism in the 20th century. Known by some as the ‘Red Clydeside' movement, the socialist tide in Scotland actually pre-dated the First World War. In 1906 came the city's first Labour Member of Parliament (MP), George Barnes – prior to that its seven MPs were all Conservatives or Liberal Unionists. In the spring of 1911, 11,000 workers at the Singer sewing-machine factory (run by an American corporation in Clydebank) went on strike to support 12 women who were protesting about new work practices. Singer sacked 400 workers, but the movement was growing – as was labour unrest. In the four years between 1910 and 1914 Clydebank workers spent four times as many days on strike than in the whole of the previous decade. The Scottish Trades Union Congress and its affiliations saw membership rise from 129,000 in 1909 to 230,000 in 1914.20The rise in discontent had much to do with Glasgow's housing. Conditions were bad, there was overcrowding, bad sanitation, housing was close to dirty, noxious and deafening industry. Unions grew quite organically to protect the interests of their members.Then came WWI, and inflation, as Britain all but abandoned gold. In 1915 many landlords responded by attempting to increase rent, but with their young men on the Western front, those left behind didn't have the means to pay these higher costs. If they couldn't, eviction soon followed. In Govan, an area of Glasgow where shipbuilding was the main occupation, women – now in the majority with so many men gone – organized opposition to the rent increases. There are photographs showing women blocking the entrance to tenements; officers who did get inside to evict tenants are said to have had their trousers pulled down.The landlords were attacked for being unpatriotic. Placards read: ‘While our men are fighting on the front line,the landlord is attacking us at home.' The strikes spread to other cities throughout the UK, and on 27 November 1915 the government introduced legislation to restrict rents to the pre-war level. The strikers were placated. They had won. The government was happy; it had dealt with the problem. The landlords lost out.In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution of 1917, more frequent strikes crippled the city. In 1919 the ‘Bloody Friday' uprising prompted the prime minister, David Lloyd George, to deploy 10,000 troops and tanks onto the city's streets. By the 1930s Glasgow had become the main base of the Independent Labour Party, so when Labour finally came to power alone after WWII, its influence was strong. Glasgow has always remained a socialist stronghold. Labour dominates the city council, and the city has not had a Conservative MP for 30 years.By the late 1950s, Glasgow was losing out to the more competitive industries of Japan, Germany and elsewhere. There was a lack of investment. Union demands for workers, enforced by government legislation, made costs uneconomic and entrepreneurial activity arduous. With lack of investment came lack of innovation.Rapid de-industrialization followed, and by the 1960s and 70s most employment lay not in manufacturing, but in the service industries.Which brings us to today. On the plus side, Glasgow is still ranked as one of Europe's top 20 financial centres and is home to some leading Scottish businesses. But there is considerable downside.Recent studies have suggested that nearly 30% of Glasgow's working age population is unemployed. That's 50% higher than that of the rest of Scotland or the UK. Eighteen per cent of 16- to 19-year-olds are neither in school nor employed. More than one in five working-age Glaswegians have no sort of education that might qualify them for a job.In the city centre, the Merchant City, 50% of children are growing up in homes where nobody works. In the poorer neighbourhoods, such as Ruchill, Possilpark, or Dalmarnock, about 65% of children live in homes where nobody works – more than three times the national average. Figures from the Department of Work and Pensions show that 85% of working age adults from the district of Bridgeton claim some kind of welfare payment.Across the city, almost a third of the population regularly receives sickness or incapacity benefit, the highest rate of all UK cities. A 2008 World Health Organization report noted that in Glasgow's Calton, Bridgeton and Queenslie neighbourhoods, the average life expectancy for males is only 54. In contrast, residents of Glasgow's more affluent West End live to be 80 and virtually none of them are on the dole.Glasgow has the highest crime rate in Scotland. A recent report by the Centre for Social Justice noted that there are 170 teenage gangs in Glasgow. That's the same number as in London, which has over six times the population of Glasgow.It also has the dubious record of being Britain's murder capital. In fact, Glasgow had the highest homicide rate in Western Europe until it was overtaken in 2012 by Amsterdam, with more violent crime per head of population than even New York. What's more, its suicide rate is the highest in the UK.Then there are the drug and alcohol problems. The residents of the poorer neighbourhoods are an astounding six times more likely to die of a drugs overdose than the national average. Drug-related mortality has increased by 95% since 1997. There are 20,000 registered drug users – that's just registered – and the situation is not going to get any better: children who grow up in households where family members use drugs are seven times more likely to end up using drugs themselves than children who live in drug-free families.Glasgow has the highest incidence of liver diseases from alcohol abuse in all of Scotland. In the East End district of Dennistoun, these illnesses kill more people than heart attacks and lung cancer combined. Men and women are more likely to die of alcohol-related deaths in Glasgow than anywhere else in the UK. Time and time again Glasgow is proud winner of the title ‘Fattest City in Britain'. Around 40% of the population are obese – 5% morbidly so – and it also boasts the most smokers per capita.I have taken these statistics from an array of different sources. It might be in some cases that they're overstated. I know that I've accentuated both the 18th- and 19th-century positives, as well as the 20th- and 21st-century negatives to make my point. Of course, there are lots of healthy, happy people in Glasgow – I've done many gigs there and I loved it. Despite the stories you hear about intimidating Glasgow audiences, the ones I encountered were as good as any I've ever performed in front of. But none of this changes the broad-brush strokes: Glasgow was a once mighty city that now has grave social problems. It is a city that is not fulfilling its potential in the way that it once did. All in all, it's quite a transformation. How has it happened?Every few years a report comes out that highlights Glasgow's various problems. Comments are then sought from across the political spectrum. Usually, those asked to comment agree that the city has grave, ‘long-standing and deep-rooted social problems' (the words of Stephen Purcell, former leader of Glasgow City Council); they agree that something needs to be done, though they don't always agree on what that something is.There's the view from the right: Bill Aitken of the Scottish Conservatives, quoted in The Sunday Times in 2008, said, ‘We simply don't have the jobs for people who are not academically inclined. Another factor is that some people are simply disinclined to work. We have got to find something for these people to do, to give them a reason to get up in the morning and give them some self-respect.' There's the supposedly apolitical view of anti-poverty groups: Peter Kelly, director of the Glasgow-based Poverty Alliance, responded, ‘We need real, intensive support for people if we are going to tackle poverty. It's not about a lack of aspiration, often people who are unemployed or on low incomes are stymied by a lack of money and support from local and central government.' And there's the view from the left. In the same article, Patricia Ferguson, the Labour Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) for Maryhill, also declared a belief in government regeneration of the area. ‘It's about better housing, more jobs, better education and these things take years to make an impact. I believe that the huge regeneration in the area is fostering a lot more community involvement and cohesion. My real hope is that these figures will take a knock in the next five or ten years.' At the time of writing in 2013, five years later, the figures have worsened.All three points of view agree on one thing: the government must do something.In 2008 the £435 million Fairer Scotland Fund – established to tackle poverty – was unveiled, aiming to allocate cash to the country's most deprived communities. Its targets included increasing average income among lower wage-earners and narrowing the poverty gap between Scotland's best- and worst-performing regions by 2017. So far, it hasn't met those targets.In 2008 a report entitled ‘Power for The Public' examined the provision of health, education and justice in Scotland. It said the budgets for these three areas had grown by 55%, 87% and 44% respectively over the last decade, but added that this had produced ‘mixed results'. ‘Mixed results' means it didn't work. More money was spent and the figures got worse.After the Centre for Social Justice report on Glasgow in 2008, Iain Duncan Smith (who set up this think tank, and is now the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions) said, ‘Policy must deal with the pathways to breakdown – high levels of family breakdown, high levels of failed education, debt and unemployment.'So what are ‘pathways to breakdown'? If you were to look at a chart of Glasgow's prosperity relative to the rest of the world, its peak would have come somewhere around 1910. With the onset of WWI in 1914 its decline accelerated, and since then the falls have been relentless and inexorable. It's not just Glasgow that would have this chart pattern, but the whole of industrial Britain. What changed the trend? Yes, empires rise and fall, but was British decline all a consequence of WWI? Or was there something else?A seismic shift came with that war – a change which is very rarely spoken or written about. Actually, the change was gradual and it pre-dated 1914. It was a change that was sweeping through the West: that of government or state involvement in our lives. In the UK it began with the reforms of the Liberal government of 1906–14, championed by David Lloyd George and Winston Churchill, known as the ‘terrible twins' by contemporaries. The Pensions Act of 1908, the People's Budget of 1909–10 (to ‘wage implacable warfare against poverty', declared Lloyd George) and the National Insurance Act of 1911 saw the Liberal government moving away from its tradition of laissez-faire systems – from classical liberalism and Gladstonian principles of self-help and self-reliance – towards larger, more active government by which taxes were collected from the wealthy and the proceeds redistributed. Afraid of losing votes to the emerging Labour party and the increasingly popular ideology of socialism, modern liberals betrayed their classical principles. In his War Memoirs, Lloyd George said ‘the partisan warfare that raged around these topics was so fierce that by 1913, this country was brought to the verge of civil war'. But these were small steps. The Pensions Act, for example, meant that men aged 70 and above could claim between two and five shillings per week from the government. But average male life- expectancy then was 47. Today it's 77. Using the same ratio, and, yes, I'm manipulating statistics here, that's akin to only awarding pensions to people above the age 117 today. Back then it was workable.To go back to my analogy of the prologue, this period was when the ‘train' was set in motion across the West. In 1914 it went up a gear. Here are the opening paragraphs of historian A. J. P. Taylor's most celebrated book, English History 1914–1945, published in 1965.I quote this long passage in full, because it is so telling.Until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state, beyond the post office and the policeman. He could live where he liked and as he liked. He had no official number or identity card. He could travel abroad or leave his country forever without a passport or any sort of official permission. He could exchange his money for any other currency without restriction or limit. He could buy goods from any country in the world on the same terms as he bought goods at home. For that matter, a foreigner could spend his life in this country without permit and without informing the police. Unlike the countries of the European continent, the state did not require its citizens to perform military service. An Englishman could enlist, if he chose, in the regular army, the navy, or the territorials. He could also ignore, if he chose, the demands of national defence. Substantial householders were occasionally called on for jury service. Otherwise, only those helped the state, who wished to do so. The Englishman paid taxes on a modest scale: nearly £200 million in 1913–14, or rather less than 8% of the national income.The state intervened to prevent the citizen from eating adulterated food or contracting certain infectious diseases. It imposed safety rules in factories, and prevented women, and adult males in some industries,from working excessive hours.The state saw to it that children received education up to the age of 13. Since 1 January 1909, it provided a meagre pension for the needy over the age of 70. Since 1911, it helped to insure certain classes of workers against sickness and unemployment. This tendency towards more state action was increasing. Expenditure on the social services had roughly doubled since the Liberals took office in 1905. Still, broadly speaking, the state acted only to help those who could not help themselves. It left the adult citizen alone.All this was changed by the impact of the Great War. The mass of the people became, for the first time, active citizens. Their lives were shaped by orders from above; they were required to serve the state instead of pursuing exclusively their own affairs. Five million men entered the armed forces, many of them (though a minority) under compulsion. The Englishman's food was limited, and its quality changed, by government order. His freedom of movement was restricted; his conditions of work prescribed. Some industries were reduced or closed, others artificially fostered. The publication of news was fettered. Street lights were dimmed. The sacred freedom of drinking was tampered with: licensed hours were cut down, and the beer watered by order. The very time on the clocks was changed. From 1916 onwards, every Englishman got up an hour earlier in summer than he would otherwise have done, thanks to an act of parliament. The state established a hold over its citizens which, though relaxed in peacetime, was never to be removed and which the Second World war was again to increase. The history of the English state and of the English people merged for the first time.Since the beginning of WWI , the role that the state has played in our lives has not stopped growing. This has been especially so in the case of Glasgow. The state has spent more and more, provided more and more services, more subsidy, more education, more health care, more infrastructure, more accommodation, more benefits, more regulations, more laws, more protection. The more it has provided, the worse Glasgow has fared. Is this correlation a coincidence? I don't think so.The story of the rise and fall of Glasgow is a distilled version of the story of the rise and fall of industrial Britain – indeed the entire industrial West. In the next chapter I'm going to show you a simple mistake that goes on being made; a dynamic by which the state, whose very aim was to help Glasgow, has actually been its ‘pathway to breakdown' . . .Life After the State is available at Amazon, Apple Books and all good bookshops, with the audiobook at Audible, Apple Books and all good audiobookshops. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

Early access programmes (EAPs) for novel medicines are an often-misunderstood strategy outside of western markets. In a new pharmaphorum podcast, web editor Nicole Raleigh speaks with Cem Zorlular, CEO of Er-Kim Pharmaceuticals, a company that has been serving as a regional affiliate for pharma and biotech since 1981 in the CEE and Mediterranean. Market access strategies in many international markets do not function the same way as they do in the US or Western Europe and require a different approach. Zorlular explains how EAPs can drive revenue for pharmaceutical companies from international unlicensed markets, but that most importantly EAPs allow patients access to life-altering novel medicines. What's more, he says, EAPs can also help shape the biotech space by supporting the opportunity for RWD collection outside of the clinical trial setting and build momentum with local payers, regulators, and the medical community. You can listen to episode 179a of the pharmaphorum podcast in the player below, download the episode to your computer, or find it - and subscribe to the rest of the series - in iTunes, Spotify, Amazon Music, Podbean, and pretty much wherever you get your other podcasts!

Remember Us, by Robert Edsel-#1 New York Times bestselling author of The Monuments Men (which was turned into a blockbuster film with an all-star cast including George Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray and Cate Blanchett) -begins in the pre-dawn hours of Hitler's invasion of Western Europe on May 10, 1940, when his forces rolled into the small rural province of Limburg in the Netherlands shattering more than 100 years of peace. Their freedom gone, the Dutch lived through four-and-a-half years of occupation until American forces reached Limburg in September 1944, the last portion of Western Europe liberated by the Allies before their advance on Nazi Germany slammed to a halt.Like The Monuments Men, Remember Us is an ensemble piece that follows twelve main characters over a six-year span, zeroing in on ordinary people including Frieda van Schäik, a teenager who falls in love with an American soldier; Lieutenant Colonel Robert Cole, the first member of the 101st Airborne to receive the Medal of Honor; and Sergeant Jeff Wiggins of the 960th Quartermaster Service Company, who escaped the poverty and racism of Alabama for yet another indignity-digging graves.Drawing on never-before-seen letters, diaries, and other historical records, Edsel shows the painful price of freedom, on the battlefields and inside American homes. In this rich, dramatic, and suspenseful story, he captures both the horrors of war and the transcendent power of gratitude, showing the extraordinary measures the Dutch have taken to thank their liberators. Remember Us is exactly the book we need-a reminder that grief is universal, that humanity knows no national or racial boundaries, and that we all want to be remembered, somehow, someway, by somebody.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-like-it-s-live--4113802/support.

Explore innovative tools and digital strategies to bridge the gospel gap, transforming evangelism with scalable, impactful, and creative outreach.As CV's Community Manager for Western Europe, Charlotte is passionate about using technology to help the church reach beyond physical walls and connect with people wherever they are.

It's Thursday, May 15th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Jonathan Clark 1,518 executions worldwide in 2024 A report from Amnesty International found there were 1,518 executions around the world last year. That's up 32 percent from 2023. Nations with the most documented executions include Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq.  These numbers do not include executions in China, North Korea, and Vietnam. China is considered to be the world's leading executioner, with potentially thousands of executions last year. All of these countries are ranked on the Open Doors' World Watch List of nations where it is most difficult to be a Christian.  British city council no longer bans street preachers A local government district in England has backed down from banning street preachers. Back in March, Rushmoor Borough Council sought to criminalize street preaching, praying for people, singing, or handing out Bibles. Local churches, supported by the Christian Legal Centre, opposed the plan. Thankfully, the council backed down.  Jamie Broadey, a local evangelist, said, “Since we found out about the injunction and asked for prayer, we have been contacted by Christians from across the UK. The issue is uniting preachers and Christians and we are prepared to challenge this as far as need be to prevent the Gospel being criminalized.” Acts 5:29 says, “But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: ‘We ought to obey God rather than men.'” $1.2 trillion economic package with Qatar United States President Donald Trump is visiting countries in the Middle East this week. Yesterday, he signed an agreement with Qatar that would generate an economic exchange worth at least $1.2 trillion. This includes an historic sale of Boeing aircraft and GE Aerospace engines to Qatar Airways worth $96 billion.  Trump budget insists on work requirements for Medicaid This week, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives unveiled the “big, beautiful bill,” as the president calls it, to advance Trump's agenda.  The bill includes tax breaks, spending cuts, and border security.  Notably, the measure would cut $900 billion from Medicaid spending. It would also require many people to prove they are working, volunteering, or pursuing education to be eligible for Medicaid. Listen to comments by House Speaker Mike Johnson. JOHNSON: “We are protecting Medicaid for the people who need and deserve it. This program is an essential lifeline for our most vulnerable Americans: pregnant women, single mothers, low income seniors, the disabled. That's who Medicaid is intended to be for, and that's who we're protecting while we're eliminating fraud, waste and abuse to improve Medicaid. “These are reforms to restore and preserve the system so that it doesn't collapse on itself. That means ensuring illegal aliens don't get coverage meant for Americans in need. It means implementing work requirements to ensure that adults who can work, but refuse to, cannot keep cheating the system. We're going to continue to call this out.” Trump's bill defunds Planned Parenthood The “big, beautiful bill” from Republicans also paves the way for defunding Planned Parenthood. The legislation would bar federal funds from going to prohibited entities that perform abortions in many cases. The measure would also cut taxpayer funding for transgender surgeries for minors.  U.S. drug overdose deaths down Drug overdose deaths in the United States declined last year. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports 80,000 people died from overdoses in 2024. That's down 27 percent from 2023. It's the largest drop in overdose deaths on record. However, overdose deaths are still higher now than they were before the COVID-19 pandemic.  Inflation down and egg prices down Annual inflation was lower than expected last month. The consumer price index rose 0.2 percent in April. That put the 12-month inflation rate at 2.3 percent. Inflation is now the lowest it's been since 2021. Notably, egg prices fell by over 12 percent. However, they're still up about 50 percent compared to a year ago. Worldwide Bible engagement update And finally, the American Bible Society released the second chapter of its State of the Bible USA 2025 report.  The chapter looks at Bible engagement around the world.  People are most actively engaged and committed to the Bible in areas that are majority Christian like Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa.  Interestingly, people are the most receptive to new ideas and other religions in Muslim-majority areas like North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia.  The greatest indifference to the Bible is found in the secular west and certain majority-Christian areas like the U.S., Western Europe, Russia, and Eastern Europe.  Of countries in the secular West, the U.S. had the highest rates of Bible usage and church attendance.  Isaiah 45:22 says, “Look to Me, and be saved, all you ends of the Earth! For I am God, and there is no other.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Thursday, May 15th, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

Remember Us, by Robert Edsel-#1 New York Times bestselling author of The Monuments Men (which was turned into a blockbuster film with an all-star cast including George Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray and Cate Blanchett) -begins in the pre-dawn hours of Hitler's invasion of Western Europe on May 10, 1940, when his forces rolled into the small rural province of Limburg in the Netherlands shattering more than 100 years of peace. Their freedom gone, the Dutch lived through four-and-a-half years of occupation until American forces reached Limburg in September 1944, the last portion of Western Europe liberated by the Allies before their advance on Nazi Germany slammed to a halt.Like The Monuments Men, Remember Us is an ensemble piece that follows twelve main characters over a six-year span, zeroing in on ordinary people including Frieda van Schäik, a teenager who falls in love with an American soldier; Lieutenant Colonel Robert Cole, the first member of the 101st Airborne to receive the Medal of Honor; and Sergeant Jeff Wiggins of the 960th Quartermaster Service Company, who escaped the poverty and racism of Alabama for yet another indignity-digging graves.Drawing on never-before-seen letters, diaries, and other historical records, Edsel shows the painful price of freedom, on the battlefields and inside American homes. In this rich, dramatic, and suspenseful story, he captures both the horrors of war and the transcendent power of gratitude, showing the extraordinary measures the Dutch have taken to thank their liberators. Remember Us is exactly the book we need-a reminder that grief is universal, that humanity knows no national or racial boundaries, and that we all want to be remembered, somehow, someway, by somebody.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-unplugged-totally-uncut--994165/support.

Exploramos músicas que nacen de las tradiciones y las experimentaciones a partir de ellas, que nos revelan una enorme riqueza y diversidad por tierras de la Europa occidental, oculta habitualmente ruido de la uniformización. Viajamos por Cerdeña, la región de las Cuatro Provincias en Italia, Bretaña, Flandes, Auvernia, Provenza, Languedoc y el Mazizo Central francés, donde nos encontramos una inesperada conexión con Benín, en el África occidental. We explore music that springs from traditions and from experimentation rooted in them, revealing a vast richness and diversity throughout the lands of Western Europe, usually hidden beneath the noise of uniformity. We travel through Sardinia, the region of the Quattro Province in Italy, Brittany, Flanders, Auvergne, Provence, Languedoc, and the French Massif Central, where we find an unexpected connection with Benin, in West Africa. - Pierpaolo Vacca - Ballu travessu - Travessu - Daniele Bicego - Alessandrina - Cantami, o müsa - O'Tridal - Temple tuk - Live - Louise - Elisa - Louise - Tant que li Siam - La caminado di sesoun - Vent'alentour - Camille en Bal - Au plus chaud de chaque été - De còr e d'aiga - Cardboard Cabin - Skateboard Scottish - Schemerdonker - Buck - Gebed - Buck - Ktipietok Orkestar - Foua - Et ouai - Ktipietok Orkestar & Gangbé Brass Band - Atin de jlo he - Gangbetok 📸 Gangbetok

In April, travel to the U.S. rebounded with a notable 12% increase in visits from Western Europe, particularly from Germany and the U.K., though the data excludes Canada, where visits have declined. The U.S. air traffic control system is under scrutiny due to outdated technology and staffing shortages, prompting the government to invest billions in modernization, including new towers and increased hiring. Meanwhile, Highgate is expanding its luxury Viceroy brand with new developments like The Harriman in Idaho, marking a shift toward upscale leisure destinations. U.S. Visits From Europe Rebounded in April After Sharp Drop Highgate Expands Viceroy With Sun Valley Launch, Branded Residences — Exclusive Newark Outages Expose Air Traffic Control Crisis — What to Know About the Fix  Connect with Skift LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.linkedin.com/company/skift/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ WhatsApp: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaAL375LikgIXmNPYQ0L/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Facebook: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://facebook.com/skiftnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/skiftnews/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Threads: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.threads.net/@skiftnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Bluesky: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bsky.app/profile/skiftnews.bsky.social⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/skift⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Subscribe to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SkiftNews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and never miss an update from the travel industry.

Spies In My Blood: A Polish Family's Secret Fight Against Nazis & Communists (Polestar-Media, 2025) is the true story of two brothers raised in New York by WWII exiles and their journey to Poland. Each takes a different path to infiltrate the Communist secret police on a mission to uncover the truth about their family of soldiers, spies, and assassins. Which brother would go into the family business?Alex Storozynski was the first in his family born in the United States, a new leaf on the family tree. When he set out to find his roots in Poland during the Cold War, his Mama stitched secret pockets into boxer shorts where he could hide his cash, passport, and important documents. Before he left to go behind the Iron Curtain, his mother warned him: “Be careful of your brother's friends.” His big brother George, a banker, told him, “Mama doesn't want you to go into the family business.”As an aspiring journalist, Storozynski interviewed Polish rock stars, filmmakers, and artists fighting censorship. He navigated the black market and learned to thrive in the surreal and repressive system. He persuaded the Communist government to give him a scholarship to write a doctoral dissertation about the most hated man in Poland, the military regime's press spokesman, Jerzy Urban. But he asked too many questions.Storozynski attended Urban's press conferences with American journalists and met underground Solidarity activists trying to overthrow the government. He translated interviews with opposition leaders like Lech Wałesa for The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Boston Globe.There's a Polish saying, “You can't fool your genes; it's in your blood.” The Communist secret police (SB) stole Storozynski's visa and interrogated him. When Senator Ted Kennedy arrived in Warsaw to give The Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award to Adam Michnik and the parents of martyred opposition priest Father Jerzy Popiełuszko, Storozynski spent time with the Kennedy clan and taught them to sing Sto Lat (May He Live 100 Years) to the opposition.The SB had enough. After investigating Alex Storozynski, they wrote: “The findings in the case show that he is familiar with the working methods of special services.” Storozynski was declared an “enemy of the state” and banned from Communist Poland.This is the true story of Alex Storozynski's quest to uncover the nitty-gritty of three generations of spies in his blood.Winston Churchill's words serve as a stark warning: “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” With the Russian Army again trying to move the border between East and Western Europe, the dormant Cold War has reignited a hot war. Russia's invasion of sovereign nations and killing of Ukrainians is a grim reminder of the need to avoid repeating history. Motorized terror squads are once again murdering Jews, and civilian bombing deaths are written off as collateral damage. The gravity of the situation cannot be overstated. Alex Storozynski is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, award-winning author, filmmaker, songwriter, and President Emeritus & Chairman of the Board of The Kosciuszko Foundation.Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Spies In My Blood: A Polish Family's Secret Fight Against Nazis & Communists (Polestar-Media, 2025) is the true story of two brothers raised in New York by WWII exiles and their journey to Poland. Each takes a different path to infiltrate the Communist secret police on a mission to uncover the truth about their family of soldiers, spies, and assassins. Which brother would go into the family business?Alex Storozynski was the first in his family born in the United States, a new leaf on the family tree. When he set out to find his roots in Poland during the Cold War, his Mama stitched secret pockets into boxer shorts where he could hide his cash, passport, and important documents. Before he left to go behind the Iron Curtain, his mother warned him: “Be careful of your brother's friends.” His big brother George, a banker, told him, “Mama doesn't want you to go into the family business.”As an aspiring journalist, Storozynski interviewed Polish rock stars, filmmakers, and artists fighting censorship. He navigated the black market and learned to thrive in the surreal and repressive system. He persuaded the Communist government to give him a scholarship to write a doctoral dissertation about the most hated man in Poland, the military regime's press spokesman, Jerzy Urban. But he asked too many questions.Storozynski attended Urban's press conferences with American journalists and met underground Solidarity activists trying to overthrow the government. He translated interviews with opposition leaders like Lech Wałesa for The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Boston Globe.There's a Polish saying, “You can't fool your genes; it's in your blood.” The Communist secret police (SB) stole Storozynski's visa and interrogated him. When Senator Ted Kennedy arrived in Warsaw to give The Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award to Adam Michnik and the parents of martyred opposition priest Father Jerzy Popiełuszko, Storozynski spent time with the Kennedy clan and taught them to sing Sto Lat (May He Live 100 Years) to the opposition.The SB had enough. After investigating Alex Storozynski, they wrote: “The findings in the case show that he is familiar with the working methods of special services.” Storozynski was declared an “enemy of the state” and banned from Communist Poland.This is the true story of Alex Storozynski's quest to uncover the nitty-gritty of three generations of spies in his blood.Winston Churchill's words serve as a stark warning: “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” With the Russian Army again trying to move the border between East and Western Europe, the dormant Cold War has reignited a hot war. Russia's invasion of sovereign nations and killing of Ukrainians is a grim reminder of the need to avoid repeating history. Motorized terror squads are once again murdering Jews, and civilian bombing deaths are written off as collateral damage. The gravity of the situation cannot be overstated. Alex Storozynski is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, award-winning author, filmmaker, songwriter, and President Emeritus & Chairman of the Board of The Kosciuszko Foundation.Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/national-security

Spies In My Blood: A Polish Family's Secret Fight Against Nazis & Communists (Polestar-Media, 2025) is the true story of two brothers raised in New York by WWII exiles and their journey to Poland. Each takes a different path to infiltrate the Communist secret police on a mission to uncover the truth about their family of soldiers, spies, and assassins. Which brother would go into the family business?Alex Storozynski was the first in his family born in the United States, a new leaf on the family tree. When he set out to find his roots in Poland during the Cold War, his Mama stitched secret pockets into boxer shorts where he could hide his cash, passport, and important documents. Before he left to go behind the Iron Curtain, his mother warned him: “Be careful of your brother's friends.” His big brother George, a banker, told him, “Mama doesn't want you to go into the family business.”As an aspiring journalist, Storozynski interviewed Polish rock stars, filmmakers, and artists fighting censorship. He navigated the black market and learned to thrive in the surreal and repressive system. He persuaded the Communist government to give him a scholarship to write a doctoral dissertation about the most hated man in Poland, the military regime's press spokesman, Jerzy Urban. But he asked too many questions.Storozynski attended Urban's press conferences with American journalists and met underground Solidarity activists trying to overthrow the government. He translated interviews with opposition leaders like Lech Wałesa for The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Boston Globe.There's a Polish saying, “You can't fool your genes; it's in your blood.” The Communist secret police (SB) stole Storozynski's visa and interrogated him. When Senator Ted Kennedy arrived in Warsaw to give The Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award to Adam Michnik and the parents of martyred opposition priest Father Jerzy Popiełuszko, Storozynski spent time with the Kennedy clan and taught them to sing Sto Lat (May He Live 100 Years) to the opposition.The SB had enough. After investigating Alex Storozynski, they wrote: “The findings in the case show that he is familiar with the working methods of special services.” Storozynski was declared an “enemy of the state” and banned from Communist Poland.This is the true story of Alex Storozynski's quest to uncover the nitty-gritty of three generations of spies in his blood.Winston Churchill's words serve as a stark warning: “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” With the Russian Army again trying to move the border between East and Western Europe, the dormant Cold War has reignited a hot war. Russia's invasion of sovereign nations and killing of Ukrainians is a grim reminder of the need to avoid repeating history. Motorized terror squads are once again murdering Jews, and civilian bombing deaths are written off as collateral damage. The gravity of the situation cannot be overstated. Alex Storozynski is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, award-winning author, filmmaker, songwriter, and President Emeritus & Chairman of the Board of The Kosciuszko Foundation.Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

Spies In My Blood: A Polish Family's Secret Fight Against Nazis & Communists (Polestar-Media, 2025) is the true story of two brothers raised in New York by WWII exiles and their journey to Poland. Each takes a different path to infiltrate the Communist secret police on a mission to uncover the truth about their family of soldiers, spies, and assassins. Which brother would go into the family business?Alex Storozynski was the first in his family born in the United States, a new leaf on the family tree. When he set out to find his roots in Poland during the Cold War, his Mama stitched secret pockets into boxer shorts where he could hide his cash, passport, and important documents. Before he left to go behind the Iron Curtain, his mother warned him: “Be careful of your brother's friends.” His big brother George, a banker, told him, “Mama doesn't want you to go into the family business.”As an aspiring journalist, Storozynski interviewed Polish rock stars, filmmakers, and artists fighting censorship. He navigated the black market and learned to thrive in the surreal and repressive system. He persuaded the Communist government to give him a scholarship to write a doctoral dissertation about the most hated man in Poland, the military regime's press spokesman, Jerzy Urban. But he asked too many questions.Storozynski attended Urban's press conferences with American journalists and met underground Solidarity activists trying to overthrow the government. He translated interviews with opposition leaders like Lech Wałesa for The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Boston Globe.There's a Polish saying, “You can't fool your genes; it's in your blood.” The Communist secret police (SB) stole Storozynski's visa and interrogated him. When Senator Ted Kennedy arrived in Warsaw to give The Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award to Adam Michnik and the parents of martyred opposition priest Father Jerzy Popiełuszko, Storozynski spent time with the Kennedy clan and taught them to sing Sto Lat (May He Live 100 Years) to the opposition.The SB had enough. After investigating Alex Storozynski, they wrote: “The findings in the case show that he is familiar with the working methods of special services.” Storozynski was declared an “enemy of the state” and banned from Communist Poland.This is the true story of Alex Storozynski's quest to uncover the nitty-gritty of three generations of spies in his blood.Winston Churchill's words serve as a stark warning: “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” With the Russian Army again trying to move the border between East and Western Europe, the dormant Cold War has reignited a hot war. Russia's invasion of sovereign nations and killing of Ukrainians is a grim reminder of the need to avoid repeating history. Motorized terror squads are once again murdering Jews, and civilian bombing deaths are written off as collateral damage. The gravity of the situation cannot be overstated. Alex Storozynski is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, award-winning author, filmmaker, songwriter, and President Emeritus & Chairman of the Board of The Kosciuszko Foundation.Stephen Satkiewicz is an independent scholar whose research areas are related to Civilizational Sciences, Social Complexity, Big History, Historical Sociology, military history, War studies, International Relations, Geopolitics, as well as Russian and East European history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Oliver O'Connor, Chief Executive of Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association discusses the lack of availability of new cancer drugs.

This week we talk about the Marshall Plan, standardization, and USB.We also discuss artificial intelligence, Anthropic, and protocols.Recommended Book: Fuzz by Mary RoachTranscriptIn the wake of WWII, the US government implemented the European Recovery Program, more commonly known as the Marshall Plan, to help Western Europe recover from a conflict that had devastated the afflicted countries' populations, infrastructure, and economies.It kicked off in April of 1948, and though it was replaced by a successor program, the Mutual Security Act, just three years later in 1951—which was similar to the Marshall Plan, but which had a more militant, anti-communism bent, the idea being to keep the Soviets from expanding their influence across the continent and around the world—the general goal of both programs was similar: the US was in pretty good shape, post-war, and in fact by waiting to enter as long as it did, and by becoming the arsenal of the Allied side in the conflict, its economy was flourishing, its manufacturing base was all revved up and needed something to do with all the extra output capacity it had available, all the resources committed to producing hardware and food and so on, so by sharing these resources with allies, by basically just giving a bunch of money and assets and infrastructural necessities to these European governments, the US could get everybody on side, bulwarked against the Soviet Union's counterinfluence, at a moment in which these governments were otherwise prone to that influence; because they were suffering and weaker than usual, and thus, if the Soviets came in with the right offer, or with enough guns, they could conceivably grab a lot of support and even territory. So it was considered to be in everyone's best interest, those who wanted to keep the Soviet Union from expanding, at least, to get Europe back on its feet, posthaste.So this program, and its successor program, were highly influential during this period, and it's generally considered to be one of the better things the US government has done for the world, as while there were clear anti-Soviet incentives at play, it was also a relatively hands-off, large-scale give-away that favorably compared with the Soviets' more demanding and less generous version of the same.One interesting side effect of the Marshall Plan is that because US manufacturers were sending so much stuff to these foreign ports, their machines and screws and lumber used to rebuild entire cities across Europe, the types of machines and screws and lumber, which were the standard models of each in the US, but many of which were foreign to Europe at the time, became the de facto standard in some of these European cities, as well.Such standards aren't always the best of all possible options, sometimes they stick around long past their period of ideal utility, and they don't always stick, but the standards and protocols within an industry or technology do tend to shape that industry or technology's trajectory for decades into the future, as has been the case with many Marshall Plan-era US standards that rapidly spread around the world as a result of these giveaways.And standards and protocols are what I'd like to talk about today. In particular a new protocol that seems primed to shape the path today's AI tools are taking.—Today's artificial intelligence, or AI, which is an ill-defined type of software that generally refers to applications capable of doing vaguely human-like things, like producing text and images, but also somewhat superhuman things, like working with large data-sets and bringing meaning to them, are developing rapidly, becoming more potent and capable seemingly every day.This period of AI development has been in the works for decades, and the technologies required to make the current batch of generative AI tools—the type that makes stuff based on libraries of training data, deriving patterns from that data and then coming up with new stuff based on the prompting of human users—were originally developed in the 1970s, but the transformer, which was a fresh approach to what's called deep learning architectures, was first proposed in 2017 by a researcher at Google, and that led to the development of the generative pre-trained transformer, or GPT, in 2018.The average non-tech-world person probably started to hear about this generation of AI tools a few years later, maybe when the first transformer-based voice and image tools started popping up around the internet, mostly as novelties, or even more likely in late-2022 when OpenAI released the first version of ChatGPT, a generative AI system attached to a chatbot interface, which made these sorts of tools more accessible to the average person.Since then, there's been a wave of investment and interest in AI tools, and we've reached a point where the seemingly obvious next-step is removing humans from the loop in more AI-related processes.What that means in practice is that while today these tools require human prompting for most of what they do—you have to ask an AI for a specific image, then ask it to refine that image in order to customize it for your intended use-case, for instance—it's possible to have AI do more things on their own, working from broader instructions to refine their creations themselves over multiple steps and longer periods of time.So rather than chatting with an AI to come up with a marketing plan for your business, prompting it dozens or hundreds of times to refine the sales copy, the logo, the images for the website, the code for the website, and so on, you might tell an AI tool that you're building a business that does X and ask it to spin up all the assets that you need. From there, the AI might research what a new business in that industry requires, make all the assets you need for it, go back and tweak all those assets based on feedback from other AI tools, and then deploy those assets for you on web hosting services, social media accounts, and the like.It's possible that at some point these tools could become so capable in this regard that humans won't need to be involved at all, even for the initial ideation. You could ask an AI what sorts of businesses make sense at the moment, and tell it to build you a dozen minimum viable products for those businesses, and then ask it to run those businesses for you—completely hands off, except for the expressing your wishes part, almost like you're working with a digital genie.At the moment, components of that potential future are possible, but one of the main things standing in the way is that AI systems largely aren't agentic enough, which in this context means they need a lot of hand-holding for things that a human being would be capable of doing, but which they largely, with rare exceptions, aren't yet, and they often don't have the permission or ability to interact with other tools required to do that kind of building—and that includes things like the ability to create a business account on Shopify, but also the ability to access and handle money, which would be required to set up business and bank accounts, to receive money from customers, and so on.This is changing at a rapid pace, and more companies are making their offerings accessible to specific AI tools; Shopify has deployed its own cluster of internal AI systems, for instance, meant to manage various aspects of a business its customers perch on its platform.What's missing right now, though, is a unifying scaffolding that allows these services and assets and systems to all play nice with each other.And that's the issue the Model Context Protocol is meant to address.The Model Context Protocol, or MCP, is a standard developed by AI company Anthropic, and it's open and designed to be universal. The company intends for it to be the mycelium that connects large language model-based AI to all sorts of data and tools and other systems, a bit like the Hypertext Transfer Protocol, or HTTP, allows data on the web to be used and shared and processed, universally, in a standardized way, and to dip back into the world of physical objects, how standardized shipping containers make global trade a lot more efficient because everyone's working with the same sized boxes, cargo vessels, and so on.The Universal Serial Bus standard, usually shorthanded as USB, is also a good comparison here, as the USB was introduced to replaced a bunch of other standards in the early days of personal computing, which varied by computer maker, and which made it difficult for those makers, plus those who developed accessories, to make their products accessible and inexpensive for end-users, as you might buy a mouse that doesn't work with your specific computer hardware, or you might have a cable that fits in the hole on your computer, but doesn't send the right amount of data, or provide the power you need.USB standards ensured that all devices had the same holes, and that a certain basic level of data and power transmission would be available. And while this standard has since fractured a bit, a period of many different types of USB leading to a lot of confusion, and the deployment of the USB C standard simplying things somewhat, but still being a bit confounding at times, as the same shaped plug may carry different amounts of data and power, despite all that, it has still made things a lot easier for both consumers and producers of electronic goods, as there are fewer plugs and charger types to purchase, and thus less waste, confusion, and so on. We've moved on from the wild west era of computer hardware connectivity into something less varied and thus, more predictable and interoperable.The MCP, if it's successful, could go on to be something like the USB standard in that it would serve as a universal connector between various AI systems and all the things you might want those AI systems to access and use.That might mean you want one of Anthropic's AI systems to build you a business, without you having to do much or anything at all, and it may be capable of doing so, asking you questions along the way if it requires more clarity or additional permissiosn—to open a bank account in your name, for instance—but otherwise acting more agentically, as intended, even to the point that it could run social media accounts, work with manufacturers of the goods you sell, and handle customer service inquiries on your behalf.What makes this standard a standout compared to other options, though—and there are many other proposed options, right now, as this space is still kind of a wild west—is that though it was developed by Anthropic, which originally made it to work with its Claude family of AI tools, it has since also been adopted by OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and several of the other largest players in the AI world.That means, although there are other options here, all with their own pros and cons, as was the case with USB compared to other connection options back in the day, MCP is usable with many of the biggest and most spendy and powerful entities in the AI world, right now, and that gives it a sort of credibility and gravity that the other standards don't currently enjoy.This standard is also rapidly being adopted by companies like Block, Apollo, PayPal, CloudFlare, Asana, Plaid, and Sentry, among many, many others—including other connectors, like Zapier, which basically allows stuff to connect to other stuff, further broadening the capacity of AI tools that adopt this standard.While this isn't a done deal, then, there's a good chance that MCP will be the first big connective, near-universal standard in this space, which in turn means many of the next-step moves and tools in this space will need to work with it, in order to gain adoption and flourish, and that means, like the standards spread around the world by the Marshall Plan, it will go on to shape the look and feel and capabilities, including the limitations, of future AI tools and scaffoldings.Show Noteshttps://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2025/04/mcp-the-new-usb-c-for-ai-thats-bringing-fierce-rivals-together/https://blog.cloudflare.com/remote-model-context-protocol-servers-mcp/https://oldvcr.blogspot.com/2025/05/what-went-wrong-with-wireless-usb.htmlhttps://arxiv.org/html/2504.16736v2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_Context_Protocol#cite_note-anthropic_mcp-1https://github.com/modelcontextprotocolhttps://www.anthropic.com/news/integrationshttps://www.theverge.com/2024/11/25/24305774/anthropic-model-context-protocol-data-sourceshttps://beebom.com/model-context-protocol-mcp-explained/https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/26/openai-adopts-rival-anthropics-standard-for-connecting-ai-models-to-data/https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/09/google-says-itll-embrace-anthropics-standard-for-connecting-ai-models-to-data/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_artificial_intelligencehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USBhttps://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/marshall-planhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Planhttps://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45079https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/marshall-planhttps://www.history.com/articles/marshall-plan This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join us on the Professor Liberty Podcast as we delve into the chilling history of Vlad the Impaler, the man behind the Dracula legend. Unravel the complex narrative of Vlad III, the ruler of Wallachia, whose brutal methods and defiance against the mighty Ottoman Empire positioned him as a controversial yet pivotal figure in Europe during the 15th century. Was Vlad III a cruel monster or a divine weapon used to thwart the Ottoman horde?  

I've been in London this week talking to America watchers about the current situation in the United States. First up is Edmund Fawcett, the longtime Economist correspondent in DC and historian of both liberalism and conservatism. Fawcett argues that Trump's MAGA movement represents a kind of third way between liberalism and conservatism - a version of American populism resurrected for our anti-globalist early 21st century. He talks about how economic inequality fuels Trumpism, with middle-class income shares dropping while the wealthy prosper. He critiques both what he calls right-wing intellectual "kitsch" and the left's lack of strategic vision beyond its dogma of identity politics. Lacking an effective counter-narrative to combat Trumpism, Fawcett argues, liberals require not only sharper messaging but also a reinvention of what it means to be modern in our globalized age of resurrected nationalism. 5 Key Takeaways* European reactions to Trump mix shock with recognition that his politics have deep American roots.* Economic inequality (declining middle-class wealth) provides the foundation for Trump's political appeal.* The American left lacks an effective counter-narrative and strategic vision to combat Trumpism.* Both right-wing intellectualism and left-wing identity politics suffer from forms of "kitsch" and American neurosis.* The perception of America losing its position as the embodiment of modernity creates underlying anxiety. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello everybody, we are in London this week, looking westward, looking at the United States, spending some time with some distinguished Englishmen, or half-Englishmen, who have spent a lot of their lives in the United States, and Edmund Fawcett, former Economist correspondent in America, the author of a number of important books, particularly, Histories of Liberalism and Conservatism, is remembering America, Edmund. What's your first memory of America?Edmund Fawcett: My first memory of America is a traffic accident on Park Avenue, looking down as a four-year-old from our apartment. I was there from the age of two to four, then again as a school child in Washington for a few years when my father was working. He was an international lawyer. But then, after that, back in San Francisco, where I was a... I kind of hacked as an editor for Straight Arrow Press, which was the publishing arm of Rolling Stone. This was in the early 70s. These were the, it was the end of the glory days of Haight-Ashbury, San Francisco, the anti-war movement in Vietnam. It was exciting. A lot was going on, a lot was changing. And then not long after that, I came back to the U.S. for The Economist as their correspondent in Washington. That was in 1976, and I stayed there until 1983. We've always visited. Our son and grandson are American. My wife is or was American. She gave up her citizenship last year, chiefly for practical reasons. She said I would always feel American. But our regular visits have ended, of course. Being with my background, my mother was American, my grandfather was American. It is deeply part of my outlook, it's part of my world and so I am always very interested. I read quite a bit of the American press, not just the elite liberal press, every day. I keep an eye on through Real Clear Politics, which has got a very good sort of gazetteer. It's part of my weather.Andrew Keen: Edmund, I know you can't speak on behalf of Europe, but I'm going to ask a dumb question. Maybe you'll give me a smarter answer than the question. What's the European, the British take on what's happening in America? What's happened in this first quarter of 2025?Edmund Fawcett: I think a large degree of shock and horror, that's just the first reaction. If you'll allow me a little space, I think then there's a second reaction. The first reaction is shock and terror, with good reason, and nobody likes being talked to in the way that Vance talked to them, ignorantly and provocatively about free speech, which he feels he hasn't really thought hard enough about, and besides, it was I mean... Purely commercial, in largely commercial interest. The Europeans are shocked by the American slide from five, six, seven decades of internationalism. Okay, American-led, but still internationalist, cooperative, they're deeply shocked by that. And anybody who cares, as many Europeans do, about the texture, the caliber of American democracy and liberalism, are truly shocked by Trump's attacks on the courts, his attacks on the universities, his attack on the press.Andrew Keen: You remember, of course, Edmund, that famous moment in Casablanca where the policeman said he was shocked, truly shocked when of course he wasn't. Is your shock for real? Your... A good enough scholar of the United States to understand that a lot of the stuff that Trump is bringing to the table isn't new. We've had an ongoing debate in the show about how authentically American Trump is, whether he is the F word fascist or whether he represents some other indigenous strain in US political culture. What's your take?Edmund Fawcett: No, and that's the response to the shock. It's when you look back and see this Trump is actually deeply American. There's very little new here. There's one thing that is new, which I'll come to in a moment, and that returns the shock, but the shock is, is to some extent absorbed when Europeans who know about this do reflect that Trump is deeply American. I mean, there is a, he likes to cite McKinley, good, okay, the Republicans were the tariff party. He likes to say a lot of stuff that, for example, the populist Tom Watson from the South, deeply racist, but very much speaking for the working man, so long as he was a white working man. Trump goes back to that as well. He goes back in the presidential roster. Look at Robert Taft, competitor for the presidency against Eisenhower. He lost, but he was a very big voice in the Republican Party in the 1940s and 50s. Robert Taft, Jr. didn't want to join NATO. He pushed through over Truman's veto, the Taft-Hartley bill that as good as locked the unions out, the trade unions out of much of the part of America that became the burgeoning economic America, the South and the West. Trump is, sorry, forgive me, Taft, was in many ways as a hard-right Republican. Nixon told Kissinger, professors are the enemy. Reagan gave the what was it called? I forget the name of the speech that he gave in endorsing Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican Convention. This in a way launched the new Republican assault on liberal republicanism. Rockefeller was the loser. Reagan, as it were, handed the palm to Rocket Goldwater. He lost to Johnson, but the sermon they were using, the anti-liberal went into vernacular and Trump is merely in a way echoing that. If you were to do a movie called Trump, he would star, of course, but somebody who was Nixon and Reagan's scriptwright, forgive me, somebody who is Nixon and Reagan's Pressman, Pat Buchanan, he would write the script of the Trump movie. Go back and read, look at some of Pat Buchanan's books, some of his articles. He was... He said virtually everything that Trump says. America used to be great, it is no longer great. America has enemies outside that don't like it, that we have nothing to do with, we don't need allies, what we want is friends, and we have very few friends in the world. We're largely on our, by our own. We're basically a huge success, but we're being betrayed. We're being ignored by our allies, we're being betrayed by friends inside, and they are the liberal elite. It's all there in Pat Buchanan. So Trump in that way is indeed very American. He's very part of the history. Now, two things. One is... That Trump, like many people on the hard right in Europe, is to some extent, a neurotic response to very real complaints. If you would offer a one chart explanation of Trumpism, I don't know whether I can hold it up for the camera. It's here. It is actually two charts, but it is the one at the top where you see two lines cross over. You see at the bottom a more or less straight line. What this does is compare the share of income in 1970 with the share of the income more or less now. And what has happened, as we are not at all surprised to learn, is that the poor, who are not quite a majority but close to the actual people in the United States, things haven't changed for them much at all. Their life is static. However, what has changed is the life for what, at least in British terms, is called the middle classes, the middle group. Their share of income and wealth has dropped hugely, whereas the share of the income and wealth of the top has hugely risen. And in economic terms, that is what Trumpism is feeding off. He's feeding off a bewildered sense of rage, disappointment, possibly envy of people who looked forward, whose parents looked forward to a great better life, who they themselves got a better life. They were looking forward to one for their children and grandchildren. And now they're very worried that they're not those children and grandchildren aren't going to get it. So socially speaking, there is genuine concern, indeed anger that Trump is speaking to. Alas, Trump's answers are, I would say, and I think many Europeans would agree, fantasies.Andrew Keen: Your background is also on the left, your first job was at the New Left Reviews, you're all too familiar with Marxist language, Marxist literature, ways of thinking about what we used to call late-stage capitalism, maybe we should rename it post-late-stage-capitalism. Is it any surprise, given your presentation of the current situation in America, which is essentially class envy or class warfare, but the right. The Bannonites and many of the others on the right fringes of the MAGA movement have picked up on Lenin and Gramsci and the old icons of class warfare.Edmund Fawcett: No, I don't think it is. I think that they are these are I mean, we live in a world in which the people in politics and in the press in business, they've been to universities, they've read an awful lot of books, they spend an awful lot of time studying dusty old books like the ones you mentioned, Gramsci and so. So they're, to some extent, forgive me, they are, they're intellectuals or at least they become, they be intellectualized. Lenin called one of his books, What is to be Done. Patrick Deneen, a Catholic right-wing Catholic philosopher. He's one of the leading right-wing Catholic intellectuals of the day, hard right. He named it What is To Be Done. But this is almost kitsch, as it were, for a conservative Catholic intellectual to name a book after Vladimir Lenin, the first Bolshevik leader of the Russian Revolution. Forgive me, I lost the turn.Andrew Keen: You talk about kitsch, Edmund, is this kitsch leftism or is it real leftism? I mean if Trump was Bernie Sanders and a lot of what Trump says is not that different from Sanders with the intellectuals or the few intellectuals left in. New York and San Francisco and Los Angeles, would they be embracing what's happening? Thanks, I've got the third again.Edmund Fawcett: No, you said Kitsch. The publicists and intellectuals who support Trump, there is a Kitsch element to it. They use a lot of long words, they appeal to a lot of authorities. Augustine of Hippo comes into it. This is really kind of intellectual grandstanding. No, what matters? And this comes to the second thing about shock at Trump. The second thing is that there is real social and economic dysfunction here that the United States isn't really coping with. I don't think the Trumpites, I don't think the rather kitschy intellectuals who are his mature leaders. I don't think they so much matter. What I think matters here is, put it this way, is the silence of the left. And this is one of the deep problems. I mean, always with my friends, progressive friends, liberal friends, it's terribly easy to throw rocks at Trump and scorn his cheerleaders but we always have to ask ourselves why are they there and we're here and the left at the moment doesn't really have an answer to that. The Democrats in the United States they're strangely silent. And it's not just, as many people say, because they haven't dared to speak up. It's not that, it's a question of courage. It's an intellectual question of lacking some strategic sense of where the country is and what kinds of policy would help get it to a better place. This is very bleak, and that's part of, underlies the sense of shock, which we come back to with Trump after we tell ourselves, oh, well, it isn't new, and so on. The sense of shock is, well what is the practical available alternative for the moment? Electorally, Trump is quite weak, he wasn't a landslide, he got fewer percentage than Jimmy Carter did. The balance in the in the congress is quite is quite slight but again you could take false comfort there. The problem with liberals and progressives is they don't really have a counter narrative and one of the reasons they don't have a counter-narrative is I don't sense they have any longer a kind of vision of their own. This is a very bleak state of affairs.Andrew Keen: It's a bleak state of affairs in a very kind of surreal way. They're lacking the language. They don't have the words. Do they need to reread the old New Left classics?Edmund Fawcett: I think you've said a good thing. I mean, words matter tremendously. And this is one of Trump's gifts, is that he's able to spin old tropes of the right, the old theme music of the hard right that goes back to late 19th century America, late 19th century Europe. He's brilliant at it. It's often garbled. It's also incoherent. But the intellectuals, particularly liberals and progressives can mishear this. They can miss the point. They say, ah, it doesn't, it's not grammatical. It's incoherent. It is word salad. That's not the point. A paragraph of Trump doesn't make sense. If you were an editor, you'd want to rewrite it, but editors aren't listening. It's people in the crowd who get his main point, and his main point is always expressed verbally. It's very clever. It's hard to reproduce because he's actually a very good actor. However, the left at the moment has nothing. It has neither a vocabulary nor a set of speech makers. And the reason it doesn't have that, it doesn't have the vocabularies, because it doesn't have the strategic vision.Andrew Keen: Yeah, and coming back to the K-word you brought up, kitsch. If anything, the kitsch is on the left with Kamala Harris and her presentation of herself in this kitschification of American immigration. So the left in America, if that's the right word to describe them, are as vulnerable to kitsch as the right.Edmund Fawcett: Yes, and whether it's kitsch or not, I think this is very difficult to talk to on the progressive left. Identity politics does have a lot to answer for. Okay, I'll go for it. I mean, it's an old saying in politics that things begin as a movement, become a campaign, become a lobby, and then end up as a racket. That's putting it much too strongly, but there is an element in identity politics of which that is true. And I think identity politics is a deep problem for liberals, it's a deep problem for progressives because in the end, what identity politics offers is a fragmentation, which is indeed happened on the left, which then the right can just pick off as it chooses. This is, I think, to get back some kind of strategic vision, the left needs to come out of identity politics, it needs to go back to the vision of commonality, the vision of non-discrimination, the mission of true civic equality, which underlay civil rights, great movement, and try to avoid. The way that identity politics is encouraged, a kind of segmentation. There's an interesting parallel between identity politics and Trumpism. I'm thinking of the national element in Trumpism, Make America Great Again. It's rather a shock to see the Secretary of State sitting beside Trump in the room in the White House with a make America it's not a make America great cap but it says Gulf of America this kind of This nationalism is itself neurotic in a way that identity politics has become neurotic.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's a Linguistic.Edmund Fawcett: Neurosis. Both are neurotic responses to genuine problems.Andrew Keen: Edmund, long-time viewers and listeners to the show know that I often quote you in your wonderful two histories of conservatism and liberalism when you, I'm not sure which of the books, I think it may have been in conservatism. I can't remember myself. You noted that this struggle between the left and the right, between liberalism and conservatives have always be smarter they've always made the first move and it's always been up to the liberals and of course liberalism and the left aren't always the same thing but the left or progressives have always been catching up with conservatives so just to ask this question in terms of this metaphorical chess match has anything changed. It's always been the right that makes the first move, that sets the game up. It has recently.Edmund Fawcett: Let's not fuss too much with the metaphor. I think it was, as it were, the Liberals made the first move for decades, and then, more or less in our lifetimes, it has been the right that has made the weather, and the left has been catching up. Let's look at what happened in the 1970s. In effect. 30-40 years of welfare capitalism in which the state played ever more of a role in providing safety nets for people who were cut short by a capitalistic economy. Politics turned its didn't entirely reject that far from it but it is it was said enough already we've reached an end point we're now going to turn away from that and try to limit the welfare state and that has been happening since the 1970s and the left has never really come up with an alternative if you look at Mitterrand in France you look at Tony Blair new Labor in you look at Clinton in the United States, all of them in effect found an acceptably liberal progressive way of repackaging. What the right was doing and the left has got as yet no alternative. They can throw rocks at Trump, they can resist the hard right in Germany, they can go into coalition with the Christian Democrats in order to resist the hard right much as in France but they don't really have a governing strategy of their own. And until they do, it seems to me, and this is the bleak vision, the hard right will make the running. Either they will be in government as they are in the United States, or they'll be kept just out of government by unstable coalitions of liberal conservatives and the liberal left.Andrew Keen: So to quote Patrick Deneen, what is to be done is the alternative, a technocracy, the best-selling book now on the New York Times bestseller list is Ezra Klein, Derek Thompson's Abundance, which is a progressive. Technocratic manifesto for changing America. It's not very ideological. Is that really the only alternative for the left unless it falls into a Bernie Sanders-style anti-capitalism which often is rather vague and problematic?Edmund Fawcett: Well, technocracy is great, but technocrats never really get to do what they say ought to be done, particularly not in large, messy democracies like Europe and the United States. Look, it's a big question. If I had a Leninist answer to Patrick Deneen's question, what is to be done, I'd be very happy to give it. I feel as somebody on the liberal left that the first thing the liberal left needs to do is to is two things. One is to focus in exposing the intellectual kitschiness, the intellectual incoherence on the one hand of the hard right, and two, hitting back in a popular way, in a vulgar way, if you will, at the lies, misrepresentations, and false appeals that the hard-right coasts on. So that's really a kind of public relations. It's not deep strategy or technocracy. It is not a policy list. It's sharpening up the game. Of basically of democratic politics and they need to liberals on the left need to be much tougher much sharper much more vulgar much more ready to use the kinds of weapons the kinds of mockery and imaginative invention that the Trumpites use that's the first thing the second thing is to take a breath and go back and look at the great achievements of democratic liberalism of the 1950s, 60s, 70s if you will. I mean these were these produced in Europe and the United States societies that by any historical standard are not bad. They have terrible problems, terrible inequities, but by any historical standard and indeed by any comparative standard, they're not bad if you ask yourself why immigration has become such a problem in Western Europe and the United States, it's because these are hugely desirable places to live in, not just because they're rich and make a comfortable living, which is the sort of the rights attitude, because basically they're fairly safe places to live. They're fairly good places for your kids to grow up in. All of these are huge achievements, and it seems to me that the progressives, the liberals, should look back and see how much work was needed to create... The kinds of politics that underpinned that society, and see what was good, boast of what was and focus on how much work was needed.Andrew Keen: Maybe rather than talking about making America great again, it should be making America not bad. I think that's too English for the United States. I don't think that should be for a winner outside Massachusetts and Maine. That's back to front hypocritical Englishism. Let's end where we began on a personal note. Do you think one of the reasons why Trump makes so much news, there's so much bemusement about him around the world, is because most people associate America with modernity, they just take it for granted that America is the most advanced, the most modern, is the quintessential modern project. So when you have a character like Trump, who's anti-modernist, who is a reactionary, It's bewildering.Edmund Fawcett: I think it is bewildering, and I think there's a kind of bewilderment underneath, which we haven't really spoken to as it is an entirely other subject, but is lurking there. Yes, you put your absolutely right, you put your finger on it, a lot of us look to America as modernity, maybe not the society of the future, but certainly the the culture of the future, the innovations of the future. And I think one of the worrying things, which maybe feeds the neurosis of Make America Great Again, feeds the neurosis, of current American unilateralism, is a fear But modernity, talk like Hegel, has now shifted and is now to be seen in China, India and other countries of the world. And I think underlying everything, even below the stuff that we showed in the chart about changing shares of wealth. I think under that... That is much more worrisome in the United States than almost anything else. It's the sense that the United States isn't any longer the great modern world historical country. It's very troubling, but let's face it, you get have to get used to it.Andrew Keen: The other thing that's bewildering and chilling is this seeming coexistence of technological innovation, the Mark Andreessen's, the the Musk's, Elon Musk's of the world, the AI revolution, Silicon Valley, who seem mostly in alliance with Trump and Musk of course are headed out. The Doge campaign to destroy government or undermine government. Is it conceivable that modernity is by definition, you mentioned Hegel and of course lots of people imagine that history had ended in 1989 but the reverse was true. Is it possible that modernity is by-definition reactionary politically?Edmund Fawcett: A tough one. I mean on the technocracy, the technocrats of Silicon Valley, I think one of their problems is that they're brilliant, quite brilliant at making machines. I'm the machinery we're using right here. They're fantastic. They're not terribly good at. Messy human beings and messy politics. So I'm not terribly troubled by that, nor your other question about it is whether looming challenges of technology. I mean, maybe I could just end with the violinist, Fritz Kreisler, who said, I was against the telegraph, I was against the telephone, I was against television. I'm a progressive when it comes to technology. I'm always against the latest thing. I mean, I don't, there've always been new machines. I'm not terribly troubled by that. It seems to me, you know, I want you to worry about more immediate problems. If indeed AI is going to take over the world, my sense is, tell us when we get there.Andrew Keen: And finally, you were half-born in the United States or certainly from an American and British parent. You spent a lot of your life there and you still go, you follow it carefully. Is it like losing a lover or a loved one? Is it a kind of divorce in your mind with what's happening in America in terms of your own relations with America? You noted that your wife gave up her citizenship this year.Edmund Fawcett: Well, it is. And if I could talk about Natalia, my wife, she was much more American than me. Her mother was American from Philadelphia. She lived and worked in America more than I did. She did give up her American citizenship last year, partly for a feeling of, we use a long word, alienation, partly for practical reasons, not because we're anything like rich enough to pay American tax, but simply the business of keeping up with the changing tax code is very wary and troublesome. But she said, as she did it, she will always feel deeply American, and I think it's possible to say that. I mean, it's part of both of us, and I don't think...Andrew Keen: It's loseable. Well, I have to ask this question finally, finally. Maybe I always use that word and it's never final. What does it mean to feel American?Edmund Fawcett: Well, everybody's gonna have their own answer to that. I was just... What does it mean for you? I'm just reading. What it is to feel American. Can I dodge the question by saying, what is it to feel Californian? Or even what is to be Los Angelino? Where my sister-in-law and brother-in-law live. A great friend said, what it is feel Los Angeles you go over those mountains and you put down your rucksack. And I think what that means is for Europeans, America has always meant leaving the past behind.Edmund Fawcett was the Economist‘s Washington, Paris and Berlin correspondent and is a regular reviewer. His Liberalism: The Life of an Idea was published by Princeton in 2014. The second in his planned political trilogy – Conservatism: The Fight for a Tradition – was published in 2020, also by Princeton University Press. The Economist called it ‘an epic history of conservatism and the Financial Times praised Fawcett for creating a ‘rich and wide-ranging account' that demonstrates how conservatism has repeated managed to renew itself.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

- Trump's Trade Embargo Announcement (0:10) - Impact on Global Trade and BRICS (4:08) - Challenges for U.S. Retailers and Manufacturers (16:32) - China's Strategic Response and Cultural Resilience (16:49) - Geopolitical Implications and Economic Collapse (34:05) - Preparation and Survival Strategies (1:06:23) - Special Reports and Additional Resources (1:14:50) - Mike Adams' Analysis of Geopolitical Factors (1:26:57) - Trump's Strategic Priorities and Western Europe's Reaction (1:30:44) - China's Strategic Advancements and Economic Dominance (1:37:11) - China's Long-Term Strategic Goals and Military Capabilities (1:40:57) - The Petrodollar System and Its Imminent Collapse (1:48:16) - The Rise of the BRICS Nations and the BRICS Blockchain (1:57:51) - Beljanski Foundation's Research and Clinical Trials (2:03:26) - The Importance of Nutritional Milestones and Health Choices (2:23:24) - The Future of Cancer Treatment and Research (2:29:31) - The Role of Technology and Information in Health (2:43:18) For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport NaturalNews videos would not be possible without you, as always we remain passionately dedicated to our mission of educating people all over the world on the subject of natural healing remedies and personal liberty (food freedom, medical freedom, the freedom of speech, etc.). Together, we're helping create a better world, with more honest food labeling, reduced chemical contamination, the avoidance of toxic heavy metals and vastly increased scientific transparency. ▶️ Every dollar you spend at the Health Ranger Store goes toward helping us achieve important science and content goals for humanity: https://www.healthrangerstore.com/ ▶️ Sign Up For Our Newsletter: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html ▶️ Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport ▶️ Join Our Social Network: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger ▶️ Check In Stock Products at: https://PrepWithMike.com

Founder of Borderhawk.News and head of Infowars Europe, Dan Lyman stops by to break down what is happening along the southern border of the United States as close to seven million illegal aliens have illegally crossed into America under the watch, and with the assistance, of the Biden regime. With Europe dealing with a similar situation as millions of fighting-age men from Africa and the Middle East stream into Western Europe in a coordinated fashion, Dan's team discovered how George Soros and his Open Society have partnered with Mastercard and the European Union to finance the migration with more than half a billion dollars as a way of changing the cultural makeup of the countries in their path. Yet another Soros-financed color revolution is well underway, this time disguised as refugees and asylum seekers. The Octopus of Global Control Audiobook: https://amzn.to/3xu0rMm Hypocrazy Audiobook: https://amzn.to/4aogwms Website: www.Macroaggressions.io Activist Post: www.activistpost.com Sponsors: Chemical Free Body: https://www.chemicalfreebody.com Promo Code: MACRO C60 Purple Power: https://c60purplepower.com/ Promo Code: MACRO Wise Wolf Gold & Silver: www.Macroaggressions.gold LegalShield: www.DontGetPushedAround.com EMP Shield: www.EMPShield.com Promo Code: MACRO ECI Development: https://info.ecidevelopment.com/-get-to-know-us/macro-aggressions Christian Yordanov's Health Transformation Program: www.LiveLongerFormula.com Privacy Academy: https://privacyacademy.com/step/privacy-action-plan-checkout-2/?ref=5620 Brain Supreme: www.BrainSupreme.co Promo Code: MACRO Above Phone: abovephone.com/macro Promo Code: MACRO Van Man: https://vanman.shop/?ref=MACRO Promo Code: MACRO My Patriot Supply: www.PrepareWithMacroaggressions.com Activist Post: www.ActivistPost.com Natural Blaze: www.NaturalBlaze.com Link Tree: https://linktr.ee/macroaggressionspodcast Dan Lyman: Website: www.Borderhawk.News Website: www.infowars.com

The Outer Realm welcomes back Morgan Daimler Host: Michelle Desrochers Date: May 1st, 2025 Episode: 557 Discussion : Morgan returns to talk about her lates book " Paid with a Kiss: Love and Sex in Fairy Belief " . - Paid with a Kiss gives a wide-ranging look at fairies, sex, gender, and human belief through history in Western Europe, focusing primarily on Irish, UK, and French evidence. By examining mythology, folklore, literature, and anecdotes, this book answers common questions of what we know about sex and sexuality among fairies and how they interact with humans, including human-fairy relationships and offspring. Aiming to answer an array of questions on humans, fairies, and intimacy that the author has been asked over the years, Paid with a Kiss is a deep dive into nearly two millennia of folk belief. Contact for the show - theouterrealmcontact@gmail.com Rumble: TheOuterRealm X - MicheleDerocher Website: www.theouterrealmradio.com Please support us by Liking, Subscribing, Sharing and Commenting. Thank you all !!! About Our Guest: -Morgan Daimler teaches classes on Irish myth and magical practices, fairies, and related subjects in the United States and internationally. She has been published in multiple anthologies as well as in Witches and Pagans magazine and Pagan Dawn magazine, and she is one of the world's foremost experts on all things Fairy. Besides the titles available through Moon Books Morgan has a high fantasy novel 'Into Shadow' through Cosmic Egg and has self-published books of Old and Middle Irish language translations, and has an urban fantasy/paranormal romance series called Between the Worlds. Morgan has also presented papers on fairies and on fairies and witches at several university conferences. The Book: AMAZON https://a.co/d/aBlQaFR If you enjoy the content on the channel, please support us by subscribing: Thank you All A formal disclosure: The opinions and information presented or expressed by guests on The Outer Realm Radio and Beyond The Outer Realm are not necessarily those of the TOR, BTOR Hosts, Sponsors, or the United Public Radio Network and its producers. Although the content may be interesting, it is deemed "For Entertainment Purposes" . We are always be respectful and courteous to all involved. Thank you, we appreciate you all

Science in Action this week comes from the European Geophysical Union general assembly, an annual get-together of scientists to discuss current projects, working hypotheses and potential findings. Nearly 18,000 in attendance this year, there is much to learn.AMOC – the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation - brings warmth to the north and cooler waters to the south in huge volumes. Climate modellers have expressed concern for its collapse (and subsequent weather chaos) as temperatures rise more generally, but others have said it is more resilient, a will-it-won't-it discussion Science in Action has covered before. But just this week, Stefan Rhamstorf has announced that extending the models past 2100 can show a different picture. The odds, he tells science in action, have shifted from 10% to more like 50/50 if the Paris climate target is missed. Has such climate change ever occurred before? And if so, what drove it? Hana Jurikova and colleagues have been using novel techniques to detect a link between atmospheric CO2 levels and rapid climate change in the geological past, and talks about how boron records in ancient brachiopods might give us a clue.What of the 6.2 magnitude earthquake near Istanbul last week? Could it have been worse? Will the next one be the big one? Expert Patricia Martínez-Garzón of GFZ in Germany doesn't quite allay the fears.Could more lives be saved from landslides and flash floods if we could set up a warning system? Stefania Ursica hopes so, and has looked to animal behaviour to design a programme to scan networks of seismic monitoring stations' output for the faint signals. Encoding different hunting and communication strategies – from nomadic whales to humming birds and bats, her new algorithm might be just the thing, though prediction will always be a different problem.Presenter: Roland Pease Producer: Alex Mansfield with Sophie Ormiston Production Coordinator: Josie Hardy(Image: 3D Render of a Topographic Map of Western Europe with the clouds from January 27, 2025. Credit: FrankRamspott via Getty Images)

Show Notes: Joe O'Mahoney is a part-time professor of consulting at Cardiff University and  a leading authority on the growth and sale of boutiques and small consultancies. He has spent 20 years researching consultancies and interviewing hundreds of owners and senior leaders. He has developed a growth drivers model, which includes factors like leadership quality, client relationships, and market positioning. He conducts benchmark surveys and interviews with leadership teams and clients. Joe then conducts a SWOT analysis, and estimates the valuation of the firm. He helps the owner satisfy their equity goals, and pull the levers. Joe typically focuses on two to three priorities each year to drive up the firm's growth. He shares three key factors in leadership and team management that are crucial to a successful scale up. Building a Sales Team for a Boutique Consultancy Joe explains that, in the long term, building a competent sales team is crucial for a firm's valuation. This involves promoting, training, mentoring, rewarding, and recruiting sales capabilities. A culture that puts sales first should be complemented by a competent system that listens to sales calls and introduces new hires. This will help build a pipeline of capable sales people in the future. In the short term, implementing these strategies can improve marketing efforts. It is important to consider how your value proposition is translated into marketing themes and content, as well as the frequency and visibility of these posts. It is crucial to ensure that marketing efforts are effective and aligned with the company's goals.  Challenges of Scaling a Business Joe discusses the challenges of scaling a business, particularly for those with a two to 3 million revenue mark. He suggests that firms need to focus on their signature service, which is high value, high growth, and can cross-sell. Marketing algorithms reward clarity in these areas, leading to better value propositions, marketing, and themes. This clarity allows firms to build intellectual property (IP) and increase margins. Once sales, project margin, or EBITDA are reached, firms can decide on additional products to sell alongside their existing offerings, such as parallel products, cross-selling services, or follow-on services. By building a logical sequence of events, firms can achieve high-quality revenue. The Importance of IP in Scaling Consulting Firms Joe shares an example of a firm that focused on a manual approach to cloud consultancy. However, when breaking down their service lines by revenue, the company realized that they should change their focus. In terms of branding and content, Joe explains that buyers are interested in the past growth, future growth, and margin of the firm, but they also want a marketing machine that generates clients, and an architecture of sales that generates high-quality leads.  Joe explains that IP is a top priority for buyers, including the quality of the leadership team. This includes delivery IP, marketing IP, thought leadership, website design, and content. LinkedIn is an interesting example, as due diligence is starting to reveal its influence on a firm's success. Valuation and Growth Trajectory Valuation is a crucial factor for buyers and private equity, as they are interested in the future value of the firm. A healthy growth trajectory is essential, and a machine that can push up the multiple is preferred. Joe explains that it is often better to focus on building the architecture that will allow you to improve your multiple, rather than focusing on increasing your profit margin. This can be achieved by implementing a PSA system, CRM system, training people, and building out IP. However, it is difficult to drive up the multiple quickly, as everyone is talking about margin all the time. It is important for buyers to consider the firm's potential for growth and profitability before making a decision. Joe talks about the EBITDA and how it should be approached. The conversation turns to the treatment of owners' compensation and how it is recalculated during the sale process. He explains that if a board member is preparing a company for sale, Joe's  fee is taken out, and if a founder is paying themselves in dividends to improve profits, the EBITDA is adjusted accordingly.  Employees and Recruiting Talent for Boutique Consulting Firms Joe discusses the importance of recruiting and training employees to provide better value to clients and charge more. He suggests that consultancies operate in two markets: the market for clients and the market for employees. Boutique consultancies often struggle to recruit decent consultants due to the lack of brand recognition and value proposition. To attract the right people, consultancies need to have a clear value proposition for both clients and employees. This includes a clear cultural side of the company, clear values, and clear due diligence rules. The architecture behind this includes competencies, promotions, training, and mentoring. Buyers of Consulting Firms The typical buyers of consulting firms are typically strategic and industry buyers, who have a gap in their offerings. Private equity has become more involved in the market, accounting for 55% of purchases of consulting firms, including private equity-backed strategic buyers. This shift has led to a growing number of non-consultancies seeking to develop consultancy arms, accounting for about 15% of purchases. The Boutique Leaders Club for Consultants Joe shares information about  IP aspects he provides to his clients. He runs the Boutique Leaders club, a group of about 40 owners of consultancies above the 5 million revenue mark. Joe gives them access to 250 bits of IP. This includes competency frameworks, succession plans, and training on business development. The group can also conduct benchmarking surveys twice a year, tracking progress and creating plans for the future. The Boutique Leaders club also offers training materials, both online and face-to-face, to help firms prepare for the selling process, such as finding the best corporate advisor, selecting the right lawyers, and preparing for the selling process. Joe's Engagement Model with Consulting Firms Joe also shares his engagement model with consulting firms, which includes three ways: Board Advisory, as part of his leaders club, and one-off projects. He typically works with clients on a monthly basis, with a focus on value proposition, business development, and marketing. His clients are mostly UK-based, with three US clients and some in Western Europe. He left corporate consulting due to his dislike of managing people, and he is currently the bottleneck to his own firm. He has worked with some good ex-CEOs but struggles with quality of revenues. Bachman asks O'Mahoney to share his website and LinkedIn profile, and he appreciates the opportunity to discuss his experiences and insights on the industry. Timestamps: 01:59: Joe O'Mahoney's Consulting Services  03:48: Diagnostic Process and Growth Drivers Model  05:35: Improving Performance and Leadership Development  09:37: Building a Sales Architecture and CRM Systems 16:36: Intellectual Property and Digital Marketing  28:20: Recruiting and Developing People 34:45: Typical Buyers and Market Trends  37:46: Joe O'Mahoney's IP and Engagement Model  Links: Website: https://joeomahoney.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/joeomahoney/?originalSubdomain=uk Unleashed is produced by Umbrex, which has a mission of connecting independent management consultants with one another, creating opportunities for members to meet, build relationships, and share lessons learned. Learn more at www.umbrex.com.    

Ukrainians have resisted Russia's aggression for years. Since the full-scale invasion of their country in 2022, Ukrainian women in particular have taken on important roles on the frontlines, in civil society, and at home. Gražina Bielousova's research examines how Ukrainian leftist feminists advocate for their causes at home and abroad, facing distinct challenges as they attempt to defend their country. The Ukrainian case is also distinct from Latvia and Lithuania, whose organizing takes on different shapes for the same cause. Bielousova joins Ben Gardner-Gill to explain these interactions and discuss the ongoing process of decolonization in Baltic Studies.Transcript Ben Gardner-Gill: Hello, and welcome to Baltic Ways. I'm your co-host, Ben Gardner-Gill. Today we're talking with Gražina Belousova. Gražina is a feminist scholar of race, religion, and gender in post-Soviet Europe. She earned her PhD from Duke University in 2022. Currently, she is a postdoctoral scholar at Vilnius University's Institute of International Relations and Political Science and a researcher at Vytautas Magnus University.Her current research project focuses on leftist feminisms in East Europe in light of Russia's war against Ukraine, which will culminate in her first book, What's Left of Feminism in East Europe.Gražina, welcome to Baltic Ways.Gražina Belousova: Thank you so much for having me, Ben.BGG: So let's kick off by just hearing a little bit more about your background. I know you finished your PhD pretty recently. Could you tell us a little bit more about how you got into academia, sort of your research interests, and what you're working on at the moment?GB: Right. Yes, I just defended my PhD in 2022. It's hard to believe that it's been nearly three years now. In my PhD, I focused on historical matters. My PhD was in religion and cultural anthropology. And one of the things that I found missing when I was trying to theorize the part of the world that I call home and that most of the world calls Eastern Europe—I realized that I was lacking a solid theory that would bridge economics, anthropology, and religious studies.I wanted to understand how religious difference, especially perceived religious difference, played a role in creating the space that we call Eastern Europe today. And that took me to 18th and 19th century travel writings by Western travelers, oftentimes who were on an official mission, to the edges or to the depths of the Russian Empire.So I've read a lot of ambassadors' letters. I've read a lot of dispatches from St. Petersburg and Moscow, trying to understand how Westerners thought about that religious difference and how that thinking structured their understanding of what this place was and why it was different. What I tried to argue is actually that perceived religious difference was at the root of thinking of Eastern Europe as something different.Now, when I chose to embark on that topic, I had to put another topic aside, which was the question of very contemporary matters, the question of leftist political thought and feminism. At that point, it felt to me more pertinent to write the kind of theory that I felt was missing. When I was given the opportunity to pursue a postdoctoral position at Vilnius University Institute of International Relations and Political Science, I pitched this idea to them.And we very quickly pulled together the application. And the next thing I knew, I was embarking on a project on leftist feminisms in Eastern Europe in light of the war in Ukraine. So, the path was windy, but here I am today, knees and elbows deep, in the project on leftist feminism.BGG: Wonderful. I mean, a windy path is going to be familiar to so many people listening.So, no surprise and no surprise as well that the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine has really impacted your work and your life as it has for many of us. So tell us a little bit more about that.Over the last three years, we've been watching and seeing the horrors in Ukraine. From your perspective, from your academic work, what are some of the main things that you're looking at?GB: One of the things that I'm particularly interested in is the way that groups that are on the edges of society, on the margins of society, such as leftists, such as feminists, and especially leftist feminists—when the two come together and try to articulate their social and political vision and explain to themselves and to their fellow compatriots and oftentimes foreign donors, in my case, also Western leftist feminists, their relevance, how they're trying to articulate their position.War has a penchant for heightening nationalist tendencies. And this is not some kind of particular Eastern European pathology. War anywhere is going to produce these results. That is normal. People defend themselves and articulate themselves on the basis on which they're being attacked, on the basis on which they're being bombed.So this is what we are seeing in Ukraine. Leftism in Eastern Europe, because of the Soviet past, is often associated with Soviet nostalgia. Feminism, on the other hand, is oftentimes seen as something antithetical to national identity, something that is imported from the West, and something that either has no relevance or can be dangerous, especially when questions of national unity, questions of national defense come about.That is one of the reasons why I embarked on this journey, and this is one of the reasons why Ukraine had to be part of this picture. Because while the other countries that I'm looking at—Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, and Moldova—experience the threat of invasion, Ukraine is under attack.And one of the things that I'm finding is that Ukrainian leftist feminists are incredibly resourceful and incredibly gifted at articulating their relevance.One of the things that I'm going to say that stems from that understanding of leftist feminism that's erroneous, but that's pervasive, is that Ukrainian leftist feminists do not debate the legitimacy of the Ukrainian state. What is in question is the way things are happening under the conditions of war.The questions of most vulnerable people—so questions of what happens with people with disabilities, questions of what happens to single mothers, questions of what happens to the elderly people who are maybe unable to evacuate, questions of what happens to the working class people—all of these things are at the forefront of their minds. They're trying to be the advocates of their pleas to the larger society, while at the same time trying to articulate Ukraine's right to self-defense to Western leftist feminists.BGG: So they have both this tension, maybe tension is the wrong word, tell me if it isn't, but they have this tension internally where they're trying to advocate for what they see as justice or what is right with a domestic audience who, understandably, may be more frequently focused on what's happening at the front lines.And then there's also this international question, the foreign audience for these Ukrainian leftist feminists, who have a very different perspective on the Russia-Ukraine conflict. And I specifically use that verbiage instead of Russia's invasion of Ukraine because they're going to think about it very differently.So let's split those out a little bit, and I want to start with the domestic. You talked about the advocacy of these leftist feminists for the most marginalized groups in society, for those who are most vulnerable.In your view, where have they been most successful, perhaps? Where have they seen actual progress happen from their advocacy?GB: One of the things that immediately comes to mind, and many of my interlocutors were directly involved with, is the nurses' movement–the unionization and self-organization of the nurses.There is a movement called Be Like Nina, referring to one of the nurses seen as a pioneer of resisting exploitation. And, of course, under the conditions of war, the labor of nurses is incredibly valuable and needed, but not always appropriately compensated. This is what we can call essential labor, especially when we talk about the front lines, where people are wounded.Many of them are wounded very badly on a daily basis. However, there are other things that are happening in the background as well. While a lot of the resources are pulled to the front, there are people who are experiencing regular daily struggles with their health. And the nurses are being stretched very thin.And this was something that was really amazing to me. This was really one of the very few instances where I saw academics who are leftist feminists actually touching the ground with their ideas: where they got involved with helping the nurses organize, but not taking the center stage, where they acted as support, as a resource, but not overtaking the movement, rather creating the conditions under which nurses themselves could articulate what it was that they needed, what their goals were.And that was incredibly impressive to me because healthcare is severely underfunded across the whole region, and to achieve such tangible goals as wage increases and regulations that empower nurses to do their job was truly impressive. With every conversation with a woman—because I specifically talk only to women—I just felt sheer amazement, because this is so contrary to so many imaginations of what civil society, self-organization, or networks are like in Eastern Europe.This is so contrary to what some have called ‘uncivil' society. What is happening is really self-organization and civil society at its best, organized by women who are oftentimes stretched very thin, not just at work, but also at home, women whose husbands are potentially on the front lines.So to me, I really cannot think of anything else that, in terms of real life impact and in terms of transforming people's lives, has been grander (I'm going to go for that word) than this.BGG: That's remarkable, and thank you for bringing that. I had very little idea of this progress and this happening.So you use the term civil society, which I think is quite apt, and Western conceptions of civil society in the region that we call Eastern Europe can be highly misguided. Let's just put it like that. I think back to a webinar that the Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies (AABS) hosted on Ukrainian civil society, democratization, responses to the war, and we have this comparative Ukrainian and Baltic perspective, where we looked at how Ukrainian civil society was responding.We looked at how Baltic civil society was responding, and you're doing something similar in your research here. You're looking at Latvia and Lithuania as two of the other case studies, in addition to Poland, Moldova, and, of course, Ukraine. One thing that I think we can all observe just from watching the news, let alone being in the countries as well, is that civil society across the region has had this really robust response in the last few years.So could you speak a little bit more to that in the comparative cases outside of Ukraine that you're looking at in your research, especially Latvia and Lithuania?GB: For sure. I think that in order to theorize civil society and the region in general, we need better theory than has been used often to talk about civil society at large.Here, for example, I'm thinking about Emily Channel Justice and her work and the way that she articulates the notion of self-organization. The way that she thinks about Ukraine, especially in the context of Maidan. The way that it left a self-organization, but that can be applied also to any form of civil society, regardless of ideology, is really a network of decentralized, self-organized people's groups.If you were to look for some kind of central organizing pattern, or some kind of centralized way of doing things, most likely you're not going to find it because it's based on personal network, connections, and localized issues. And I think that's definitely something that I'm seeing in Ukraine.One of the things that I'm seeing in Lithuania and Latvia is that it's going to differ slightly because there are going to be more central organizing figures. If we talk about organizing support for Ukraine, one of the things that we're going to see is that people are going to point to nationwide initiatives.Right now in Lithuania, there is an initiative called Radarum, which is a play on words, on radar and on darom, which is a Lithuanian word for let's do it. And it's a nationwide initiative to collect funds to purchase drones and anti-drone equipment for Ukraine. And there are particular faces that we associate with this initiative.National television is running ads for it. So there's a little bit more of a centralized sense to it. But once again, I would say that this is the mainstream way of organizing civil society, which, of course, with Westernization, has taken on some of the patterns that are similar to the West.If we look towards the left, we're going to see very much that it is self-organized, small groups of people who take different initiatives, such as raising funds for medical care, such as raising funds for queer people in Ukraine. So the more mainstream we go, the more patterns that are akin to those that we see in the West we're going to see.That is also going to be true in Latvia. The further left we go, the more organic, grassroots, self-organized cells of people we're going to find who participate in smaller, less visible initiatives. So that's probably the best way that I can explain the difference.BGG: Got it. We see this distinction of centralization and decentralization.One could consider these different types of movements organic in their own ways, but different in different ways. When one thinks of leftist organizing, which has a long and rich history, organic is sort of one of the key words.It's perpetual, and these society-wide initiatives, like what's currently going on in Lithuania, that we've seen across other countries over the last few years, are maybe a little bit less frequent and less common. So there's an important distinction there.So I want to pivot to the international dimension of how the Ukrainian leftist feminists are talking, especially with Western counterparts. And by Western, we mean Western Europe. We mean American and Canadian. We mean Western, as in not Eastern Europe. So could you talk a little bit about the challenges they're facing there?I think I alluded to it earlier. You alluded to it earlier, but could you dive a little bit more into that discourse, that dialogue between the Ukrainians and their counterparts?GB: This is the main point of contention. What does it mean to be leftist? How much does local experience shape being leftist?What is the relationship of the left to the national question? And I think this is where we are seeing the real tension. Underlying this tension, of course, is the question of Russia. Let me try to unpack this. And I'm going to start from the other end than I listed, which is with the question of Russia.Eastern European in general, and Ukrainian in particular, leftist feminists have a very different understanding as to what Russia is in terms of geopolitics than the Western counterparts are going to have. This stems from very different histories. Western leftism—especially the new wave of leftism that arose in the sixties and the seventies—in many ways has redefined itself not just through the questions of class, which I would argue were lost to some extent. They lost their centrality.And they redefined themselves through the anti-colonial, anti-racist struggle. And that struggle was particularly important because after the fall of the formal colonial system, the colonial patterns of economic exploitation, of social exploitation, of brain drain still very much persisted. And naming that and defining themselves against Western neoimperialism or neocolonialism in the Global South was one of the most defining features of the Left, both in the Global South and in the West. Now, Russia at that time had positioned itself as the ally of the colonized countries. And some of it was pure show, and some of it was actual money, resources, and help that were sent, for example, to Angola. And that made a real difference. Whether that was genuine concern for the colonized people or whether that was an ideological tool is a matter of debate.Whatever it was, it had a profound impact on the way that Western leftists relate to Russia. They continue to see Russia out of that tradition, in many ways, as an ally against Western capitalism and imperialism. Their empire, against which they define themselves, continues to be in the West, and oftentimes is seen as centered on the United States.The empire against which we define ourselves in Eastern Europe is Russia, because Russia was the colonizing power in a very real sense in the region. It was our empire that subjugated us. It was the colonial power that engaged in just about every single practice in which any colonial power engages in the region.For us, if we think outside of ourselves, Russia continues to be the colonial power in the way that it relates to Central Asia, in the way that it relates to the indigenous people of Siberia, in the way that it continues to conduct business. So both the left in the West and the left in the East continue to define themselves against the empire, but disagree on who the empire is.The fundamental difference is the question of Russia. Because of the way that Western leftists, and particularly Western leftist feminists, have been taught to see the world, the way that they have been habituated to see the world, they're unable to see Russia as an aggressor. They're unable to change their narrative about how NATO might act.And of course, the criticisms of continued Western abuses of power, especially when they center on the United States—such as Afghanistan or such as Iraq, but also here in the European context, intra-European context, Serbia is another context in which that comes up—are highly debatable questions, but they're seen a certain way. They're understood in a certain way by Western leftists. And because of Russia's criticism of the West, Western leftists see it as a natural ally, or at least as an equally guilty party.BGG: That's a really great explanation. I think the way that you've laid that out makes a lot of sense.It also harkens back to where I want to bring this, which is the debate that has been going on in Baltic studies and other academic fields, especially those focusing on the region, about thinking about Baltic history in particular as a colonial history and thinking about what it means to decolonize Baltic studies as a field, to decolonize our academic thinking. There have been a lot of discussions.I know that we were in the same room at the AABS panel at Yale last year on that fantastic panel about decolonization. Where do you think this leads with regard to your research specifically? There's already this trend in this field. I get the sense that you are an advocate and moving forward in land seeking for the field as a whole to move in that direction.What do you think the next steps are? What paths do you think could be taken? What do people need to be thinking about that they may not already be thinking about?GB: Well, I think for me, the key question when we are talking about Baltic studies and decolonization is what is it that we talk about when we talk about decolonizing Baltic studies or Baltic countries?Because I think sometimes we're talking about four different things. We are talking about the question of colonialism and coloniality. That's one. We are talking about imperialism, Russian imperialism, and Russian imperiality. We are talking about Russification and what it means to de-Russify. And we are also talking about Sovietization and what it means to de-Sovietize.And I would argue that while these four concepts are very much interrelated, they have very different agendas. So, I think it's a question of definitions. How do we define what our agenda is? Which of the four do we have in mind when we talk about decolonizing Baltic countries, Baltic studies, or anything else?And I would say that each of the four has its place and is significant. But the flip side of that, especially if we stay with the question of decolonization, is the question of Western theory, practice, and scholarship as it relates to Baltic studies. Because if we go back to the early questions in the conversation of what is civil society and whether there is a civil society, Baltic countries and the region as a whole are pathologized.Because the concept of what civil society is, or is not, was based on Western understandings and Western practices. And it rendered civil society in the region invisible. In what ways does the production of scholarship and knowledge about the region continue to be based in very unequal power relationships, in such a way that it continues to pathologize the region?And these are very uncomfortable questions, because much like, you know, in the late eighteenth century when the Lithuanian Polish Commonwealth was divided between the three powers, we're facing the same question: Who is our ally? Because we have learned that Russia is definitely not, but the West is also a problematic ally.This is where I think the question of what it means to center the study of the region in the theory, in the practice, in the questions that actually originate from the ground up, are so important. And I'm not ditching all Western scholarship out the window. That would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.But I'm saying, what does it mean to balance? What does it mean to center? What does it mean to change the parameters of the conversation?BGG: Those are some weighty questions. I think they're good questions that the field is, I would say not even starting to engage with, but is engaging with, which is really excellent, but it's a long path.As anyone who is a scholar of decolonization will tell you, it doesn't happen overnight. It doesn't happen over a decade. It's sort of a continuous process. So, I think that is where we're going to have to leave it, knowing that there is so much more we could have talked about. But, Gražina, thank you so much.This has been a fascinating conversation. Thank you for joining Baltic Ways.GB: Thank you so much for having me, Ben. It's been a privilege.BGG: Thank you for listening to this episode of Baltic Ways, a co-production of the Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies and the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI). A note that the views expressed in this and every Baltic Ways episode do not necessarily reflect those of AABS or FPRI.To ensure you catch the next episode of Baltic Ways, make sure you're subscribed to your podcast feed or wherever you get your shows. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time. Get full access to FPRI Insights at fpriinsights.substack.com/subscribe

Americans, it's time to move to Europe! The American geo-strategist Jason Pack anticipated last week's advice from Simon Kuper and moved to London a few years ago during the first Trump Presidency. Pack, the host of the excellent Disorder podcast, confesses to be thrilled to have escaped MAGA America. He describes the esthetics of contemporary Washington DC as "post-apocalyptic" and criticizes what he sees as the Trump administration's hostile atmosphere, ideological purity tests, and institutional destruction. Contrasting this with Europe's ideological fluidity, Pack warns that Trump's isolationist policies are increasing global disorder by fundamentally undermining America's global leadership role with its erstwhile European allies. Five Key Takeaways* Pack left America because he found the "esthetics" of working in policy and media spaces increasingly distasteful, particularly during Trump's first administration.* He argues that European political systems allow for greater ideological fluidity, while American politics demands strict partisan loyalty.* Pack describes Washington DC as "post-apocalyptic" with institutions functioning like zombies - going through motions without accomplishing anything meaningful.* Unlike European populists who want to control institutions, Pack believes Trump's administration aims to destroy government institutions entirely.* Pack warns that America's deteriorating relationships with traditional allies is creating a "rudderless world" with increased global disorder and potential for conflict. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. Over the last few days, we've been focusing on the impressions of America, of Trump's America around the world. We had the Financial Times' controversial columnist, Simon Cooper, on the show, arguing that it's the end of the American dream. He had a piece in the FT this week, arguing that it's time to move to Europe for Americans. Not everyone agrees. We had the London-based FT writer Jemima Kelly on the show recently, also suggesting that she hasn't quite given up on America. She is, of course, a Brit living in the UK and looking at America from London. My guest today, another old friend, is Jason Pack. He is the host of the Excellent Disorder podcast. Jason's been on the shows lots of times before. He's an observer of the world's early 21st century disorder. And he is an American living in London. So I'm thrilled that Jason is back on the show. Jason, did you have a chance to look at Simon Cooper's piece? Is it time for Americans to move to Europe?Jason Pack: You've already moved. Well, he's just popularizing what I've believed for eight or 10 years already. So yeah, I looked at the piece. I really enjoyed your podcast with him. I don't think many Americans will move because most Americans are not particularly global in their outlook. And as disenchanted as they will be, their networks of family and of perspective are in America. Some elites in media and finance will move. But for me, I just found the aesthetics of America becoming distasteful when I worked in D.C. during the first Trump administration. And that's why I pursued a European citizenship.Andrew Keen: Jason, it's interesting that you choose the word aesthetics. Two thoughts on that. Firstly, America has never been distinguished for its aesthetics. People never came to America for aesthetics. It's never been a particularly beautiful country, a very dynamic place, a very powerful place. So why do you choose that word aesthetic?Jason Pack: Because for most upper middle class Americans, life under Trump, particularly if they're white and heterosexual, will not change tremendously. But the aesthetics of working in the policy space or in the media will change. Having to deal with all the BS that we hear when we wake up and turn on the TV in the morning, having to interact with Republican nutcase friends who say, oh, the fat is being trimmed by the doge and don't worry about all those people who've been being laid off. The aesthetics of it are ugly and mean. And I have found among some Republican colleagues and friends of mine that they love the vileness of this dog-eat-dog aesthetic.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's an interesting way of putting it. And I understand exactly what you're saying. I'm less concerned with the aesthetics as with the reality. And my sense in some ways of what's happening is that the Trump people are obsessed with what you call aesthetics. They want to appear mean. I'm not actually sure that they're quite as mean as they'd like to think they are.Jason Pack: Oh, they're pretty mean. I mean, people are running around the NIH offices, according to colleagues of mine. And if you're out to the bathroom and your card is inserted in your computer, they go in, they steal the data from your computer.Andrew Keen: Actually, I take your point. What I meant more by that is that whereas most traditional authoritarian regimes hide their crimes against migrants. They deny wrongdoing. My sense of the Trump regime, or certainly a lot of the people involved in this Trump administration, is that they actually exaggerate it because it gives them pleasure and it somehow benefits their brand. I'm not convinced that they're quite as bad as they'd like to think.Jason Pack: Oh, I agree with that. They make Schadenfreude a principle. They want to showcase that they enjoy other people's pain. It's a bizarre psychological thing. Trump, for example, wanted to show his virility and his meanness, probably because he's an inner coward and he's not that feral. But we digress in terms of the aesthetics of the individual American wanting to leave. I experienced American government, like the State Department, and then, the bureaucracy of the policy space, say think tanks, or even the government relations trade space, say working for oil companies and government relations, as already authoritarian and ass-kissing in America, and the aesthetics of those industries I have always preferred in Europe, and that's only diverging.Andrew Keen: One of the things that always struck me about Washington, D.C. It was always uncomfortable as an imperial city. It always has been since the end of the Second World War, with America dominating the world as being one of two or perhaps the only super power in the world. But Washington, DC seems to always have been uncomfortable wearing its imperial mantle cloak in comparison, I think, to cities like London or Paris. I wonder whether, I'm not sure how much time you've spent back in America since Trump came back to power. I wonder if in that sense DC is trying to catch up with London and Paris.Jason Pack: I actually was giving a briefing in Congress to staffers of the House Foreign Affairs Committee only three weeks ago, and DC seemed post-apocalyptic to me. Many of my favorite restaurants were closing. There was traffic jams at bizarre hours of the day, which I think this is because the Trump people don't know how public transport works and they just ride their cars everywhere. So, yes, it seemed very bizarre being back. You were trying to gauge the interlocutor you were speaking to, were they merely pretending to be on board with Trump's stuff, but they actually secretly think it's ridiculous, or were they true believers? And you had to assess that before you would make your comments. So there is a slide to a kind of, again, neo-authoritarian aesthetic. In my conference, it became clear that the Republican Congressional staffers thought that it was all junk and that Trump doesn't care about Libya and he doesn't understand these issues. But we needed to make lip service in how we expressed our recommendations. So, fascinatingly, various speakers said, oh, there's a transactional win. There's a way that cheaper oil can be gotten here or we could make this policy recommendation appeal to the transactional impulses of the administration. Even though everyone knew that we were speaking in a Democrat echo-chamber where the only Republicans present were anti-Trump Republicans anyway.Andrew Keen: Describe DC as post-apocalyptic. What exactly then, Jason, is the apocalypse?Jason Pack: I don't think that the Trump people who are running the show understand how government works and whether you're at state or the NIH or USAID, you're kind of under siege and you're just doing what you're supposed to do and going through the motions. I mean, there's so much of like the zombie apocalypse going on. So maybe it's more zombie apocalypse than regular apocalypse, whereby the institutions are pretending to do their work, but they know that it doesn't accomplish anything. And the Trumpian appointees are kind of pretending to kind of cancel people on DAI, but the institutions are still continuing.Andrew Keen: I'm going to vulgarize something you said earlier. You talked about Trump wanting to appear bigger than he actually is. Maybe we might call that small penis syndrome. Is that, and then that's my term, Jason, let's be clear, not yours. Maybe it's fair or not. He probably would deny it, but I don't think he'll come on this show. He's more than welcome. Is that also reflected in the people working for him? Is there a bit of a small penis syndrome going on with a lot of the Trump people? Are they small town boys coming to America, coming to D.C. And in all their raison d'état trying to smash up the world that they always envied?Jason Pack: 100%. If you look at the Tucker Carlson and the Hegset, who went to Princeton in 03, and obviously Tucker Carlsen's WASP elite background is well known, they wanted to make it conventionally and couldn't. Hegson didn't achieve the rank of lieutenant general or colonel or anything in the army. He didn't make it in finance and Vance, obviously had just a minor career in finance, they didn't make the big time except through their hate and resentment of the establishment that succeeded on merit. So, I mean, you could call that small penis syndrome. I think another thing to point out is that many of them have been selected because whether they've been accused of rape or financial crimes or just meanness, they owe the great leader their ability to be in that position. And if he would throw them overboard they're entirely exposed, so that cash patels of the world and the Hexeds of the world serve at the mercy of the great leader, because if they were thrown to the wolves, they could be devoured for their misdeeds. And I think that that makes it a place where it's all about loyalty to the boss. But maybe we could pivot to the initial topic about how I think Europe is a place where you can reinvent yourself as an individual now. Certainly in the political and ideology space, and America really hasn't been for much of my left.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's interesting. And this is how actually our conversation you're doing. You're a much better podcast host than I am, Jason. You're reminding us of the real conversation rather than getting led down one Trumpian byway or another. I did a show recently on why I still believe in the American dream. And I was interviewed by my friend, David Maschiottra, another old friend of the show. And I suggested I originally came to America to reinvent myself and that's always been the platform with which Europeans have come to America. You're suggesting that perhaps the reverse is true now.Jason Pack: I really enjoyed that episode. I thought you were a great guest and he was a natural host. But I realized how it wasn't speaking to me. Many of my European friends who work in law, finance, tech, startup, you know, they finished their degrees in Italy or in England and they moved to America. And that's where they raised venture capital and they go on the exact success trajectory that you explained and they fetishize, oh my God, when my green card is gonna come through, I'm gonna have this big party. That never resonated with me because America was never a land of opportunity for me. And it hit me in hearing your podcast that that's because what I've aspired to is to work in government slash think tank or to be a professional expert. And if you don't ally yourself with one of the major political movements, you're always branded and you can never move ahead. I'll give a few examples if you're interested in the way that my trying to be in the center has meant that I could never find a place in America.Andrew Keen: Absolutely. So you're suggesting that your quote-unquote American dream could only be realized in Europe.Jason Pack: So I moved to the Middle East to serve my country after 9/11. If Gore had been elected president, I likely would have joined the army or the Marines or something. But Bush was president and I knew I needed to do this on my own. So, you know, I lived in Beirut, then I went to Iraq. Where did you graduate from, Jason? I graduated from Williams in 2002, but I was changing my studies as soon as the 9-11 happened. I stopped my senior thesis in biology and I pivoted to doing the Middle East. I thought the Middle East was going to be the next big thing. But I didn't realize that if you wanted to do it your own way, for example, living in Syria prior to working in government, then you couldn't get those security clearances. But in the UK, that's not really a problem. If you go to Leeds or Oxford and you got sent to study Arabic in Syria, you can work for the UK government, but not in America. If your went and did that your own way, your loyalties would be questioned. You wouldn't get your security clearance. I got an internship to work at the U.S. Embassy in Muscat, where I fell afoul of my supervisors because I was someone who wanted to speak in Arabic with Omanis and, for example, go to hear prayers at the mosque and really be a part of the society. And I was told, don't do that. But aren't we here to understand about Oman? And they're like, no, it's really important to mostly socialize with people at the embassy. But my British colleagues, they were out there in Omani society, and they were, for example, really participating in stuff because the relationship between the Omanis and the Brits and the Americans is a happy one. That's just a small example, but I wanna make the kind of further point, which is that if you wanna get promoted in think tank world in America, it doesn't matter whether it's Cato or Heritage on the right or New America Foundation or Middle East Institute on the left. You have to buy in hook, line, and sinker to the party line of those institutions. And if that party line is DEI, as it was at the Middle East Institute when I was there, and you're a white heterosexual male, you're not going to get promoted. And if, for example, you want to then interact with some Zionist think tank like FDD, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, I was going to a fellowship there for work that I had done about monitoring ISIS in Libya, and they had proposed a funding line for my project, which was just technically reading jihadi Facebook posts and monitoring them. And then they did some more research on me, ironically, after we had already signed the funds. And they said, oh, we're so sorry, we are going to have to pull back on this. We are going have to pay you a kill fee. We are really, really sorry. And I came to understand why that was. And it was because I had advocated that the Iranians should be allowed to get the bomb so that they could have mutually assured destruction theory with Israel.Andrew Keen: Well, Jason, I take your point, but everyone has their own narrative when it comes to why their career didn't did or didn't take off and how they know what that doesn't happen in Europe. I'm just making a contrast. Let me just come back to my argument about America, which is it isn't necessarily as straightforward as perhaps at first it seems. I think one of the reasons why America has always been a great place for reinvention is because of the absence of memory.Jason Pack: No, but what I'm saying is Google will inspire on you, and if you're not within the ideological cadre, you cannot progress at these kind of institutions.Andrew Keen: Okay, I take your point on that, but thinking more broadly, America is a place where you can, I've done so many different things in this country from being a scholar to being an internet entrepreneur to being an expert on technology to being a critic of technology to being against podcasts, to being a podcaster. And you can get away, and I've failed in practically all of them, if not all of them, but the fact is that because people don't have memory, you can keep on doing different things and people won't say, well, how can you get away with this? Last week you were doing X. My sense, and maybe correct me if I'm wrong about London or Europe, is there is much more memory. You can't get away with perpetual reinvention in Europe as you can in the U.S. and maybe that's because of the fact that in your language, living in Europe with its memory and respect for memory is more aesthetically pleasing. So I'm not suggesting this is as simple as it might appear.Jason Pack: I agree with that last point, but I think I'm trying to bring something else out. In spheres like tech or podcasting, there isn't credentialism in America. And therefore, if you're just good at it, you don't need the credentials and you can get going. And you and other Europeans who had great merit, as you do, have benefited from that. And in Europe, you might run up against credentialism, but, oh, but you didn't work at the BBC, so you don't get the job. I'm making a different point about ideological purity within the very specific realms of, say, working for an American presidential candidate or briefing a policymaker or rising up at a think tank. I have briefed labor MPs, Lib Dem MPs and Tory MPs. And they don't ask my politics. I can go in there and get a meeting with Keir Starmer's people on Libya, and they don't care about the fact that I want him to do something slightly different. Criticized him and praised him at different times on my podcast, try having an influence with some Trump people and then say, Oh, well, you know, I really think that I can help you on this Libya policy, but I happened to run a fairly anti-Trump podcast. No, you just can't get the briefing because America is about ideological purity tests and getting your ticket punch in the government and think tank and exporting professions, and therefore it's not some place you can reinvent yourself. If you're clearly an anti-Trump Republican McCainite, you can't all of a sudden become an AOC Democrat for the purpose of one meeting. But in Europe you can, because you can be a Lib Dem like Liz Truss and then be a Tory Prime Minister. And no one cares what my position on these topics are when they ask me to brief Keir Starmer's people and that's something that I find so fantastic about Europe.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's interesting. I mean, you know this stuff better than I do. But isn't someone like Truss rooted in ideological purity? She was a Lib Dem when she was at Oxford. Yeah, but that was a long time ago. I can reverse that, Jason, and say, well, when Trump was young, he ran around with Bill and Hillary Clinton, he went to their wedding, he funded them. He never was even a Republican until 2014 or 15. So, I mean, he's an example of the very ideological fluidity that you idealize in Europe.Jason Pack: I agree with your point. I think that he's an exception there and he wouldn't have allowed it from his staffers. They now have essentially loyalty tested everything. It's not a place where if you were Democrat with ideas that would benefit the Trumpian establishment, you can be heard. I'll give an example. I like the Abraham Accords and I have a colleague who wants to help extend the Abraham Accords to Pakistan, she can only work with ideologically pure Republicans in the pitching of this idea. She can't work with someone like me because I don't have the ideological purity, even though this is a nonpartisan idea and it should be embraced if you can get the Trumpians to be interested in it. But that's not how America works and it has not been. Reagan, of course, if you said that you like taxes, and I'm someone who likes taxes and I don't believe in the Laffer curve, and neoliberalism is a sham, you couldn't be on that economic team. So there are different ideological tests. Trump was never a politician, so he's not an expert like me in the expert class where we've been litmus tested our whole careers.Andrew Keen: Interesting. Jason, yesterday I was talking to someone who was thinking of hiring me to do a speech in Europe to a business group, and we were discussing the kinds of speeches I could give, and one of the things I suggested was a defense of America, suggesting that we can believe in America and that everyone's wrong. And these people have hired me before. I've often made provocative counterintuitive arguments, there was a little bit of a silence and they said, you can't make that speech in Europe. No one will take it seriously to a business community. What's generally, I mean, you travel a lot, you talk to lots of different people. Have people really given up on the promise of America, particularly within the establishment, the business establishment, the political establishment?Jason Pack: I don't know. I think that many Europeans still think that this is a passing phase. I will comment on the fact that I do not see anti-Americanism in my daily life as a result of Trump, the way that, for example, you do see anti-Semitism as a results of Netanyahu's policy. The individual Jew is tarred by horrible things happening in Gaza, but the individual American is not tarred by the deporting and illegal detentions and sacking of people by Doge because people in Poland or London or even the Middle East understand that you're likely to not be a Trump supporter and they're not targeting you as an individual as a result of that. So I think they believe in the promise of America and they still might like to move to America. But on individual level if you want to be a political animal inside the beast of campaigns, rising up to be a David Axelrod kind of figure. America has been a place of these litmus tests. Whereas in Europe, you know, I feel that there's tremendous fluidity because in Italy they have so and so many political parties and in Germany, what's the distinction between the SPD at one moment in the CDU and the Greens and there's a tradition of coalitions that allows the individual to reinvent himself.Andrew Keen: One of the things that came up with Cooper, and he's certainly no defender of Marine Le Pen or Meloni in Italy, but he suggested that the Trump people are far to the right of Le Pen and Meloni. Would you agree with that?Jason Pack: Because they want to break down institutions, whereas Le Pen and Meloni simply want to conquer the institutions and use them. They're not full-blown, disordering neopopulists, to use the language of my disorder podcast. When Meloni is in power, she loves the Italian state and she wants it to function merely with her ideological slant. Whereas the Trumpians, they have a Bannonite wing, they don't simply wanna have a MAGA agenda, use the U.S. Government. No, they want to break the Department of Agriculture. They want to break the EPA. They simply want to destroy our institutions. And there's no European political party that wants that. Maybe on the fringe like reform, but reform probably doesn't even want that.Andrew Keen: But Jason, we've heard so much about how the Bannonites idealized Orban in Hungary. A lot of people believe that Project 2025 was cooked up in Budapest trying to model America on Orban. Is there any truth to that? I mean, are the Trump people really re-exporting Orbanism back into the United States?Jason Pack: That there is some truth, but it can be overplayed. It can go back further to Berlusconi. It's the idea that a particularly charismatic political leader can come to dominate the media landscape by either having a state media channel in the Berlusconi sense or cowing media coverage to make it more favorable, which is something that Orban has done geniusly, and then doling out contracts and using the state for patronage, say, Orban's father's construction business and all those concrete soccer stadiums. There is an attempt potentially in Trump land to, through an ideological project, cow the media and the checks and balances and have a one-party state with state media. I think it's going to be difficult for them to achieve, but Chuck Carlson and others and Bannon seem to want that.Andrew Keen: You were on Monocle recently talking about the Pope's death. J.D. Vance, of course, is someone who apparently had a last, one of the last conversations with the Pope. Pope wasn't particularly, Pope Francis wasn't particularly keen on him. Bannon and Vance are both outspoken Catholics. What's your take on the sort of this global religious movement on the part of right-wing Catholics, and how does it fit in, not only to the death of Francis, but perhaps the new Pope?Jason Pack: It's a very interesting question. I'm not a right-wing Catholic, so I'm really not in a position to...Andrew Keen: I thought you were Jason, that's why you could always come on the show.Jason Pack: I think that they don't have the theological bona fides to say that what they call Catholicism is Catholicism because obviously Jesus turned the other cheek, you know, and Jesus didn't want to punish his enemies and make poor black or Hispanic women suffer. But there is an interesting thing that has been going on since 1968, which is that there was a backlash against the student protests and free love and the condom and all the social changes that that brought about. And Catholics have been at the forefront, particularly Catholic institutions, in saying this has gone too far and we need to use religion to retake our society. And if we don't, no one will have children and we will lose out and the Muslims and Africans will rule the roost because they're having babies. And that right-wing Catholicism is caught up in the moral panic and culture wars since 1968. What I argued in the monocle interview that you referenced from earlier today is something quite different, which is that the Catholic Church has a unique kind of authority, and that that unique kind of authority can be used to stand up against Trump, Bannon, Orban, and other neopopulists in a way that, say, Mark Carney or Keir Starmer cannot, because if Mark Kearney and Keir Stormer say, you guys are not sufficiently correctly American and you're not following the American laws, blah, blah blah, the kind of Americans who support Trump are not convinced by that because they say, these are just, you know, pinko Brits and Canadians. I don't even care about Mark Kearny, but it's quite different if the next Pontiff is someone who comes not only from the school of Francis, but maybe more so is a great communicator vested in the real doctrines of the church, the Lateran Councils and Vatican too, and can say, actually this given thing that Trump has just said is not in line with the principles of Jesus. It's not inline with what the Vatican has said about, for example, migration or social equity. And I find that that is a unique opportunity because even the right-wing Catholics have to acknowledge the Pope and Christian doctrine and the ability of the Catholic hierarchy to say this is not in line with our teachings. So I think there's a very interesting opportunity right now.Andrew Keen: Perhaps that brings to mind Stalin's supposedly famous remarks to Churchill at Potsdam when they were talking about the Pope. Stalin said to Churchill, the Pope, how many divisions does he have? In other words, it's all about ideology, morality, and ultimately it doesn't really. It's the kind of thing that perhaps if some of the Trump people were as smart as Stalin, they might make the same remark.Jason Pack: That was a physical war, and the Pope didn't have divisions to sway the battles in World War II, but this is an ideological or an influence war. And the Pope, if you've just seen from media coverage over the last week, is someone who has tremendous media influence. And I do think that the new pontiff could, if he wanted to, stand up to the moral underpinnings of Trump and pull even the most right-wing Catholics away from a Trumpian analysis. Religion is supposed to be about, because Jesus didn't say punish your enemies. Don't turn the other cheek and own the libs. Jesus said something quite different than that. And it will be the opportunity of the new Catholic leader to point that out.Andrew Keen: I'm not sure if you've seen the movie Conclave, which was very prescient, made by my dear London friend, or at least produced by Tessa Ross at House Productions. But I wonder in these new conversations whether in the debates about who should the new Pope be, they'll mull over TikTok presence.Jason Pack: I hope they will. And I want to point out something that many people probably are not aware, which is that the College of Cardinals that constitutes the conclave does not have to pick one of their member to be pope. For the last six centuries, they have always chosen one of their own number, but they don't have to. So they could choose someone who has not only an ability to make great TikToks, but someone who can put forth a vision about climate change, about tax equity, for example, maybe about AI and what constitutes humanity from within the Catholic tradition, but reaching new faithful. And I think that they might actually consider we're doing this because in places like Western Europe, attendance is down, but in Eastern Europe and Latin America, it isn't. And in Africa, it's surging. So they may want to reach new millennials in Gen Z with a new message, but one which is rooted in their tradition. And I think that that would be a great counterbalance to what Trump and his ilk have done to how media coverage place things like climate change and migrants these days.Andrew Keen: Speaking of Trump and his ilk, Jason, lots of conversations here about the first cracks in his monolith. Speaking to me from London, I always look at the front page of The Telegraph, a conservative English newspaper. I refuse to give the money, so I never actually read any of the pieces. But I'm always curious as to the traditional conservative media attitude to Trump. What do not so much the Conservative Party, which seems to be in crisis in the UK, but what does Conservative media, Conservative thinkers, what's their take currently on Trump? Are you seeing a crack? Are people seeing this guy's absolutely insane and that the tariff policy is going to make all of us, everybody in the world poorer?Jason Pack: Well, Trump has always been a vote loser in the UK. So that even though Farage brags about his relationship, it isn't something that gets him more votes for reform. And whether it's Sunak or Badnak, and Badnak is the current leader of the Tory party, which is an opposition, she can't so closely associate herself with Trump because he's not popular in even right-wing British circles. However, the Tory media, like the telegraph and the spectator, they love the idea that he's owning the Libs. We talked about Schadenfreude, we talked about attacking the woke. The spectator has taken a very anti-woke turn over the last five to 10 years. And they love the ideal of pointing out the hypocrisies of the left and the effeminacy of it and all of that. And that gets them more clicks. So from a media perspective, there is a way in which the Murdoch media is always going to love the click bait, New York post bait of the Trump presidency. And that applies very much, you know, with the sun and the Daily Mail and the way that they cover media in this country.Andrew Keen: Although I was found in the U.S. That perhaps the newspaper that has been most persistently and usefully critical of Trump is the Wall Street Journal, which is owned by Murdoch.Jason Pack: Yeah, but that's a very highbrow paper, and I think that it's been very critical of the tariff policy and it said a lot of intelligent things about Trump's early missteps. It doesn't reach the same people as the New York Post or the Daily Mail do.Andrew Keen: Finally, Jason, let's go back to Disorder, your excellent podcast. You started it a couple of years ago before this new Trump madness. You were always one of the early people on this global disorder. How much more disordered can the world become? Of course, it could become more disorded in terms of war. In late April 2025, is the world more disordered than it was in April 2024, when Biden was still in power? I mean, we still have these wars in Gaza, in Ukraine, doesn't seem as if that much has changed, or am I wrong?Jason Pack: I take your point, but I'm using disorder in a particularly technical sense in a way by which I mean the inability of major powers to coordinate together for optimal solutions. So in the Biden days of last year, yes, the Ukraine and Gaza wars may be waging, but if Jake Sullivan or Blinken were smarter or more courageous, they could host a summit and work together with their French and British and Argentinian allies. Put forth some solutions. The world is more disordered today because it doesn't have a leader. It doesn't have institutions, the UN or NATO or the G7 where those solutions on things like the Ukraine war attacks could happen. And you may say, but wait, Jason, isn't Trump actually doing more leadership? He's trying to bring the Ukrainians and the Russians to the table. And I would say he isn't. They're not proposing actual solutions. They don't care about solving underlying issues. They're merely trying to get media wins. He wants the Japanese to come to Washington to have the semblance of a new trade deal, not a real trade deal. He's trying to reorder global finance in semblance, not in reality. So the ability to come to actual solutions through real coordinating mechanisms where I compromise with you is much weaker than it was last year. And on the Disorder Podcast, we explore all these domains from tax havens to cryptocurrency to cyber attacks. And I think that listeners of Keen On would really enjoy how we delve into those topics and try to see how they reflect where we're at in the global system.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's a strongly, I would strongly agree with you. I would encourage all keen on listeners to listen to Disorder and vice versa if this gets onto the Disorder podcast. What about the China issue? How structural is the tariff crisis, if that's the right word, gonna change US relations with China? Is this the new Cold War, Jason?Jason Pack: I'm not an economist, but from what I've been told by the economists I've interviewed on my podcast, it's absolutely completely game changing because whether it's an Apple iPhone or most pieces of manufactured kit that you purchase or inputs into American manufacturing, it's assembled everywhere and the connections between China and America are essential to the global economy. Work and it's not like you can all of a sudden move those supply chains. So this trade war is really a 1930s style beggar thy neighbor approach to things and that led to and deepened the great depression, right? So I am very worried. I had the sense that Trump might back off because he does seem to be very sensitive to the markets. But maybe this is such an ideological project and, you know, Andrew Ross Sorkin on CNBC was just saying, even though he's willing to back off if the T bill rate changes, he thinks that his strategy is working and that he's going to get some deals. And that terrifies me because that's not what's happening. It isn't working. And God forbid that they'll push this to its logical conclusion and cause a new recession or depression.Andrew Keen: I know you've got to run Jason. So final question, let's return to where we began with America and the changing nature of America. Your last episode of Disorder was with Corey Sharpe, who is a very, very good and one of Washington DC's, I think, smartest foreign policy analysts. She asks, what's America without allies? If this continues, what, indeed, I mean, you're happy in London, so I don't sound like you're coming back, whatever. But what will America become if indeed all these traditional allies, the UK, France, Germany, become, if not enemies, certainly just transactional relationships? What becomes of America without allies?Jason Pack: Wow, great question. I'm gonna treat this in two parts, the American cultural component and then the structural geopolitical component. I'm a proud American. Culturally, I work on Sundays. I don't take any holiday. I get angry at contractors who are not direct. I am going to be American my whole life and I want an American style work ethic and I wanna things to function and the customer to always be right. So I didn't move to Europe to get European stuff in that way, and I think America will still be great at new inventions and at hard work and at all of that stuff and will still, the NFL will still be a much better run sports league than European sports leagues. Americans are great at certain things. The problem is what if America's role in the world as having the reserve currency, coordinating the NATO allies. If that's eviscerated, we're just going to be living more and more in the global enduring disorder, as Corey Schacke points out, which is that the Europeans don't know how to lead. They can't step up because they don't have one prima inter Paris. And since the decline of the British Empire, the British haven't learned how, for example, to coordinate the Europeans for the defense of Ukraine or for making new missile technologies or dealing with the defense industry. So we're just dealing with a rudderless world. And that's very worrying because there could be major conflict. And then I just have to hope that a new American administration, it could be a Republican one, but I think it just can't be a Trumpian one, will go back to its old role of leadership. I haven't lost hope in America. I've just lost hope in this current administration.Andrew Keen: Well, I haven't lost hope in Jason Pack. He is an ally of ours at Keen On. He's the host of the Excellent Disorder podcast. Jason, it's always fun to have you on the show. So much to discuss and no doubt there will be much more over the summer, so we'll have you back on in the next month or two. Thank you so much. Keep well. Stay American in London. Thank you again.Jason Pack: It was a great pleasure. Thanks, Andrew. See you then. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Orhan Tahir is a Romani lawyer, scholar and journalist, originally from Bulgaria, who has lived in Western Europe for the past 10 years. He is currently engaged as a PhD researcher in Political Science at the Heidelberg University in Germany. Orhan's focus is on the construction of "Gypsies" as an outcast "Pariah people" in European imagination in line with the Orientalist narratives of colonial India, and the impact of this concept on modern perceptions of Roma. He is among the first scholars in Europe to examine the situation of the Roma from the perspective of "caste" - a new approach still unpopular in European academia.Orhan's LinkedInOur Romani crush is the artist and anarchist, Helios GomezSome information about enslaved African's language heritage https://wordscr.com/what-language-did-slaves-speak/https://www.nps.gov/ethnography/aah/aaheritage/sysMeaningA.htm Thank you for listening to Romanistan podcast.You can find us on Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook @romanistanpodcast, and on Twitter @romanistanpod. To support us, Join our Patreon for extra content or donate to Ko-fi.com/romanistan, and please rate, review, and subscribe. It helps us so much. Follow Jez on Instagram @jezmina.vonthiele & Paulina @romaniholistic. You can get our book Secrets of Romani Fortune Telling, online or wherever books are sold. Visit romanistanpodcast.com for events, educational resources, merch, and more. Please support our book tour fundraiser if you can. Email us at romanistanpodcast@gmail.com for inquiries. Romanistan is hosted by Jezmina Von Thiele and Paulina StevensConceived of by Paulina StevensEdited by Viktor PachasWith Music by Viktor PachasAnd Artwork by Elijah Vardo

Ukrainians have resisted Russia's aggression for years. Since the full-scale invasion of their country in 2022, Ukrainian women in particular have taken on important roles on the frontlines, in civil society, and at home. Gražina Bielousova's research examines how Ukrainian leftist feminists advocate for their causes at home and abroad, facing distinct sets of challenges as they attempt to defend their country. The Ukrainian case is also distinct in comparison to Latvia and Lithuania, whose organizing takes on different shapes for the same cause. Bielousova joins Ben Gardner-Gill to explain these interactions and discuss the ongoing process of decolonization in Baltic Studies.TranscriptBen Gardner-Gill: Hello, and welcome to Baltic Ways. I'm your co-host, Ben Gardner-Gill. Today we're talking with Gražina Belousova. Gražina is a feminist scholar of race, religion, and gender in post-Soviet Europe. She earned her PhD from Duke University in 2022. Currently, she is a postdoctoral scholar at Vilnius University's Institute of International Relations and Political Science and a researcher at Vytautas Magnus University.Her current research project focuses on leftist feminisms in East Europe in light of Russia's war against Ukraine, which will culminate in her first book, What's Left of Feminism in East Europe.Gražina, welcome to Baltic Ways.Gražina Belousova: Thank you so much for having me, Ben.BGG: So let's kick off by just hearing a little bit more about your background. I know you finished your PhD pretty recently. Could you tell us a little bit more about how you got into academia, sort of your research interests, and what you're working on at the moment?GB: Right. Yes, I just defended my PhD in 2022. It's hard to believe that it's been nearly three years now. In my PhD, I focused on historical matters. My PhD was in religion and cultural anthropology. And one of the things that I found missing when I was trying to theorize the part of the world that I call home and that most of the world calls Eastern Europe—I realized that I was lacking a solid theory that would bridge economics, anthropology, and religious studies.I wanted to understand how religious difference, especially perceived religious difference, played a role in creating the space that we call Eastern Europe today. And that took me to 18th and 19th century travel writings by Western travelers, oftentimes who were on an official mission, to the edges or to the depths of the Russian Empire.So I've read a lot of ambassadors' letters. I've read a lot of dispatches from St. Petersburg and Moscow, trying to understand how Westerners thought about that religious difference and how that thinking structured their understanding of what this place was and why it was different. What I tried to argue is actually that perceived religious difference was at the root of thinking of Eastern Europe as something different.Now, when I chose to embark on that topic, I had to put another topic aside, which was the question of very contemporary matters, the question of leftist political thought and feminism. At that point, it felt to me more pertinent to write the kind of theory that I felt was missing. When I was given the opportunity to pursue a postdoctoral position at Vilnius University Institute of International Relations and Political Science, I pitched this idea to them.And we very quickly pulled together the application. And the next thing I knew, I was embarking on a project on leftist feminisms in Eastern Europe in light of the war in Ukraine. So, the path was windy, but here I am today, knees and elbows deep, in the project on leftist feminism.BGG: Wonderful. I mean, a windy path is going to be familiar to so many people listening.So, no surprise and no surprise as well that the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine has really impacted your work and your life as it has for many of us. So tell us a little bit more about that.Over the last three years, we've been watching and seeing the horrors in Ukraine. From your perspective, from your academic work, what are some of the main things that you're looking at?GB: One of the things that I'm particularly interested in is the way that groups that are on the edges of society, on the margins of society, such as leftists, such as feminists, and especially leftist feminists—when the two come together and try to articulate their social and political vision and explain to themselves and to their fellow compatriots and oftentimes foreign donors, in my case, also Western leftist feminists, their relevance, how they're trying to articulate their position.War has a penchant for heightening nationalist tendencies. And this is not some kind of particular Eastern European pathology. War anywhere is going to produce these results. That is normal. People defend themselves and articulate themselves on the basis on which they're being attacked, on the basis on which they're being bombed.So this is what we are seeing in Ukraine. Leftism in Eastern Europe, because of the Soviet past, is often associated with Soviet nostalgia. Feminism, on the other hand, is oftentimes seen as something antithetical to national identity, something that is imported from the West, and something that either has no relevance or can be dangerous, especially when questions of national unity, questions of national defense come about.That is one of the reasons why I embarked on this journey, and this is one of the reasons why Ukraine had to be part of this picture. Because while the other countries that I'm looking at—Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, and Moldova—experience the threat of invasion, Ukraine is under attack.And one of the things that I'm finding is that Ukrainian leftist feminists are incredibly resourceful and incredibly gifted at articulating their relevance.One of the things that I'm going to say that stems from that understanding of leftist feminism that's erroneous, but that's pervasive, is that Ukrainian leftist feminists do not debate the legitimacy of the Ukrainian state. What is in question is the way things are happening under the conditions of war.The questions of most vulnerable people—so questions of what happens with people with disabilities, questions of what happens to single mothers, questions of what happens to the elderly people who are maybe unable to evacuate, questions of what happens to the working class people—all of these things are at the forefront of their minds. They're trying to be the advocates of their pleas to the larger society, while at the same time trying to articulate Ukraine's right to self-defense to Western leftist feminists.BGG: So they have both this tension, maybe tension is the wrong word, tell me if it isn't, but they have this tension internally where they're trying to advocate for what they see as justice or what is right with a domestic audience who, understandably, may be more frequently focused on what's happening at the front lines.And then there's also this international question, the foreign audience for these Ukrainian leftist feminists, who have a very different perspective on the Russia-Ukraine conflict. And I specifically use that verbiage instead of Russia's invasion of Ukraine because they're going to think about it very differently.So let's split those out a little bit, and I want to start with the domestic. You talked about the advocacy of these leftist feminists for the most marginalized groups in society, for those who are most vulnerable.In your view, where have they been most successful, perhaps? Where have they seen actual progress happen from their advocacy?GB: One of the things that immediately comes to mind, and many of my interlocutors were directly involved with, is the nurses' movement–the unionization and self-organization of the nurses.There is a movement called Be Like Nina, referring to one of the nurses seen as a pioneer of resisting exploitation. And, of course, under the conditions of war, the labor of nurses is incredibly valuable and needed, but not always appropriately compensated. This is what we can call essential labor, especially when we talk about the front lines, where people are wounded.Many of them are wounded very badly on a daily basis. However, there are other things that are happening in the background as well. While a lot of the resources are pulled to the front, there are people who are experiencing regular daily struggles with their health. And the nurses are being stretched very thin.And this was something that was really amazing to me. This was really one of the very few instances where I saw academics who are leftist feminists actually touching the ground with their ideas: where they got involved with helping the nurses organize, but not taking the center stage, where they acted as support, as a resource, but not overtaking the movement, rather creating the conditions under which nurses themselves could articulate what it was that they needed, what their goals were.And that was incredibly impressive to me because healthcare is severely underfunded across the whole region, and to achieve such tangible goals as wage increases and regulations that empower nurses to do their job was truly impressive. With every conversation with a woman—because I specifically talk only to women—I just felt sheer amazement, because this is so contrary to so many imaginations of what civil society, self-organization, or networks are like in Eastern Europe.This is so contrary to what some have called ‘uncivil' society. What is happening is really self-organization and civil society at its best, organized by women who are oftentimes stretched very thin, not just at work, but also at home, women whose husbands are potentially on the front lines.So to me, I really cannot think of anything else that, in terms of real life impact and in terms of transforming people's lives, has been grander (I'm going to go for that word) than this.BGG: That's remarkable, and thank you for bringing that. I had very little idea of this progress and this happening.So you use the term civil society, which I think is quite apt, and Western conceptions of civil society in the region that we call Eastern Europe can be highly misguided. Let's just put it like that. I think back to a webinar that the Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies (AABS) hosted on Ukrainian civil society, democratization, responses to the war, and we have this comparative Ukrainian and Baltic perspective, where we looked at how Ukrainian civil society was responding.We looked at how Baltic civil society was responding, and you're doing something similar in your research here. You're looking at Latvia and Lithuania as two of the other case studies, in addition to Poland, Moldova, and, of course, Ukraine. One thing that I think we can all observe just from watching the news, let alone being in the countries as well, is that civil society across the region has had this really robust response in the last few years.So could you speak a little bit more to that in the comparative cases outside of Ukraine that you're looking at in your research, especially Latvia and Lithuania?GB: For sure. I think that in order to theorize civil society and the region in general, we need better theory than has been used often to talk about civil society at large.Here, for example, I'm thinking about Emily Channel Justice and her work and the way that she articulates the notion of self-organization. The way that she thinks about Ukraine, especially in the context of Maidan. The way that it left a self-organization, but that can be applied also to any form of civil society, regardless of ideology, is really a network of decentralized, self-organized people's groups.If you were to look for some kind of central organizing pattern, or some kind of centralized way of doing things, most likely you're not going to find it because it's based on personal network, connections, and localized issues. And I think that's definitely something that I'm seeing in Ukraine.One of the things that I'm seeing in Lithuania and Latvia is that it's going to differ slightly because there are going to be more central organizing figures. If we talk about organizing support for Ukraine, one of the things that we're going to see is that people are going to point to nationwide initiatives.Right now in Lithuania, there is an initiative called Radarum, which is a play on words, on radar and on darom, which is a Lithuanian word for let's do it. And it's a nationwide initiative to collect funds to purchase drones and anti-drone equipment for Ukraine. And there are particular faces that we associate with this initiative.National television is running ads for it. So there's a little bit more of a centralized sense to it. But once again, I would say that this is the mainstream way of organizing civil society, which, of course, with Westernization, has taken on some of the patterns that are similar to the West.If we look towards the left, we're going to see very much that it is self-organized, small groups of people who take different initiatives, such as raising funds for medical care, such as raising funds for queer people in Ukraine. So the more mainstream we go, the more patterns that are akin to those that we see in the West we're going to see.That is also going to be true in Latvia. The further left we go, the more organic, grassroots, self-organized cells of people we're going to find who participate in smaller, less visible initiatives. So that's probably the best way that I can explain the difference.BGG: Got it. We see this distinction of centralization and decentralization.One could consider these different types of movements organic in their own ways, but different in different ways. When one thinks of leftist organizing, which has a long and rich history, organic is sort of one of the key words.It's perpetual, and these society-wide initiatives, like what's currently going on in Lithuania, that we've seen across other countries over the last few years, are maybe a little bit less frequent and less common. So there's an important distinction there.So I want to pivot to the international dimension of how the Ukrainian leftist feminists are talking, especially with Western counterparts. And by Western, we mean Western Europe. We mean American and Canadian. We mean Western, as in not Eastern Europe. So could you talk a little bit about the challenges they're facing there?I think I alluded to it earlier, and you alluded to it earlier, but could you dive a little bit more into that discourse, that dialogue between the Ukrainians and their counterparts?GB: This is the main point of contention. What does it mean to be leftist? How much does local experience shape being leftist?What is the relationship of the left to the national question? And I think this is where we are seeing the real tension. Underlying this tension, of course, is the question of Russia. Let me try to unpack this. And I'm going to start from the other end than I listed, which is with the question of Russia.Eastern European in general, and Ukrainian in particular, leftist feminists have a very different understanding as to what Russia is in terms of geopolitics than the Western counterparts are going to have. This stems from very different histories. Western leftism—especially the new wave of leftism that arose in the sixties and the seventies—in many ways has redefined itself not just through the questions of class, which I would argue were lost to some extent. They lost their centrality.And they redefined themselves through the anti-colonial, anti-racist struggle. And that struggle was particularly important because after the fall of the formal colonial system, the colonial patterns of economic exploitation, of social exploitation, of brain drain still very much persisted. And naming that and defining themselves against Western neoimperialism or neocolonialism in the Global South was one of the most defining features of the Left, both in the Global South and in the West. Now, Russia at that time had positioned itself as the ally of the colonized countries. And some of it was pure show, and some of it was actual money, resources, and help that were sent, for example, to Angola. And that made a real difference. Whether that was genuine concern for the colonized people or whether that was an ideological tool is a matter of debate.Whatever it was, it had a profound impact on the way that Western leftists relate to Russia. They continue to see Russia out of that tradition, in many ways, as an ally against Western capitalism and imperialism. Their empire, against which they define themselves, continues to be in the West, and oftentimes is seen as centered on the United States.The empire against which we define ourselves in Eastern Europe is Russia, because Russia was the colonizing power in a very real sense in the region. It was our empire that subjugated us. It was the colonial power that engaged in just about every single practice in which any colonial power engages in the region.For us, if we think outside of ourselves, Russia continues to be the colonial power in the way that it relates to Central Asia, in the way that it relates to the indigenous people of Siberia, in the way that it continues to conduct business. So both the left in the West and the left in the East continue to define themselves against the empire, but disagree on who the empire is.The fundamental difference is the question of Russia. Because of the way that Western leftists, and particularly Western leftist feminists, have been taught to see the world, the way that they have been habituated to see the world, they're unable to see Russia as an aggressor. They're unable to change their narrative about how NATO might act.And of course, the criticisms of continued Western abuses of power, especially when they center on the United States—such as Afghanistan or such as Iraq, but also here in the European context, intra-European context, Serbia is another context in which that comes up—are highly debatable questions, but they're seen a certain way. They're understood in a certain way by Western leftists. And because of Russia's criticism of the West, Western leftists see it as a natural ally, or at least as an equally guilty party.BGG: That's a really great explanation. I think the way that you've laid that out makes a lot of sense.It also harkens back to where I want to bring this, which is the debate that has been going on in Baltic studies and other academic fields, especially those focusing on the region, about thinking about Baltic history in particular as a colonial history and thinking about what it means to decolonize Baltic studies as a field, to decolonize our academic thinking. There have been a lot of discussions.I know that we were in the same room at the AABS panel at Yale last year on that fantastic panel about decolonization. Where do you think this leads with regard to your research specifically? There's already this trend in this field. I get the sense that you are an advocate and moving forward in land seeking for the field as a whole to move in that direction.What do you think the next steps are? What paths do you think could be taken? What do people need to be thinking about that they may not already be thinking about?GB: Well, I think for me, the key question when we are talking about Baltic studies and decolonization is what is it that we talk about when we talk about decolonizing Baltic studies or Baltic countries?Because I think sometimes we're talking about four different things. We are talking about the question of colonialism and coloniality. That's one. We are talking about imperialism, Russian imperialism, and Russian imperiality. We are talking about Russification and what it means to de-Russify. And we are also talking about Sovietization and what it means to de-Sovietize.And I would argue that while these four concepts are very much interrelated, they have very different agendas. So, I think it's a question of definitions. How do we define what our agenda is? Which of the four do we have in mind when we talk about decolonizing Baltic countries, Baltic studies, or anything else?And I would say that each of the four has its place and is significant. But the flip side of that, especially if we stay with the question of decolonization, is the question of Western theory, practice, and scholarship as it relates to Baltic studies. Because if we go back to the early questions in the conversation of what is civil society and whether there is a civil society, Baltic countries and the region as a whole are pathologized.Because the concept of what civil society is, or is not, was based on Western understandings and Western practices. And it rendered civil society in the region invisible. In what ways does the production of scholarship and knowledge about the region continue to be based in very unequal power relationships, in such a way that it continues to pathologize the region?And these are very uncomfortable questions, because much like, you know, in the late eighteenth century when the Lithuanian Polish Commonwealth was divided between the three powers, we're facing the same question: Who is our ally? Because we have learned that Russia is definitely not, but the West is also a problematic ally.This is where I think the question of what it means to center the study of the region in the theory, in the practice, in the questions that actually originate from the ground up, rather than are solely important. And I'm not ditching all Western scholarship out the window. That would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.But I'm saying, what does it mean to balance? What does it mean to center? What does it mean to change the parameters of the conversation?BGG: Those are some weighty questions. I think they're good questions that the field is, I would say not even starting to engage with, but is engaging with, which is really excellent, but it's a long path.As anyone who is a scholar of decolonization will tell you, it doesn't happen overnight. It doesn't happen over a decade. It's sort of a continuous process. So, I think that is where we're going to have to leave it, knowing that there is so much more we could have talked about. But, Gražina, thank you so much.This has been a fascinating conversation. Thank you for joining Baltic Ways.GB: Thank you so much for having me, Ben. It's been a privilege.To ensure you catch the next episode of Baltic Ways, make sure you're subscribed to your podcast feed or wherever you get your shows. Thanks so much, and we'll see you next time.(Image: Facebook | Феміністична майстерня)Baltic Ways is a podcast from the Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies, produced in partnership with the Baltic Initiative at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of AABS or FPRI. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fpribalticinitiative.substack.com

Today we're getting into part one of a four-part series on why Western society is falling apart. Yes, it's collapsing—and if you live in the U.S. or Western Europe, that means you. I talked about this on a live stream earlier this year, but this topic is too important not to be on the official record, which is this show right here. If this is the main place you hear from me, you're in the right spot. Let's get into it. Show Notes: [03:52]#1 Cultural and social fragmentation.  [09:34]#2 The breakdown of the family structure.   [17:51]#3 The middle class is disappearing.  [23:05]Recap Episodes Mentioned: 3143: There Will Be No "Middle Class" [Part 1 of 4] Next Steps: ---

We are now only days away from the highly anticipated canonization of the first Millennial saint, Blessed Carlo Acutis, on April 27. Courtney Mares, Rome Correspondent for Catholic News Agency, joins us from the Eternal City. Across the US and even in secularizing Western Europe, this Lent had witnessed increases in conversions. We talk to Register correspondent Matt McDonald and Jane Tomaszewski, one of the newest members entering the Church.

In this episode, Matt and Chris pour themselves a stiff drink and slip into the fever‑dream crossover of Jordan Peterson and Michael Shellenberger, a conversation that opens with the claim that Western Europe is now the single greatest threat to free speech; yes, croissants and GDPR apparently out‑authoritarian China and Russia. According to Shellenberger, we can now rest safe as free speech has been restored and “America Is Back!” thanks to God-Emperor Trump and the living avatar of honest utterance, Elon 'Horus' Musk.Our hosts marvel as Shellenberger insists USAID is a rogue soft‑power leviathan that somehow staged January 6th, sabotaged the 2020 election, and deserves to be nuked from orbit... although he can't quite prove any of that YET​. Alongside the conspiratorial drivel there is also a heavy serving of Peterson's obscurantist mythicism and dinner‑party anthropology as he explains how Hungary is a model democracy, the US nation beset by parasites, and that this is all inevitably connected to how people are not paying enough attention to Jesus​.But that is not all! You will also learn about Manly Men vs. Gentlemen, Musk's “move fast and break government” ethos, and the revelation that free speech is not a nice‑to‑have but a must‑have—unless you are a lawyer, journalist, or student on the wrong side of the Trump administration. So buckle up for an hour of dystopian déjà vu, as two self‑styled rebel intellectuals morph into state propagandists, cheerleading every single action of Trump and Musk while lecturing the rest of us on free thought.Sources“Trump, Musk, Kennedy: The Dawn of Transparency,” The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast, Ep. 526.Shellenberger's Substack, including gems like "Why Trump's Victory Is, For Millions Of Us, Cathartic" and "Both USAID And The CIA Were Behind The Impeachment Of Trump in 2019"Taibbi & Shellenberger testify to the House Judiciary Committee to help uncover "the Biden-Harris Administration's unconstitutional censorship campaign"Singal-Minded articles detailing Shellenberger's sloppy journalism and conspiracy theories

We reach for it twice a day — without thinking about the decades of research and engineering that went into that squeezable tube of minty goo. Zachary Crockett extracts the last bit. SOURCES:Stephan Habif, chief technology officer at Colgate-Palmolive.Sergio Leite, global head of Oral Care R&D at Colgate-Palmolive.Peter Miskell, professor of international business history at the University of Reading. EXTRAS:"History of Toothpaste" (Delta Dental of Arkansas, 2019)."Cavity Protection or Cosmetic Perfection? Innovation and Marketing of Toothpaste Brands in the United States and Western Europe, 1955–1985," by Peter Miskell (Business History Review, 2011). RESOURCES:"9,000-Year-Old Dentistry," by WIRED Staff (WIRED, 2006).