Podcasts about Islam Karimov

Few Americans have been as explicit in their warnings about Donald Trump than the St. Louis based writer Sarah Kendzior. Her latest book, The Last American Road Trip, is a memoir chronicling Kendzior's journey down Route 66 to show her children America before it is destroyed. Borrowing from her research of post Soviet Central Asia, Kendzior argues that Trump is establishing a kleptocratic “mafia state” designed to fleece the country of its valuables. This is the third time that Kendzior has been on the show and I have to admit I've always been slightly skeptical of her apocalyptic take on Trump. But given the damage that the new administration is inflicting on America, I have to admit that many of Kendzior's warnings now appear to be uncannily prescient. As she warns, it's Springtime in America. And things are about to get much much hotter. FIVE TAKEAWAYS* Kendzior views Trump's administration as a "mafia state" or kleptocracy focused on stripping America for parts rather than traditional fascism, comparing it to post-Soviet oligarchic systems she studied as an academic.* She believes American institutions have failed to prevent authoritarianism, criticizing both the Biden administration and other institutional leaders for not taking sufficient preventative action during Trump's first term.* Despite her bleak analysis, Kendzior finds hope in ordinary Americans and their capacity for mutual care and resistance, even as she sees formal leadership failing.* Kendzior's new book The Last American Road Trip follows her journey to show her children America before potential collapse, using Route 66 as a lens to examine American decay and resilience.* As an independent voice, she describes being targeted through both publishing obstacles and personal threats, yet remains committed to staying in her community and documenting what's happening. FULL TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello everybody, it is April the 18th, 2025, a Friday. I'm thrilled today that we have one of my favorite guests back on the show. I call her the Cassandra of St. Louis, Sarah Kendzior. Many of you know her from her first book, which was a huge success. All her books have done very well. The View from Flyover Country. She was warning us about Trump and Trumpism and MAGA. She was first on our show in 2020. Talking about media in the age of Trump. She had another book out then, Hiding in Plain Sight, The Invention of Donald Trump and the Erosion of America. Then in 2022, she came back on the show to talk about how a culture of conspiracy is keeping America simultaneously complacent and paranoid that the book was called or is called, They Knew. Another big success. And now Sarah has a new book out. It's called The Last American Road Trip. It's a beautifully written book, a kind of memoir, but a political one, of course, which one would expect from Sarah Kendzior. And I'm thrilled, as I said, that the Cassandra of St. Louis is joining us from St. Louis. Sarah, congratulations on the new book.Sarah Kendzior: Oh, thank you. And thank you for having me back on.Andrew Keen: Well, it's an honor. So these four books, how does the last American road trip in terms of the narrative of your previous three hits, how does it fit in? Why did you write it?Sarah Kendzior: Well, this book kind of pivots off the epilog of hiding in plain sight. And that was a book about political corruption in the United States and the rise of Trump. But in the epilogue, I describe how I was trying as a mom to show my kids America in the case that it ended due to both political turmoil and corruption and also climate change. I wanted them to see things themselves. So I was driving them around the country to national parks, historic sites, et cetera. And so many people responded so passionately to that little section, especially parents really struggling on how to raise children in this America that I ended up writing a book that covers 2016 to 2024 and my attempts to show my children everything I could in the time that we had. And as this happens, my children went from relatively young kids to teenagers, my daughter's almost an adult. And so it kind of captures America during this time period. It's also just a travelog, a road trip book, a memoir. It's a lot of things at once.Andrew Keen: Yeah, got great review from Ms. magazine comparing you with the great road writers, Kerouac, of course, and Steinbeck, but Kerouak and Steinback, certainly Kerouack was very much of a solitary male. Is there a female quality to this book? As you say, it's a book as much about your kids and the promise of America as it is about yourself.Sarah Kendzior: Yeah, I think there is in that, you know, I have a section actually about the doomed female road trip where it's, you know, Thelma and Louise or Janet Bates and Psycho or even songs about, you know, being on the road and on the run that are written by women, you know, like Merle Haggard's I'm a Lonesome Fugitive, had to be sung by men to convey that quality. And there aren't a lot of, you know, mom on the Road with her husband and kids kind of books. That said, I think of it as a family book, a parenting book. I certainly think men would like it just as much as women would, and people without kids would like just as people with kids, although it does seem to strike a special resonance with families struggling with a lot of the same issues that I do.Andrew Keen: It's all about the allure of historic Route 66. I've been on that. Anyone who's driven across the country has you. You explain that it's a compilation of four long trips across Route 66 in 1998, 2007, 2017, and 2023. That's almost 40 years, Sarah. Sorry, 30. Getting away my age there, Andrew. My math isn't very good. I mean, how has Route 66 and of course, America changed in that period? I know that's a rather leading question.Sarah Kendzior: No, I mean, I devote quite a lot of the book to Route 66 in part because I live on it, you know, goes right through St. Louis. So, I see it just every day. I'll be casually grocery shopping and then be informed I'm on historic Route 66 all of a sudden. But you know it's a road that is, you once was the great kind of romanticized road of escape and travel. It was decommissioned notably by Ronald Reagan after the creation of the interstate. And now it's just a series of rural roads, frontage roads, roads that end abruptly, roads that have gone into ruin, roads that are in some really beautiful places in terms of the landscape. So it really is this conglomeration of all of America, you know of the decay and the destruction and the abandonment in particular, but also people's, their own memories, their own artistic works, you know roadside shrines and creations that are often, you know pretty off beat. That they've put to show this is what I think of our country. These are my values. This is what, I think, is important. So it's a very interesting journey to take. It's often one I'm kind of inadvertently on just because of where I live and the direction I go. We'll mirror it. So I kept passing these sites again and again. I didn't set out to write this book. Obviously, when I first drove it when I was 19, I didn't know that this was our future. But looking back, especially at technological change, at how we travel, at how trust each other, at all of these things that have happened to this country since this time, it's really something. And that road will bring back all of those memories of what was lost and what remains to be lost. And of course it's hitting its 100th anniversary next year, so I'm guessing there'll be a lot of reminiscing about Route 66.Andrew Keen: Book about memories, you write about that, eventually even your memory will just or this experience of this trip will just be a memory. What does that suggest about contextualizing the current moment in American history? It's too easy to overdramatize it or perhaps it's hard not to over dramatize it given what's happening. I want to talk about a little bit about that your take on America on April the 18th, 2025. But how does that make sense of a memorial when you know that even your memories will become memories?Sarah Kendzior: Yeah, I mean it's hard to talk frankly about what's happening in America now without it sounding over dramatic or hyperbolic, which I think is why so many people were reluctant to believe me over my last decade of warnings that the current crises and catastrophes that we're experiencing are coming, are possible, and need to be actively stopped. I don't think they were inevitable, but they needed to be stopped by people in charge who refused to do it. And so, my reaction to this as a writer, but just as a human being is to write everything down, is to keep an ongoing record, not only of what I witness now, but of what know of our history, of what my own values are, of what place in the world is. And back in 2016, I encouraged everyone to do this because I knew that over the next decade, people would be told to accept things that they would normally never accept, to believe things that they would normally, never believe. And if you write down where you stand, you always have that point of reference to look back towards. It doesn't have to be for publication. It doesn't have to for the outside world. It can just be for yourself. And so I think that that's important. But right now, I think everyone has a role to play in battling what is an authoritarian kleptocracy and preventing it from hurting people. And I think people should lean into what they do best. And what I do best is write and research and document. So that's what I meant. Continue to do, particularly as history itself is under assault by this government.Andrew Keen: One of the things that strikes me about you, Sarah, is that you have an unusual background. You got a PhD in Soviet studies, late Soviet studies.Sarah Kendzior: Anthropology, yeah, but that was nice.Andrew Keen: But your dissertation was on the Uzbek opposition in exile. I wonder whether that experience of studying the late Soviet Union and its disintegration equipped you in some ways better than a lot of domestic American political analysts and writers for what's happening in America today. We've done a number of shows with people like Pete Weiner, who I'm sure you know his work from the Atlantic of New York Times. About learning from East European resistance writers, brave people like Milan Kundra, of course, Vaclav Havel, Solzhenitsyn. Do you think your earlier history of studying the Soviet Union helped you prepare, at least mentally, intellectually, for what's happening in the United States?Sarah Kendzior: Oh, absolutely. I think it was essential, because there are all sorts of different types of authoritarianism. And the type that Trump and his backers have always pursued was that of a mafia state, you know, of a kleptocracy. And Uzbekistan is the country that I knew the most. And actually, you what I wrote my dissertation about, this is between 2006, and 2012, was the fact that after a massacre of civilians... A lot of Uzbekistan's journalists, activists, political figures, opposition figures, et cetera, went into exile and then they immediately started writing blogs. And so for the very first time, they had freedom of speech. They had never had it in Uzbekistan. And they start revealing the whole secret history of Uzbekistan and everything going on and trying to work with each other, try to sort of have some impact on the political process in Uzbekistan. And they lost. What happened was the dictator died, Islam Karimov died, in 2016, and was replaced by another dictator who's not quite as severe. But watching the losing side and also watching people persevere and hold on to themselves and continue working despite that loss, I think, was very influential. Because you could look at Václav Havel or Lech Walesa or, you know, other sort of. People who won, you know, from Eastern Europe, from the revolutions of 1989 and so forth. And it's inspiring that sometimes I think it's really important to look at the people who did not succeed, but kept going anyway. You know, they didn't surrender themselves. They didn't their morality and they didn't abandon their fellow man. And I think that that's important. And also just to sort of get at the heart of your question, yes, you the structure of it, oligarchs who shake down countries, strip them and sell them for parts. Mine them for resources. That model, especially of what happened to Russia, actually, in particular in the 1990s of these oligarch wars, is what I see as the future of the United States right now. That is what they're trying to emulate.Andrew Keen: That we did a show with Steve Hansen and Jeff Kopstein, both political scientists, on what they see. They co-wrote a book on patrimonialism. This is the model they see there. They're both Max Weber scholars, so they borrow from that historic sociological analysis. And Kopstein was on the show with John Rausch as well, talking about this patrimonials. And so you, do you share the Kopstein-Hansen-Rausch analysis. Roush wrote a piece in the Atlantic about this too, which did very well. But this isn't conventional fascism or communism. It's a kind of 21st century version of patrimonialism.Sarah Kendzior: It's definitely not traditional fascism and one of the main reasons for that is a fascist has loyalty to the state. They seek to embody the state, they seek to expand the state recently Trump has been doing this more traditional route somewhat things like wanting to buy Greenland. But I think a lot of what he's doing is in reaction to climate change and also by the way I don't think Trump is the mastermind or originator. Of any of these geopolitical designs. You know, he has a team, we know about some of them with the Heritage Foundation Project 2025. We know he has foreign advisors. And again, you know, Trump is a corporate raider. That is how he led his business life. He's a mafia associate who wants to strip things down and sell them for parts. And that's what they wanna do with the United States. And that, yes, there are fascist tactics. There are fascists rhetoric. You know there are a lot of things that this country will, unfortunately, and has. In common, you know, with, say, Nazi Germany, although it's also notable that of course Nazi Germany borrowed from a lot of the tactics of Jim Crow, slavery, genocide of Native Americans. You know, this has always been a back and forth and America always has had some form of selective autocracy. But yeah, I think the folks who try to make this direct line and make it seem like the 20th century is just simply being revived, I've always felt like they were off because. There's no interest for these plutocrats in the United States even existing as a sovereign body. Like it truly doesn't matter to them if all of our institutions, even something as benign as the Postal Service, collapse. That's actually beneficial for them because then they can privatize, they can mine resources, they can make money for themselves. And I really worry that their goal is partition, you know, is to take this country. And to split it into smaller pieces that are easier to control. And that's one of the reasons I wrote this book, that I wrote The Last American Road Trip because I don't want people to fall for traps about generalizations or stereotypes about different regions of this country. I want them to see it as a whole and that our struggles are interconnected and we have a better chance of winning if we stand by each other.Andrew Keen: Yeah, and your book, in particular, The View from Flyover Country was so important because it wasn't written from San Francisco or Los Angeles or D.C. Or New York. It was written from St. Louis. So in a way, Sarah, you're presenting Trump as the ultimate Hayekian b*****d. There's a new book out by Quinn Slobodian called Hayek's B******s, which connects. Trumpianism and mago with Neoliberalism you don't see a break. We've done a lot of shows on the rise and fall of neoliberalism. You don't say a break between Hayek and TrumpSarah Kendzior: I think that in terms of neoliberalism, I think it's a continuation of it. And people who think that our crises began with Trump becoming the president in 2017, entering office, are deluded because the pathway to Trump even being able to run for president given that he was first investigated by the Department of Justice in 1973 and then was linked to a number of criminal enterprises for decades after. You know, that he was able to get in that position, you know that already showed that we had collapsed in certain respects. And so I think that these are tied together. You know, this has a lot to do with greed, with a, you know a disregard for sovereignty, a disregard human rights. For all of this Trump has always served much better as a demagogue, a front man, a figurehead. I do think, you he's a lot smarter. Than many of his opponents give him credit for. He is very good at doing what he needs to do and knowing what he need to know and nothing more. The rest he gives to the bureaucrats, to the lawyers, et cetera. But he fills this persona, and I do wonder what will happen when he is gone because they've tried very hard to find a successor and it's always failed, like DeSantis or Nikki Haley or whoever. And I kind of wonder if one of the reasons things are moving so, so fast now is they're trying to get a lot of things in under the wire while he's still alive, because I don't think that there's any individual who people have the loyalty to. His cult is not that big. It's a relatively small segment of the country, but it is very intense and very loyal to him. I don't think that loyalty is transferable.Andrew Keen: Is there anything, you know, I presented you as the Cassandra from St. Louis, you've seen the future probably clearer than most other people. Certainly when I first came across your work, I wasn't particularly convinced. I'm much more convinced now. You were right. I was wrong. Is there, anything about Trump too, that surprised you? I mean, any of the, the cruelty? Open corruption, the anger, the hostility, the attempt to destroy anything of any value in America, the fact that they seem to take such great pleasure in destroying this country's most valuable thing.Sarah Kendzior: Yeah, it's extremely sad and no, he doesn't surprise me at all. He's been the same guy since I was a little kid. You know, he was a plot line on children's television shows in the 1980s where as a child, I was supposed to know that the name Trump was synonymous with corruption, with being a tax cheat, with being a liar, you know, these were just sort of cultural codes that I was expected to know. What surprised me more is that no one stopped him because this threat was incredibly obvious. And that so many people in power have joined in, and I'm assuming they're joining in because they would rather be on the side with all that power than be a target of that power, but that they feel apparently no sense of loss, no sense grief for things like the loss of national parks, public education, the postal service, things that most folks like, social security for your elderly parents. Most Americans... Want these things. And most Americans, regardless of political party, don't want to see our country torn apart in this fashion. And so I'm not surprised by Trump. I'm surprised at the extent of his enablers at the complicity of the press and of the FBI and other institutions. And, you know, it's also been very jarring to watch how open they are this time around, you know, things like Elon Musk and his operation taking out. Classified information. The thing is, is I'm pretty sure Trump did all that. I mean, we know Trump did this in his first term, you know, and they would emphasize things like this box of physical written documents in Mar-a-Lago illegally taken. But, you know my mind always just went to, well, what did they do digitally? Because that seems much easier and much more obvious. What did they with all of these state secrets that they had access to for four years? What kind of leverage would that give them? And I think now they're just kind of, they're not bothering to hide anything anymore. I think they set the stage and now, you know, we're in the midst of the most horrible play, the most terrible performance ever. And it's, you can be still crushing at times.Andrew Keen: And of course, the real question is whether we're in the last act. Your book, The Last American Road Trip, was written, mostly written, what, in 2024 from?Sarah Kendzior: 2023.Andrew Keen: 2023. So, I mean, here's, I don't know if you can answer this, Sarah, but you know as much about middle America and middle Americans as anyone. You're on the road, you talk to everyone, you have a huge following, both on the left and the right in some ways. Some of your books now, you told me before we went live, some of your previous books, like Hiding in Plain Sight, suddenly become a big hit amongst conservative Americans. What does Trump or the MAGA people around him, what do they have to do to lose the support of ordinary Americans? As you say, they're destroying the essential infrastructure, medical, educational, the roads, the railways, everything is being destroyed, carted off almost like Stalin carted of half of the Soviet Union back into Asia during the Second World War. What does he have to do to lose the support of Middle America?Sarah Kendzior: I mean, I don't think middle America, you know, by which like a giant swath of the country that's, that's just ideological, diverse, demographically diverse supports him. I mean some do certainly. He's got some hardcore acolytes. I think most people are disillusioned with the entire political system. They are deeply frustrated by Trump. They were deeply frustrated. By Biden, they're struggling to pay bills. They're struggling. To hold on to basic human rights. And they're mad that their leverage is gone. People voted in record numbers in 2020. They protested in record number throughout Trump's first term. They've made their concerns known for a very long time and there are just very few officials really listening or responding. And I think that initially when Trump reentered the picture, it caused folks to just check out mentally because it was too overwhelming. I think it's why voter turnout was lower because the Democrats, when they won, didn't make good on their promises. It's a very simple thing. If you follow through with your campaign platform that was popular, then you're going to retain those voters. If you don't, you may lose them, especially when you're up against a very effective demagogue who has a way with rhetoric. And so we're just in such a bad place, such a painful place. I don't think people will look to politicians to solve their problems and with very good reason. I'm hoping that there are more of a sense of community support, more of sense that we're all in this together, especially as financially things begin to fall apart. Trump said openly in 2014 that he intended to crash the American economy. He said this on a Fox News clip that I found in 2016. Because it was being reprinted all over Russian-language media. They loved this clip because it also praised Putin and so forth. And I was astounded by it. I was like, why in the world isn't this all over every TV station, every radio station? He's laying out the whole plan, and now he's following that plan. And so I'm very concerned about that. And I just hope people in times like this, traditionally, this opens the door to fascism. People become extremely afraid. And in their fear they want a scapegoat, they are full of rage, they take it out on each other. That is the worst possible move right now from both a moral or a strategic view. People need to protect each other, to respect each other as fully human, to recognize almost everyone here, except for a little tiny group of corrupt billionaires, is a victim in this scenario, and so I don't see a big difference between, you know, myself and... Wherever I go. I was in Tulsa yesterday, I was in San Francisco last week. We're all in this together and I see a lot of heartache wherever I go. And so if people can lend each other support, that is the best way to get through this.Andrew Keen: Are you suggesting then that he is the Manchurian candidate? Why did he say that in 2014?Sarah Kendzior: Well, it was interesting. He was on Fox during the Sochi Olympics, and he was talking about how he speaks with Putin every day, their pals, and that Putin is going to produce a really big win for us, and we're all going to be very happy about it. And then he went on to say that the crashing of the economy and riots throughout America is what will make America great again. And this is in February 2014. Fox has deleted the clip, You know, other people have copies. So it is, it's also in my book hiding in plain sight, the transcript of that. I'm not sure, like a Manchurian candidate almost feels, you know like the person would have to be blackmailed or coerced or brainwashed somehow to participate. I think Trump is a true volunteer and his loyalty isn't to Russia per se. You know, his loyalty is to his bank accounts, like his loyalty is to power. And one thing he's been after his whole life was immunity from prosecution because he has been involved or adjacent to such an enormous number of crimes. And then when the Supreme Court granted him that, he got what he wanted and he's not afraid of breaking the law in any way. He's doing what all autocrats do, which is rewrite the law so that he is no longer breaking it. And he has a team of lawyers who help him in that agenda. So I feel like on one sense, he's very. All-American. It's kind of a sad thing that as he destroys America, he's doing it in a very American way. He plays a lot of great American music at his rallies. He has a vernacular that I can relate to that and understand it while detesting everything he's doing and all of his horrific policies. But what they want to turn us into though, I think is something that all Americans just won't. Recognized. And we've had the slipping away of a kind of unified American culture for a while, I think because we've lost our pop culture, which is really where a lot of people would bond, you know, movies, music, all of it became split into streaming services, you know. All of it became bifurcated. People stopped seeing each other as much face to face, you know, during COVID and then that became kind of a permanent thing. We're very fragmented and that hurts us badly. And all we've kind of got left is I guess sports and then politics. So people take all the effort that they used to put into devouring American pop culture or American civic life and they put it into this kind of politics that the media presents as if it's a game, like initially a horse race during the election and now like, ooh, will the evil dictator win? It's like, this is our lives. Like we have a lot on the line. So I wish they would do, they would take their job more seriously too. Of course, they're up paywalled and on streaming sites, so who's watching anyway, but still it is a problem.Andrew Keen: Yeah, it's interesting you talk about this death wish, you mentioned Thelma and Louise earlier, one of the great movies, American road movies, maybe in an odd way, the final scene of the Trump movie will be similar to the, you seem to be suggesting to, I'm not gonna give away the end of Thelmer and Louise to anyone who's watching who hasn't seen it, you do need to see it, similar ending to that movie. What about, you've talked about resistance, Sarah, a one of. The most influential, I guess, resistors to Trump and Trumpism. You put up an X earlier this month about the duty of journalism to resist, the duty to thinkers to resist. Some people are leaving, guys like Tim Snyder, his wife, Marcy Shaw, Jason Stanley, another expert on fascism. You've made it clear that you're staying. What's your take on people like Snyder who are leaving this country?Sarah Kendzior: Well, from what I know, he made a statement saying he had decided to move to Canada before Trump was put in office. Jason Stanley, on the other hand, explicitly said he's moving there because Trump is in office, and my first thought when I heard about all of them was, well, what about their students? Like, what about all these students who are being targeted by ICE, who are being deported? What about their TAs? What about everyone who's in a more vulnerable position. You know, when you have a position of power and influence, you could potentially do a lot of good in helping people. You know I respect everyone's decision to live wherever they want. Like it's not my business. But I do think that if you have that kind of chance to do something powerful for the community around you, especially the most vulnerable people in it who at this time are green card holders, people here on visas, we're watching this horrific crackdown at all these universities. My natural inclination would be to stay and take a stand and not abandon them. And I guess, you know, people, they do things in different ways or they may have their own personal concerns and, you know that's fine. I just know, you know I'm not leaving, you know, like I've got elderly parents and in-laws. I've got relatives who need me. I have a lot of people who depend on me and they depend on me in St. Louis and in Missouri. Because there aren't that many journalists in St. Louis. I think there could be, there are a lot of great writers in St Louis, you know, who have given a chance, given a platform, you could really show you what it's actually like here instead of all these stereotypes. But we're always, always marginalized. Like even I'm marginalized and I think I'm, you know, probably the most well-known in terms of being a political commentator. And so I feel like it's important to stand my ground but also You know, I love this, this state in the city and I love my community and I can't fathom, you know, leaving people in the lurch at a time like this. When I'm doing better, I'm on more solid ground despite being a target of various, you know organizations and individuals. I'm at a more solid down than somebody who's a, you know a black American or an immigrant or impoverished. Like I feel like it is my job to stand up for you know, folks here and let everyone know, you know what's going on and be somebody who they can come to and feel like that's safe.Andrew Keen: You describe yourself, Sarah, as a target. Your books have done very well. Most of them have been bestsellers. I'm sure the last American road trip will do very well, you're just off.Sarah Kendzior: It is the bestseller as of yesterday. It is your bestseller, congratulations. Yeah, our USA Today bestsellers, so yeah.Andrew Keen: Excellent. So that's good news. You've been on the road, you've had hundreds of people show up. I know you wrote about signing 600 books at Left Bank Books, which is remarkable. Most writers would cut off both hands for that. How are you being targeted? You noted that some of your books are being taken off the shelves. Are they being banned or discouraged?Sarah Kendzior: I mean, basically, what's been happening is kind of akin to what you see with universities. I just think it's not as well publicized or publicized at all, where there's not some sort of, you know, like the places will give in to what they think this administration wants before they are outright told to do it. So yes, there is an attempt to remove hiding in plain sight from circulation in 2024 to, you know, make the paperback, which at the time was ranked on Amazon. At number 2,000. It was extremely popular because this is the week that the Supreme Court gave Trump immunity. I was on vacation when I found out it was being pulled out of circulation. And I was in rural New Mexico and I had to get to a place with Wi-Fi to try to fight back for my book, which was a bestseller, a recent publication. It was very strange to me and I won that fight. They put it back, but a lot of people had tried to order it at that time and didn't get it. And a lot of people try to get my other books and they just can't get them. You know, so the publisher always has a warehouse issue or a shipping problem and you know, this kind of comes up or you know people notice, they've noticed this since 2020, you know I don't get reviewed in the normal kind of place as a person that has best selling books one after another would get reviewed. You know, that kind of thing is more of a pain. I always was able to circumvent it before through social media. But since Musk took over Twitter and because of the way algorithms work, it's more and more difficult for me to manage all of the publicity and PR and whatnot on my own. And so, you know, I'm grateful that you're having me on your show. I'm also grateful that, you Know, Flatiron did give me a book tour. That's helped tremendously. But there's that. And then there's also just the constant. Death threats and threats of you know other things you know things happening to people I love and it's been scary and I get used to it and that I expect it but you know you never could really get used to people constantly telling you that they're gonna kill you you know.Andrew Keen: When you get death threats, do you go to the authorities, have they responded?Sarah Kendzior: No, there's no point. I mean, I have before and it was completely pointless. And, you know, I'll just mostly just go to people I know who I trust to see if they can check in on things. I have to be very vague here who are not in the government or in the police or anything like that. I don't think anyone would protect me. I really just don't think anyone could help. You know, one thing is, you know, yes, I'm a prominent critic of Trump and his administration, but I was also a prominent critic of. The DOJ and Merrick Garland for not doing anything about all of these threats and also a critic of Biden and the Democrats for not impeaching quickly, for not being more proactive, for not acting with greater urgency. So I'm targeted by kind of everyone except for people who don't have any power, which is a strange situation to be in because I love my readers and I think that they're wonderful and I'm incredibly grateful for them because my books largely spread through word of mouth. It is scary for me, just as like a mom in Missouri without a lot of resources to be targeted by all of these kind of high profile, wealthy, powerful people. But all I have is my voice and my writing. And so I just do what I can. And that's just the way the cards have been dealt for me and it is what it is, so.Andrew Keen: Later historians write about this period in 50 or 100 years time. How do you think you mentioned the Biden administration, you were critical of them. We haven't talked about Kamala Harris's failed presidential term, which I wasn't particularly impressed with. How much moral responsibility do you think that Biden and Harris should be accused of for Trump too?Sarah Kendzior: Yeah, I mean, well, first of all, I'd be delighted if we have historians in the future. Well, I will be, even if I don't.Andrew Keen: Well, there will be, even if, I don't know, in America, there'll be somewhere.Sarah Kendzior: I is where it'll be some sort of AI creation that just, you know, belches out, make America great again, like, you know, like in The Shining or something, just over and over and over again. But assuming we have real historians that actually assess the situation, I think they are going to be tremendously critical of the Biden administration. I think it may in fact go down as one of the worst of all time. And he will be seen as a Neville Chamberlain-like figure who had the opportunity to stop or slow A number of autocratic practices and either chose to look the other way or to enable them. Because the thing is, in 2016, people were very doubtful that America could become an autocratic state. They hadn't seen this before. A lot of this was new to them. From 2016 through 2021, we saw all that Trump was capable of, and he committed a large multitude of crimes,RetryClaude hit the max length for a message and has paused its response. You can write Continue to keep the chat going.AKplease continueEditHere's the continuation of the transcript:Sarah Kendzior: ...and those crimes, not just him, but his cohort were never held accountable. And what they did during the Biden years was plan all of their next moves. Like you don't suddenly have a gulag for Americans in El Salvador, like just off the top of your head. You know, all of this takes planning. We knew about a lot of the plans, you know, the Democrats campaigned about combating Project 2025. And my question to them was, well, what what if you lose? How are you going to combat it then? You know what, if he gets back, what are you gonna do? They would be so offended. They're like, how dare you, you question us. How dare you question, you know, our plans? They're, like, well, I don't, you don't have a plan. Like, that's my question is what is the plan? And they didn't. And they could have spent those four years creating a bulwark against a lot of the most horrific policies that we're seeing now. Instead, they're kind of reacting on the fly if they're even reacting at all. And meanwhile, people are being targeted, deported, detained. They're suffering tremendously. And they're very, very scared. I think it's very scary to have a total dearth of leadership from where the, not just the opposition, but just people with basic respect for the constitution, our civil rights, etc., are supposed to be.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Project 2025, we've got David Graham on the show next week, who's written a book about Project 2025. Is there anything positive to report, Sarah? I mean, some people are encouraged by the behavior, at least on Friday, the 18th of April, who knows what will happen over the weekend or next week. Behavior of Harvard, some law firms are aggressively defending their rights. Should we be encouraged by the universities, law firms, even some corporate leaders are beginning to mutter under their breath about Trump and Trumpism?Sarah Kendzior: And it depends whether they actually have that power in wielded or whether they're just sort of trying to tamper down public dissent. I'm skeptical of these universities and law firms because I think they should have had a plan long ago because I was very obvious that all of this was going to happen and I feel so terribly for all of the students there that were abandoned by these administrations, especially places like Columbia. That gave in right away. What does hearten me though, you know, and I, as you said, I'd been on this tour, like I was all over the West coast. I've been all over, the Midwest and the South is, Americans, Americans do understand what's happening. There's always this like this culture in media of like, how do we break it to Americans? Like, yeah, well, we know, we know out here in Missouri that this is very bad. And I think that people have genuine concern for each other. I think they still have compassion for each other. I think there's a culture of cruelty that's promoted online and it's incentivized. You know, you can make money that way. You could get clicks that that way, whatever, but in real life, I think people feel vulnerable. They feel afraid, but I've seen so much kindness. I've been so much concern and determination from people who don't have very much, and maybe that's, you know, why people don't know about it. These are just ordinary folks. And so I have great faith in American people to combat this. And what I don't have faith in is our institutions. And I hope that these sort of in between places, places like universities who do a lot of good on one hand, but also can kind of act as like hedge funds. On the other hand, I hope they move fully to the side of good and that they purge themselves of these corrupt elements that have been within them for a long time, the more greedy. Aspects of their existence. I hope they see themselves as places that uphold civic life and history and provide intellectual resistance and shelter for students in the storm. They could be a really powerful force if they choose to be. It's never too late to change. I guess that's the message I want to bring home. Even if I'm very critical of these places, it's never to late for them to change and to do the right thing.Andrew Keen: Well, finally, Sarah, a lot of people are going to be watching this on my Substack page. Your Substack Page, your newsletter, They Knew, I think has last count, 52,000 subscribers. Is this the new model for independent writers, journalist thinkers like yourself? I'm not sure of those 52,00, how many of them are paid. You noted that your book has disappeared co-isindecially sometimes. So maybe some publishers are being intimidated. Is the future for independent thinkers, platforms like Substack, where independent authors like yourself can establish direct intellectual and commercial relations with their readers and followers?Sarah Kendzior: It's certainly the present. I mean, this is the only place or other newsletter outlets, I suppose, that I could go. And I purposefully divorced myself from all institutions except for my publisher because I knew that this kind of corruption would inhibit me from being able to say the truth. This is why I dropped out of academia, I dropped out of regular journalism. I have isolated myself to some degree on purpose. And I also just like being in control of this and having direct access to my readers. However, what does concern me is, you know, Twitter used to also be a place where I had direct access to people I could get my message out. I could circumvent a lot of the traditional modes of communication. Now I'm essentially shadow banned on there, along with a lot of people. And you know Musk has basically banned substack links because of his feud with Matt Taibbi. You know, that led to, if you drop a substack link in there, it just gets kind of submerged and people don't see it. So, you know, I think about Twitter and how positive I was about that, maybe like 12, 13 years ago, and I wonder how I feel about Substack and what will happen to it going forward, because clearly, you Know, Trump's camp realizes the utility of these platforms, like they know that a lot of people who are prominent anti authoritarian voices are using them to get the word out when they are when they lose their own platform at, like, say, the Washington Post or MSNBC or... Whatever network is corrupted or bullied. And so eventually, I think they'll come for it. And, you know, so stack has problems on its own anyway. So I am worried. I make up backups of everything. I encourage people to consume analog content and to print things out if they like them in this time. So get my book on that note, brand new analog content for you. A nice digital.Andrew Keen: Yeah, don't buy it digitally. I assume it's available on Kindle, but you're probably not too keen or even on Amazon and Bezos. Finally, Sarah, this is Friday. Fridays are supposed to be cheerful days, the days before the weekend. Is there anything to be cheerful about on April The 18th 2025 in America?Sarah Kendzior: I mean, yeah, there's things to be cheerful about, you know, pre spring, nice weather. I'm worried about this weekend. I'll just get this out real quick. You know, this is basically militia Christmas. You know, This is the anniversary of Waco, the Oklahoma City bombings, Columbine. It's Hitler's birthday. This is a time when traditionally American militia groups become in other words,Andrew Keen: Springtime in America.Sarah Kendzior: Yeah, springtime for Hitler. You know, and so I'm worried about this weekend. I'm worry that if there are anti-Trump protests that they'll be infiltrated by people trying to stoke the very riots that Trump said he wanted in order to, quote, make America great again and have everything collapse. So everyone, please be very, very careful this weekend heading out and just be aware of the. Of these dates and the importance of these days far predates Trump to, you know, militia groups and other violent extremist groups.Andrew Keen: Well, on that cheerful note, I asked you for a positive note. You've ruined everyone's weekend, probably in a healthy way. You are the Cassandra from St. Louis. Appreciate your bravery and honesty in standing up to Trump and Trumpism, MAGA America. Congratulations on the new book. As you say, it's available in analog form. You can buy it. Take it home, protect it, dig a hole in your garden and protect it from the secret police. Congratulations on the new book. As I said to you before we went live, it's a beautifully written book. I mean, you're noted as a polemicist, but I thought this book is your best written book, the other books were well written, but this is particularly well written. Very personal. So congratulations on that. And Sarah will have to get you back on the show. I'm not sure how much worse things can get in America, but no doubt they will and no doubt you will write about it. So keep well, keep safe and keep doing your brave work. Thank you so much.Sarah Kendzior: Yeah, you too. Thank you so much for your kind words and for having me on again. 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

Islam Karimov was the 1st President of Uzbekistan from 1991 until his death in 2016.  Terrified by the economic devastation which gripped Russia in the 1990s, Karimov decided that he would rather close the door firmly on market economics if the transition towards it risked even slightly going the same way as Uzbekistan's former masters. And so, Uzbekistan fossilised. The state retained ownership and control of industry. New collectivised farms were established. Foreign currencies were kept out - at least officially. Was Karimov right to do this? What were the trade offs involved? Should countries in the Global South be allowed to reject modernity? These are the dilemmas at the heart of today's episode.My guest today is Jen Murtazashvili. Jen is the Founding Director of the Center for Governance and Markets at the University of Pittsburgh, where she is also a Professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs. She is a Nonresident Scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and lived and worked in Uzbekistan on behalf of the United States Agency for International Development during the 1990s and early 2000s, before being asked to leave by Karimov's government. 

Kate Adie presents stories from Pakistan Ukraine, Gibraltar, Uzbekistan and Namibia More than 100 people were killed in an attack targeting police in a high security mosque in the northern city of Peshawar in Pakistan earlier this week. An investigation is now underway as to how the bomber managed to enter the high-security zone. Caroline Davies went to the city and met some of the survivors. Ukraine's President, Volodymyr Zelensky has launched a anti-corruption drive, which led to the resignation of several government and regional ministers. James Waterhouse was in Kyiv and said the upheaval marked a shift in the government's narrative, with a new focus on accountability. Gibraltar, the British territory which borders Spain, remains deeply patriotic despite its geographical location. Joe Inwood met the chief minister there and discovered how a simple mispronunciation opened up deeper cultural differences. We visit Samarkand in Uzbekistan, for centuries a major trading hub on the Silk Road. But under the former President Islam Karimov, the country experienced economic stagnation and isolation. His successor is trying to revive the economy by boosting tourism. Heidi Fuller-Love went to visit a shiny new complex near Samarkand - a different world from the heritage sites of the old city. And Stephen Moss explores the sand dunes of the Namib desert - one of the most arid places on earth. He finds that, although Chinese investment in nearby Walvis Bay is reaping returns, the wider ecosystem is under threat. Producers: Serena Tarling, Louise Hidalgo and Arlene Gregorius Editor: China Collins Production Coordinator: Helena Warwick-Cross

Tonight we are going to tell you a tale. A superb tale. A tale as old as time that takes us from the beginnings of civilization until today. This tale will thrill you and chill you. It may elicit feelings of dread and sadness. It may make you angry.  At times it may make you uneasily laugh like the friend at school that was kicked in the balls but couldn't show his weakness. It's a subject that people continually argue about and debate with savage ferocity. Tonight we are talking about executions! We'll talk about the methods and the reasons behind executions throughout the years. Then we'll talk about some famous executions, as well as some of the more fucked up ones. And by fucked up, we mean botched. Bad stuff. This episode isn't meant to be a debate for or against executions but merely to discuss them and the crazy shit surrounding them. So with all that being said, Let's rock and roll!           Capital punishment has been practiced in the history of virtually all known societies and places. The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes.  The Code of Hammurabi was one of the earliest and most complete written legal codes and was proclaimed by the Babylonian king Hammurabi, who reigned from 1792 to 1750 B.C. Hammurabi expanded the city-state of Babylon along the Euphrates River to unite all of southern Mesopotamia. The Hammurabi code of laws, a collection of 282 rules, established standards for commercial interactions and set fines and punishments to meet the requirements of justice. Hammurabi's Code was carved onto a massive, finger-shaped black stone stele (pillar) that was looted by invaders and finally rediscovered in 1901. The text, compiled at the end of Hammurabi's reign, is less a proclamation of principles than a collection of legal precedents, set between prose celebrating Hammurabi's just and pious rule. Hammurabi's Code provides some of the earliest examples of the doctrine of “lex talionis,” or the laws of retribution, sometimes better known as “an eye for an eye the greatest soulfly song ever!   The Code of Hammurabi includes many harsh punishments, sometimes demanding the removal of the guilty party's tongue, hands, breasts, eye, or ear. But the code is also one of the earliest examples of an accused person being considered innocent until proven guilty. The 282 laws are all written in an “if-then form.” For example, if a man steals an ox, he must pay back 30 times its value. The laws range from family law to professional contracts and administrative law, often outlining different standards of justice for the three classes of Babylonian society—the propertied class, freedmen, and slaves.   A doctor's fee for curing a severe wound would be ten silver shekels for a gentleman, five shekels for a freedman, and two shekels for a slave. So, it was less expensive when you were a lower-class citizen. Penalties for malpractice followed the same scheme: a doctor who killed a wealthy patient would have his hands cut off, while only financial restitution was required if the victim was a slave. Crazy!   Some examples of the death penalty laws at this time are as follows:         If a man accuses another man and charges him with homicide but cannot bring proof against him, his accuser shall be killed. Holy shit.         If a man breaks into a house, they shall kill him and hang him in front of that same house.          The death penalty was also part of the Hittite Code in the 14th century B.C., but only partially. The most severe offenses typically were punished through enslavement, although crimes of a sexual nature often were punishable by death. The Hittite laws, also known as the Code of the Nesilim, constitute an ancient legal code dating from c. 1650 – 1500 BCE. The Hittite laws were kept in use for roughly 500 years, and many copies show that other than changes in grammar, what might be called the 'original edition' with its apparent disorder, was copied slavishly; no attempt was made to 'tidy up' by placing even apparent afterthoughts in a more appropriate position.    The Draconian constitution, or Draco's code, was a written law code enforced by Draco near the end of the 7th century BC; its composition started around 621BC. It was written in response to the unjust interpretation and modification of oral law by Athenian aristocrats. Aristotle, the chief source for knowledge of Draco, claims that he was the first to write Athenian laws and that Draco established a constitution enfranchising hoplites, the lower class soldiers. The Draconian laws were most noteworthy for their harshness; they were written in blood rather than ink. Death was prescribed for almost all criminal offenses. Solon, who was the magistrate in 594 BCE, later repealed Draco's code and published new laws, retaining only Draco's homicide statutes.   In the 5th century B.C., the Roman Law of the Twelve Tables also contained the death penalty. Death sentences were carried out by such means as beheading, boiling in oil, burying alive, burning, crucifixion, disembowelment, drowning, flaying alive, hanging, impalement, stoning, strangling, being thrown to wild animals, and quartering. We'll talk more about that later. The earliest attempt by the Romans to create a code of law was the Laws of the Twelve Tables. A commission of ten men (Decemviri) was appointed (c. 455 B.C.) to draw up a code of law binding on patrician and plebeian and which consuls would have to enforce. The commission produced enough statutes to fill ten bronze tablets.    Mosaic Law codified many capital crimes. There is evidence that Jews used many different techniques, including stoning, hanging, beheading, crucifixion (copied from the Romans), throwing the criminal from a rock, and sawing asunder. The most infamous execution of history occurred approximately 29 AD with the crucifixion of that one guy, Jesus Christ, outside Jerusalem. About 300 years later, Emperor Constantine, after converting to Christianity, abolished crucifixion and other cruel death penalties in the Roman Empire. In 438, the Code of Theodosius made more than 80 crimes punishable by death.    Britain influenced the colonies more than any other country and has a long history of punishment by death. About 450 BC, the death penalty was often enforced by throwing the condemned into a quagmire, which is not only the character from Family Guy, and another word for dilemma but in this case is a soft boggy area of land. By the 10th Century, hanging from the gallows was the most frequent execution method. William the Conqueror opposed taking life except in war and ordered no person to be hanged or executed for any offense. Nice guy, right? However, he allowed criminals to be mutilated for their crimes.    During the middle ages, capital punishment was accompanied by torture. Most barons had a drowning pit as well as gallows, and they were used for major as well as minor crimes. For example, in 1279, two hundred and eighty-nine Jews were hanged for clipping coins. What the fuck is that you may be wondering. Well, Clipping was taking a small amount of metal off the edge of hand-struck coins. Over time, the precious metal clippings could be saved up and melted into bullion (a lump of precious metal) to be sold or used to make new coins. Under Edward I, two gatekeepers were killed because the city gate had not been closed in time to prevent the escape of an accused murderer. Burning was the punishment for women's high treason, and men were hanged, drawn, and quartered. Beheading was generally accepted for the upper classes. One could be burned to death for marrying a Jew. Pressing became the penalty for those who would not confess to their crimes—the executioner placed heavy weights on the victim's chest until death. On the first day, he gave the victim a small quantity of bread, on the second day a small drink of bad water, and so on until he confessed or died. Under the reign of Henry VIII, the number of those put to death is estimated as high as 72,000. Boiling to death was another penalty approved in 1531, and there are records to show some people cooked for up to two hours before death took them. When a woman was burned, the executioner tied a rope around her neck when she was connected to the stake. When the flames reached her, she could be strangled from outside the ring of fire. However, this often failed, and many were burnt alive.   In Britain, the number of capital offenses continually increased until the 1700's when two hundred and twenty-two crimes were punishable by death. These included stealing from a house for forty shillings, stealing from a shop the value of five shillings, robbing a rabbit warren, cutting down a tree, and counterfeiting tax stamps. However, juries tended not to convict when the penalty was significant, and the crime was not. Reforms began to take place. In 1823, five laws were passed, removing about a hundred crimes from the death penalty. Between 1832 and 1837, many capital offenses were swept away. In 1840, there was a failed attempt to abolish all capital punishment. Through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, more and more capital punishments were abolished, not only in Britain but also all across Europe; until today, only a few European countries retain the death penalty.   The first recorded execution in the English American colonies was in 1608 when officials executed George Kendall of Virginia for supposedly plotting to betray the British to the Spanish. In 1612, Virginia's governor, Sir Thomas Dale, implemented the Divine, Moral, and Martial Laws that made death the penalty for even minor offenses such as stealing grapes, killing chickens, killing dogs or horses without permission, or trading with Indians. Seven years later, these laws were softened because Virginia feared that no one would settle there. Well, no shit.   In 1622, the first legal execution of a criminal, Daniel Frank, occurred in, of course, Virginia for the crime of theft. Some colonies were very strict in using the death penalty, while others were less so. In Massachusetts Bay Colony, the first execution was in 1630, but the earliest capital statutes did not occur until later. Under the Capital Laws of New England that went into effect between 1636-1647, the death penalty was set forth for pre-meditated murder, sodomy, witchcraft, adultery, idolatry, blasphemy, assault in anger, rape, statutory rape, manstealing, perjury in a capital trial, rebellion, manslaughter, poisoning, and bestiality. A scripture from the Old Testament accompanied early laws. By 1780, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts only recognized seven capital crimes: murder, sodomy, burglary, buggery, arson, rape, and treason. And for those wondering, The Buggery Act of 1533, formally An Act for the punishment of the vice of Buggerie, was an Act of the Parliament of England that was passed during the reign of Henry VIII. It was the country's first civil sodomy law.   The Act defined buggery as an unnatural sexual act against the will of God and Man. This term was later determined by the courts to include only anal penetration and bestiality.   The New York colony instituted the so-called Duke's Laws of 1665. This list of laws directed the death penalty for denial of the true God, pre-meditated murder, killing someone who had no weapon of defense, killing by lying in wait or by poisoning, sodomy, buggery, kidnapping, perjury in a capital trial, traitorous denial of the king's rights or raising arms to resist his authority, conspiracy to invade towns or forts in the colony and striking one's mother or father (upon complaint of both). The two colonies that were more lenient concerning capital punishment were South Jersey and Pennsylvania. In South Jersey, there was no death penalty for any crime, and there were only two crimes, murder, and treason, punishable by death. Way to go, Jersey Raccoons!   Some states were more severe. For example, by 1837, North Carolina required death for the crimes of murder, rape, statutory rape, slave-stealing, stealing banknotes, highway robbery, burglary, arson, castration, buggery, sodomy, bestiality, dueling where death occurs, (and this insidious shit), hiding a slave with intent to free him, taking a free Negro out of state to sell him, bigamy, inciting slaves to rebel, circulating seditious literature among slaves, accessory to murder, robbery, burglary, arson, or mayhem and others. However, North Carolina did not have a state prison and, many said, no suitable alternative to capital punishment. So, instead of building a fucking prison to hold criminals, they just made the penalty for less severe crimes punishable by death. What the shit, North Carolina?!?   The first reforms of the death penalty occurred between 1776-1800. Thomas Jefferson and four others, authorized to undertake a complete revision of Virginia's laws, proposed a law that recommended the death penalty for only treason and murder. After a stormy debate, the legislature defeated the bill by one vote. The writing of European theorists such as Montesquieu, Voltaire, and Bentham had a significant effect on American intellectuals, as did English Quaker prison reformers John Bellers and John Howard.   Organizations were formed in different colonies for the abolition of the death penalty and to relieve poor prison conditions. Dr. Benjamin Rush, a renowned Philadelphia citizen, proposed abolishing capital punishment. William Bradford, Attorney General of Pennsylvania, was ordered to investigate capital punishment. In 1793 he published “An Enquiry How Far the Punishment of Death is Necessary” in Pennsylvania. Bradford strongly insisted that the death penalty be retained but admitted it was useless in preventing certain crimes. He said the death penalty made convictions harder to obtain because in Pennsylvania, and indeed in all states, the death penalty was mandatory. Juries would often not return a guilty verdict because of this fact, which makes sense. In response, in 1794, the Pennsylvania legislature abolished capital punishment for all crimes except murder “in the first degree,” the first time murder had been broken down into “degrees.” In New York, in 1796, the legislature authorized construction of the state's first prison, abolished whipping, and reduced the number of capital offenses from thirteen to two. Virginia and Kentucky passed similar reform bills. Four more states reduced their capital crimes: Vermont in 1797 to three; Maryland in 1810, to four; New Hampshire in 1812, to two and Ohio in 1815 to two. Each of these states built state penitentiaries. A few states went in the opposite direction. Rhode Island restored the death penalty for rape and arson; Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Connecticut raised death crimes from six to ten, including sodomy, maiming, robbery, and forgery. Many southern states made more crimes capital, especially for slaves. Assholes.   The first profound reform era occurred between 1833-1853. Public executions were attacked as cruel. Sometimes tens of thousands of eager viewers would show up to view hangings; local merchants would sell souvenirs and alcohol. Which, I'm not sure if I hate or absolutely love. Fighting and pushing would often break out as people jockeyed for the best view of the hanging or the corpse! Onlookers often cursed the widow or the victim and would try to tear down the scaffold or the rope for keepsakes. Violence and drunkenness often ruled towns far into the night after “justice had been served.” People are fucking weird, dude. Many states enacted laws providing private hangings. Rhode Island (1833), Pennsylvania (1834), New York (1835), Massachusetts (1835), and New Jersey (1835) all abolished public hangings. By 1849, fifteen states were holding private hangings. This move was opposed by many death penalty abolitionists who thought public executions would eventually cause people to cry out against execution itself. For example, in 1835, Maine enacted what was in effect a moratorium on capital punishment after over ten thousand people who watched a hanging had to be restrained by police after they became unruly and began fighting. All felons sentenced to death would have to remain in prison at hard labor and could not be executed until one year had elapsed and then only on the governor's order. No governor ordered an execution under the “Maine Law” for twenty-seven years. Though many states argued the merits of the death penalty, no state went as far as Maine. The most influential reformers were the clergy, of course. Ironically, the small but influential group that opposed the abolitionists was the clergy.    Ok, let's talk about electrocution. Want to know how the electric chair came to be? Well, Electrocution as a method of execution came onto the scene in an implausible manner. Edison Company, with its DC (direct current) electrical systems, began attacking Westinghouse Company and its AC (alternating current) electrical systems as they were pressing for nationwide electrification with alternating current. To show how dangerous AC could be, Edison Company began public demonstrations by electrocuting animals. People reasoned that if electricity could kill animals, it could kill people. In 1888, New York approved the dismantling of its gallows and the building of the nation's first electric chair. It held its first victim, William Kemmler, in 1890, and even though the first electrocution was clumsy at best, other states soon followed the lead.   Between 1917 and 1955, the death penalty abolition movement again slowed. Washington, Arizona, and Oregon in 1919-20 reinstated the death penalty. In 1924, the first execution by cyanide gas took place in Nevada, when Tong war gang murderer Gee Jon became its first victim. Get this shit. The frigging state wanted to secretly pump cyanide gas into Jon's cell at night while he was asleep as a more humanitarian way of carrying out the penalty. Still, technical difficulties prohibited this, and a special “gas chamber” was hastily built. Other concerns developed when less “civilized” methods of execution failed. In 1930, Mrs. Eva Dugan became the first female to be executed by Arizona. The execution was botched when the hangman misjudged the drop, and Mrs. Dugan's head was ripped from her body. More states converted to electric chairs and gas chambers. During this time, abolitionist organizations sprang up all across the country, but they had little effect. Several stormy protests were held against the execution of certain convicted felons, like Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were convicted of spying on behalf of the Soviet Union. The couple was convicted of providing top-secret information about radar, sonar, jet propulsion engines, and valuable nuclear weapon designs. At that time, the United States was supposedly the only country with nuclear weapons. Convicted of espionage in 1951, they were executed by the United States federal government in 1953 in the Sing Sing correctional facility in Ossining, New York, becoming the first American civilians to be executed for such charges and the first to receive that penalty during peacetime. However, these protests held little opposition against the death penalty itself. In fact, during the anti-Communist period, with all its fears and hysteria, Texas Governor Allan Shivers seriously suggested that capital punishment be the penalty for membership in the Communist Party.   The movement against capital punishment revived again between 1955 and 1972.   England and Canada completed exhaustive studies which were largely critical of the death penalty, and these were widely circulated in the U.S.  Death row criminals gave their moving accounts of capital punishment in books and films. Convicted robber, kidnapper, and rapist Caryl Chessman, published “Cell 2455 Death Row” and “Trial by Ordeal.” Barbara Graham's story was utilized in the book and movie “I Want to Live!” after her execution. She was executed in the gas chamber at San Quentin Prison on the same day as two convicted accomplices, Jack Santo and Emmett Perkins. All of them were involved in a robbery that led to the murder of an elderly widow.  Television shows were broadcast on the death penalty. Hawaii and Alaska ended capital punishment in 1957, and Delaware did so the following year. Controversy over the death penalty gripped the nation, forcing politicians to take sides. Delaware restored the death penalty in 1961. Michigan abolished capital punishment for treason in 1963. Voters in 1964 abolished the death penalty in Oregon. In 1965 Iowa, New York, West Virginia, and Vermont ended the death penalty. New Mexico abolished the death penalty in 1969.   The controversy over the death penalty continues today. There is a strong movement against lawlessness propelled by citizens' fears of security. Politicians at the national and state levels are taking the floor of legislatures and calling for more frequent death penalties, death penalties for more crimes, and longer prison sentences. Those opposing these moves counter by arguing that harsher sentences do not slow crime and that crime is slightly or the same as in the past. FBI statistics show murders are now up. (For example, 9.3 persons per 100,000 were murdered in 1973, and 9.4 persons per 100,000 were murdered in 1992, and as of today, it's upwards of 14.4 people per 100,000. This upswing might be because of more advanced crime technology, as well as more prominent news and media.   Capital punishment has been completely abolished in all European countries except for Belarus and Russia, which has a moratorium and has not conducted an execution since September 1996. The complete ban on capital punishment is enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU). Two widely adopted protocols of the European Convention on Human Rights of the Council of Europe are thus considered a central value. Of all modern European countries, San Marino, Portugal, and the Netherlands were the first to abolish capital punishment, whereas only Belarus still practices capital punishment in some form or another. In 2012, Latvia became the last EU member state to abolish capital punishment in wartime.   Ok, so now let's switch gears from the history of capital punishment and executions in general and get into what we know you beautiful bastards come here for. Let's talk about some methods used throughout the years, and then we'll talk about some famous executions and some fucked and messed up ones.   Methods:   We've discussed a few of these before, but some are so fucked up we're going to discuss them again.   Boiling To Death:   A slow and agonizing punishment, this method traditionally saw the victim gradually lowered — feet-first — into boiling oil, water, or wax (although uses of boiling wine and molten lead have also been recorded).   If the shock of the pain did not render them immediately unconscious, the person would experience the excruciating sensation of their outer layers of skin, utterly destroyed by immersion burns, dissolving right off their body, followed by the complete breakdown of the fatty tissue, boiling away beneath.   Emperor Nero is said to have dispatched thousands of Christians in this manner. At the same time, in the Middle Ages, the primary recipients of the punishment were not killers or rapists but coin forgers, particularly in Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. In Britain, meanwhile, King Henry VIII introduced the practice for executing those who used poison to commit murder.   Shockingly, the practice is believed to have been carried out as recently as 2002, when the government of Uzbekistan, led by Islam Karimov, was alleged to have tortured several suspected terrorists to death by boiling.   The Blood Eagle:   A technique ascribed to ancient Norse warriors, the blood eagle, mixed brutality and poetic imagery that only the Vikings could. First, the victim's back would be hacked open, and the skin ripped apart, exposing the spinal column.   The ribs would then be snapped from the spine and forcibly bent backward until they faced outwards from the body, forming a pair of bloody, shattered eagle's wings. As a horrifying finale, the lungs would then be pulled from the body cavity and coated with stinging salt, causing eventual death by suffocation.   There is some question whether this technique was ever actually used as the only accounts come from Norse literature. Odin did this shit, you know it.   Several scholars claim that the act we know of today is simply a result of poor translating and misunderstands the strong association of the eagle with blood and death in Norse imagery. That said, every account is consistent in that in each case, the victim is a nobleman being punished for murdering his father.   The good news for any poor soul who might have suffered this brutal death? The agony and blood loss from the initial wounds would probably have caused them to pass out long before the lungs were removed from their bodies.    Impalement:   Most famously used by Vlad the Impaler, 15th-century ruler of Wallachia (in present-day Romania) and inspiration for Count Dracula, the act of impalement has a long, grim history. While images tend to depict people skewered through the midsection and then held aloft — in a manner that would almost certainly bring about a rapid death — the actual process was a much longer, horrifically drawn-out ordeal.   Traditionally, the stake would be partially sharpened and planted, point up, in the ground. The victim would then be placed over the spike as it was inserted partway into the rectum or vagina.   As their body weight dragged them further onto the pole, the semi-greased wooden stake would force its way up through their body, piercing organs with agonizing slowness as it eventually penetrated the entire torso, finally tearing an exit wound through the skin of the shoulder, neck or throat. Holy shishkabob. Or bill. Or Karen.   The earliest records of the torture come from 1772 B.C. in Babylon, where the aforementioned King Hammurabi ordered a woman be executed in this way for killing her husband. But its use continued until as recently as the 20th century when the Ottoman government employed the technique during the Armenian genocide of 1915-1923. Which is super fucked up.   According to some accounts, it could take the victim — exposed, bleeding, and writhing in tormented agony — as long as eight whole days to die. Oh my hell!   Keelhauling:   Walking the plank might not be the most pleasant of deaths, but it seems moderately more humane than the other favored maritime punishment of keelhauling.   A punishment that often ended in death due to the severity of the wounds sustained (or was simply carried out until the point of death), it saw the victim, legs weighted and suspended from a rope, dropped from the bow of the ship, and then rapidly pulled underwater along the length of the hull — and over the keel (the beam that runs longitudinally down the center of the underside to the stern.   In the age of old, old wooden sailing ships, the hull of a vessel would generally be coated in a thick layer of barnacles, whose shells could be rock hard and razor-sharp.   As the drowning sailor was yanked relentlessly through the saltwater, these barnacles would strip the skin from his body, gouging out raw chunks of flesh and even, by some accounts, tearing off whole limbs or severing the head.   If the sailor was still alive, they might be hung from the mast for 15 minutes before going in again. In some cases, the victim would have an oil-soaked sponge — containing a breath of air — stuffed into their mouth to prevent a “merciful” drowning.   Employed mainly by the Dutch and the French from the 1500s until it was abolished in 1853, accounts of its use date back to Greece in 800 B.C.   The Roman Candle:   Many of the worst execution methods ever devised involve fire — from burning witches at stake in medieval Britain to roasting criminals alive in the hot metal insides of the brazen bull in Ancient Greece — but few match the sheer lack of humanity as the Roman Candle.   A rumored favorite of the mad Roman Emperor Nero, this method saw the subject tied to a stake and smeared with flammable pitch (tree or plant resin), then set ablaze, slowly burning to death from the feet up.   What sets this above the many other similar methods is that the victims were sometimes lined up outside to provide the lighting for one of Nero's evening parties.   Being Hanged, Drawn, And Quartered:   First recorded in England during the 13th century, this unusually extreme — even for the time — mode of execution was made the statutory punishment for treason in 1351. Though it was intended to be an act of such barbarous severity that no one would ever risk committing a treasonous act, there were nevertheless plenty of recipients over the next 500 years.   The process of being hanged, drawn, and quartered began with the victim being dragged to the site of execution while strapped to a wooden panel, which was in turn tied to a horse.   They would then experience a slow hanging, in which, rather than being dropped to the traditional quick death of a broken neck, they would instead be left to choke horribly as the rope tore up the skin of their throat, their body weight dragging them downwards.   Some had the good fortune to die at this stage, including the infamous Gunpowder Plot conspirator Guy Fawkes, who ensured a faster death by leaping from the gallows.   Once half-strangled, the drawing would begin. The victim would be strapped down and then slowly disemboweled, their stomachs sliced open, and their intestines and other significant organs hacked apart and pulled — “drawn” — from the body.   The genitals would often be mutilated and ripped from between their legs. Those unlucky enough to still be alive at this point might witness their organs burned in front of them before they were finally decapitated.   Once death had finally claimed them, the recipient's body would be carved into four pieces — or “quartered” — and the parts sent to prominent areas of the country as a warning to others.   The head would often be taken to the infamous Tower of London, where it would be impaled on a spike and placed on the walls “for the mockery of London.”   Rat Torture:   As recently depicted in that horrible show, Game Of Thrones, rat torture is ingenious in its disgusting simplicity. In its most basic form, a bucket containing live rats is placed on the exposed torso of the victim, and heat is applied to the base of the bucket.   The rats, crazy with fear from the heat, tear and gnaw their way into the abdomen of the victim, clawing and ripping through skin, flesh, organs, and intestines in their quest to escape.   Possessing the most powerful biting and chewing motion of any rodent, rats can make short work of a human stomach. Along with the unimaginable pain, the victim would also suffer the sick horror of feeling the large, filthy creatures writhing around inside their guts as they died.   While associated with Elizabethan England — where the Tower of London was said to have housed a “Dungeon of Rats,” a pitch-black room below high watermark that would draw in rats from the River Thames to torment the room's inhabitants — the practice has been used far more recently.   General Pinochet is said to have employed the technique during his dictatorship of Chile (1973-1990), while reports from Argentina during the National Reorganization Process in the late 1970s and early '80s claimed victims were subjected to a version in which live rats — or sometimes spiders — were inserted into the subject's body via a tube in the rectum or vagina….yep.   Bamboo Torture   Forcing thin shards of bamboo under the fingernails has long been cited as an interrogation method, but bamboo has been used to creatively — and slowly — execute a person, too. Allegedly used by the Japanese on American prisoners of war, it saw the victim tied down to a frame over a patch of newly sprouting bamboo plants.   One of the fastest-growing plants in the world, capable of up to three feet of growth in 24 hours, the sharp-tipped plants would slowly pierce the victim's skin — and then continue to grow. The result was death by gradual, continuous, multiple impalements, the equivalent of being dropped on a bed of sharpened stakes in terrible slow motion.   Despite the practice having roots in the former areas of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and Siam (now Thailand) in the 19th century, there are no proven instances of it being used during WWII.   It's certainly possible, however, and it has been shown that the technique, among the worst execution methods ever, works: A 2008 episode of MythBusters found that bamboo was capable of penetrating a human-sized lump of ballistic gelatin over three days.   https://m.imdb.com/list/ls059738828/

In this new episode of Trouble with the Truth, Lana talks with a journalist from Uzbekistan about the state of media freedom in the country. The 25 year old dictatorship of Islam Karimov was accompanied by human rights abuses and silencing of independent voices. When president Shavkat Mirziyoyev took power in 2016, it appeared that Uzbekistan was to take a new direction rooted in reform and liberalization. Many dissidents and journalists were released from imprisonment and independent media outlets were allowed to function freely. However, journalists still must think twice before writing about the president's family and other tabooed topics. The new regime may not use prison and torture to intimidate journalists but other tactics, such as troll campaigns, defamations and legal threats, can be equally damaging for media workers. It is very telling that the speaker requested we alter her voice, skip video and omit any personal details.

Em 1º de setembro de 1991, o Uzbequistão declarou sua independência da União Soviética, acelerando o processo de dissolução da superpotência comunista. No entanto, esse fato histórico em nada contribuiu para a liberdade do povo deste país da Ásia Central, que passou a se submeter a um regime de mão de ferro e centralizado na figura do presidente Islam Karimov.----Quer contribuir com Opera Mundi via PIX? Nossa chave é apoie@operamundi.com.br (Razão Social: Última Instancia Editorial Ltda.). Desde já agradecemos!Assinatura solidária: www.operamundi.com.br/apoio★ Support this podcast ★

Seekordse saate peategelasteks on kaks Kesk-Aasia uut diktaatorit, Türkmenistani liider Saparmurat Njazov (1940-2006), ning Usbekistani juht Islam Karimov (1938-2016). Vaatleme mil kombel nad võimule said ja kuidas seal püsisid, ning kuidas valitsesid ja riigi raha kulutasid.

Weaving together personal story and broad analysis, Bagila Burkhabayeva's The Vanishing Generation: Revolution, Religion, and Disappearance in Modern Uzbekistan (Indiana UP, 2019) deals with the question of Islam and its repression during the period of Islam Karimov's rule in newly independent Uzbekistan. As witness to the infamous Zhaslyk prison and the 2005 Andijan uprising, Bukharbayeva shares intimate details about Uzbekistan's use of torture, kidnapping, and imprisonment against perceived religious extremists. Burkhabayeva's book will be of great interest to scholars, journalists, and anyone interested in contemporary Islam, Central Asia, or newly-formed authoritarian states of the late 20th and early 21st century. Nicholas Seay is a PhD student at Ohio State University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

Weaving together personal story and broad analysis, Bagila Burkhabayeva's The Vanishing Generation: Revolution, Religion, and Disappearance in Modern Uzbekistan (Indiana UP, 2019) deals with the question of Islam and its repression during the period of Islam Karimov's rule in newly independent Uzbekistan. As witness to the infamous Zhaslyk prison and the 2005 Andijan uprising, Bukharbayeva shares intimate details about Uzbekistan's use of torture, kidnapping, and imprisonment against perceived religious extremists. Burkhabayeva's book will be of great interest to scholars, journalists, and anyone interested in contemporary Islam, Central Asia, or newly-formed authoritarian states of the late 20th and early 21st century. Nicholas Seay is a PhD student at Ohio State University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Weaving together personal story and broad analysis, Bagila Burkhabayeva's The Vanishing Generation: Revolution, Religion, and Disappearance in Modern Uzbekistan (Indiana UP, 2019) deals with the question of Islam and its repression during the period of Islam Karimov's rule in newly independent Uzbekistan. As witness to the infamous Zhaslyk prison and the 2005 Andijan uprising, Bukharbayeva shares intimate details about Uzbekistan's use of torture, kidnapping, and imprisonment against perceived religious extremists. Burkhabayeva's book will be of great interest to scholars, journalists, and anyone interested in contemporary Islam, Central Asia, or newly-formed authoritarian states of the late 20th and early 21st century. Nicholas Seay is a PhD student at Ohio State University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Weaving together personal story and broad analysis, Bagila Burkhabayeva's The Vanishing Generation: Revolution, Religion, and Disappearance in Modern Uzbekistan (Indiana UP, 2019) deals with the question of Islam and its repression during the period of Islam Karimov's rule in newly independent Uzbekistan. As witness to the infamous Zhaslyk prison and the 2005 Andijan uprising, Bukharbayeva shares intimate details about Uzbekistan's use of torture, kidnapping, and imprisonment against perceived religious extremists. Burkhabayeva's book will be of great interest to scholars, journalists, and anyone interested in contemporary Islam, Central Asia, or newly-formed authoritarian states of the late 20th and early 21st century. Nicholas Seay is a PhD student at Ohio State University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/islamic-studies

Weaving together personal story and broad analysis, Bagila Burkhabayeva's The Vanishing Generation: Revolution, Religion, and Disappearance in Modern Uzbekistan (Indiana UP, 2019) deals with the question of Islam and its repression during the period of Islam Karimov's rule in newly independent Uzbekistan. As witness to the infamous Zhaslyk prison and the 2005 Andijan uprising, Bukharbayeva shares intimate details about Uzbekistan's use of torture, kidnapping, and imprisonment against perceived religious extremists. Burkhabayeva's book will be of great interest to scholars, journalists, and anyone interested in contemporary Islam, Central Asia, or newly-formed authoritarian states of the late 20th and early 21st century. Nicholas Seay is a PhD student at Ohio State University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/central-asian-studies

For many years, Uzbekistan was a particularly dangerous place to be a journalist. Speaking out against the government of former president Islam Karimov could lead to torture and a lengthy spell in prison. So it was a surprise for many when in 2004 secret messages started appearing online, containing what seemed like detailed and scandalous information about the president's household. For years, the identity of the writer was kept a secret, and the messages kept coming. Then one day, an inconspicuous football writer called Bobomurod Abdulla was snatched off the streets by the security forces, and the secret was finally out. Do you have a fantastic story involving a secret or a lie? We'd love to hear about it. Record a short voice memo or write an e-mail and send it to us at outlook@bbc.com. If your story is about someone you know, just make sure they're ok with you telling us about it. Presenter: Ibrat Safo Producers: Ibrat Safo & Harry Graham Secrets & Lies series producer: Fiona Woods Music: Joel Cox

For many years, Uzbekistan was a particularly dangerous place to be a journalist. Speaking out against the government of former president Islam Karimov could lead to torture and a lengthy spell in prison. So it was a surprise for many when in 2004 secret messages started appearing online, containing what seemed like detailed and scandalous information about the president's household. For years, the identity of the writer was kept a secret, and the messages kept coming. Then one day, an inconspicuous football writer called Bobomurod Abdulla was snatched off the streets by the security forces, and the secret was finally out. Do you have a fantastic story involving a secret or a lie? We'd love to hear about it. Record a short voice memo or write an e-mail and send it to us at outlook@bbc.com. If your story is about someone you know, just make sure they're ok with you telling us about it. Presenter: Ibrat Safo Producers: Ibrat Safo & Harry Graham Secrets & Lies series producer: Fiona Woods Music: Joel Cox

Under President Shavkat Mirziyoev, Uzbekistan has made some progress in the four years addressing the long list of rights violations that came to characterize the government under Mirziyoev's predecessor, Islam Karimov. But while some hail what they see as major breakthroughs, others see it as small and slow change.

The polls are closing on Wednesday after a week of voting in Russia. More than 200 different constitutional amendments are on the ballot.And people get a single vote — yes or no on the entire package of changes. Among them is a provision that would get rid of term limits, potentially allowing President Vladimir Putin to remain in power until 2036. Preliminary results show that the changes will indeed take effect. Related: Diplomats display Pride flags as LGBTQ rights threatened in RussiaRussian opposition politician Vladimir Kara-Murza has been following the vote closely. He spoke with The World's Marco Werman about what this means for the future of Russia.  Marco Werman: Exit polls show these amendments are passing with flying colors. What does this mean for Russia?Vladimir Kara-Murza: Before I start answering your question, I think it is very important to state that half of what you just said in this sentence should be put in quotation marks. You know, "exit polls," "voting results." This sham procedure that Vladimir Putin has organized has nothing — and I want to stress, nothing to do with a genuine Democratic vote. Had there been a real referendum on whether Putin can stay in power beyond 2024 when his current and supposedly final mandate runs out, he would have lost that referendum. That much is absolutely clear from trends in Russian public opinion.And so the Kremlin, you know, having realized full well that they would never win an honest vote, they are holding this sham exercise, the sham plebiscite. As you just said, there was weeklong voting. Of course, you know, every night those ballots are stored in the offices of electoral commissioners with no kind of independent oversight control. There are no international observers being invited. The only so-called international experts present are representatives of far-right parties in Europe, from Germany, Sweden, Bulgaria. You know, the far-right seems to be the biggest allies of Vladimir Putin abroad.Related: After decades in the shadows, Russia's feminists grab their spotlightSo, for you, the outcomes of this "referendum" — it sounds like they've already been settled on. Why even hold it?Well, because I think Vladimir Putin is obsessed with the idea of legitimacy. Otherwise, he would not have gone through this sham exercise, and I think here is where the international aspect is very important. You know, Vladimir Putin clearly wants to be accepted and recognized as a fellow legitimate leader. He wants to be invited to G-8 summits, he wants to have those high-level meetings, he wants to have this red-carpet treatment. This is why, you know, for all those years before, even while violating the spirit of the law of the rule of law, Vladimir Putin has been careful about, you know, keeping the pretenses and sort of adhering to the letter.We know that Russia hasn't had a real democratic election in a long time now. All the genuine opponents of the regime are removed, disqualified from the ballot, like Alexei Navalny was, for example, in 2018, who wanted to run against Vladimir Putin. But there was sort of an election, quote-unquote. So, up to now, Vladimir Putin has been careful to follow the letter of the law, even while violating its spirit. What's happening this week is substantively different. He chose the most unsophisticated, the most banal way that was used by our dictators all over the map, from Venezuela to Egypt to Uzbekistan to Burkina Faso in previous years and simply waving term limits, subverting constitutional term limits to stay in power beyond the end of his mandate. And I think it is very, very important that the international community, that the democratic nations of the world, what we call the free world, led by the United States, takes a very clear position that it is not accepting this power grab, that even though Vladimir Putin has now been an illegitimate de facto for a long time, he now, as of today, becomes illegitimate de jure.That is a very important stance I think that the international community, including the United States, should be making now. And what it means for the Russian domestic context, I think, again, you know, it's been clear for a very long time that in the system — in the authoritarian system that Vladimir Putin has created — political changes in Russia will not be decided at the ballot box. They will be one day decided on the streets. It will not happen today, will not happen next week, and it will most likely not even happen next year, but it will certainly happen much sooner than 2036.From 2017: Putin critic Alexei Navalny given five-year suspended jail term So, what was Putin's reason for having this referendum held in the first place? I mean, surely he didn't telegraph his desires to stay in power to the whole world?Well, he actually did, and he said publicly on Russian state television that he is, quote-unquote, “considering” which, as you know, in his language, means that he has decided to run again in 2024. And in fact, you know, you mentioned at the outset of our discussion that there are 206 constitutional amendments in this package that are being offered for a supposedly yes or no vote.Well, out of those 206, I mean, there are different types of amendments. Some of these are harmful. Some of these are meaningless. But all of them, well, I should say 205 out of the 206 are a smoke screen. And the only real amendment, the only reason for all of this exercise is one amendment not, by the way, abolishing term limits, but waving them specifically for one individual, for Vladimir Putin personally and allowing him to remain in power after the end of his mandate in 2024.  Related: Russia's cabinet resigns and it's all part of Putin's plan  So, I know this referendum is a yes or no vote. Have you actually seen a ballot and the list of all these 206 amendments? And where does the term limit one set in all of that? Like is Putin literally trying to hide that one among all these others?They are actually trying to hide it. There was the official website set up by the Central Electoral Commission, which kind of outlines all of these amendments. They didn't mention that one — the most important — and only after it was pointed out by the media. And, you know, the opposition groups said that they had to include it on the list. But to answer your question, I haven't seen the ballot and I haven't voted yet myself. I'll go in a couple of hours, so as of the time of speaking to you now, I've not yet taken up my own ballot. I will do that because I just, you know, this is emotionally important for myself to know that I went and said no to Putin's dictatorship.There is a kind of split opinion in the Russian opposition of how to approach this exercise. Many of my colleagues — and I fully respect their view — advocate for a boycott because, you know, it's not a meaningful procedure. It's a sham. It's a farce. It's a spectacle. And so why participate in it? That's one position that I fully respect that. I subscribe myself more to the view that we should use every opportunity we have as Russian citizens to say no to this corrupt and dictatorial system. And so personally, I will in a couple of hours, go and take up my ballot and vote no. I know it will not change anything this time. Again, as I already said, you know, these types of authoritarian regimes, real political changes is made on the streets, not at the ballot boxes.Related: Russia's next generation is ready to remake their world Help us understand something — because Russia does have an opposition movement. You're one of the more vocal people in it. But leading up to this vote, there hasn't been a wave of protests or strong movement to boycott the vote. Why is that?Well, first of all, when you say that Russia has an opposition, you know, Russia had a leader of the opposition whose name was Boris Nemtsov. He was the former deputy prime minister, he was the most prominent and the most effective and most vocal political opponent of President Vladimir Putin. A little more than five years ago, Boris Nemtsov was assassinated, gunned down by five bullets in the back as he walked across a bridge right in front of the Kremlin in Moscow.So, when we talk about the opposition in Russia, let's be careful about terminology. We do not have a democratic system of government. We haven't had one for almost 20 years now. And our most prominent leader of the opposition is dead because he was killed in the middle of Moscow and to this day, five years on, the organizers and masterminds of his murder continue to be fully shielded and fully protected by the highest levels.Related: 'Between Two Fires' looks at the complexities of life in Putin's Russia You would call it an opposition, but not a movement?No, I mean, you're right to say, of course, we are the opposition. As Boris Nemtsov himself said in one of his last interviews before his death, we should be better referred to as dissidents than opposition leaders. You asked why there are no public protests. Well, first of all, because they are banned, because several times when the opponents of these amendments have tried to organize street rallies in Russian cities, they were forbidden to do so by the authorities — of course, under the pretext of the pandemic.So, there's no trouble withholding a vote with tens of millions of people because of the pandemic. There's no problem there. And somebody tries to organize a rally against these amendments? Oh, no, no, no. That's going to be dangerous. No rallies allowed. Actually, as we speak now, there is a spontaneous street protest happening on Pushkin Square right in the middle of Moscow, where people are being dispersed and attacked and arrested and led away by the police, as usual. So, let's watch what happens in the next few months.I guess I'm scratching my head because last summer, municipal elections prompted big demonstrations. So, why is something as consequential as this raft of constitutional amendments, including waiving term limits for Putin — why is that not pushing people out into the streets for the nation?  Well, first of all, it is, as I mentioned, now as we speak, there are demonstrations breaking out in Moscow. But again —Well it’s a small one —— and again, I think it might be sort of obvious for me as a Russian citizen, but I think maybe it needs to be spelled out again for our audience in the United States that, you know, when people go and demonstrate in the US that they are constitutionally protected. They have the right to demonstrate and that right is generally respected by the authorities. You know, in Russia, when you go to demonstrate against the government, you can be beaten up, you can be detained, you can be arrested, you could get several years' term in prison.You know, you mentioned those demonstrations last year in Moscow. There are still people in prison today, a year after the fact, for having gone out to those demonstrations to exercise their rights of freedom of assembly. So, first of all, let's not take this lightly. It's not just why don't people go out and demonstrate. People have to calculate that they can end up 10 years in prison if they go and demonstrate.But I think the astonishing fact is, that even despite this repression and despite this danger and despite the fact that people can face real prison terms for going out to demonstrate, there are still a lot of people in Russia today who are prepared to publicly voice their opposition against the Putin regime. Again, let us see what happens in the next few months, especially as these quarantine measures will be eventually lifted.Related: Russia's youth flex their political power Do you believe Putin will stay in power until 2036?  No, I do not believe that for a second, and speaking to a lot of people and my friends and colleagues in Russia, I have yet to meet a single person who actually believes that Putin will stay in power until 2036. I want to remind you —But what would stop him?— not just would, but what will stop him will be organized public resistance from Russian society. The same factor that stopped authoritarian regimes that other countries where dictators also wanted to stay in power for life or for a long time — [Slobodan] Milošević in Serbia, [Viktor] Yanukovych in Ukraine, [Serzh] Sargsyan in Armenia. And I can long continue this list of would-be strongmen and dictators who wanted to stay in power for life until their citizens, their people told them otherwise.Related: Presidents aren't immune to treason convictions. Just look to Ukraine. You've lived through a lot in Russian politics and public life. Some listeners may know that your life was in danger on multiple occasions and you were poisoned twice and miraculously survived. Vladimir Kara-Murza, after a day like today, how do you refocus? How do you retain hope as a Russian opposition activist?Well, in a way, nothing changes because I think it's been clear to many of our colleagues and many Russian citizens since at least 2003 — so for about 17 years now — that Vladimir Putin wants to remain in power as long as he remains physically alive. So, there's sort of nothing new in this. And going back to what you asked a few minutes ago, the only thing that can, and the only thing that, in the end, will stop Vladimir Putin and his authoritarian regime from realizing these plans is organized public resistance from Russian citizens.But it is also very, very important to have a strong and principled position of the international community, of the free world, led by the United States, that should not allow Vladimir Putin's regime to get away with this power grab. They should not accept this constitutional coup d'etat. No more invitations to the G-8, no more high-level visits, no red-carpet treatment. Vladimir Putin from this day de jure, belongs to the same league of rogue authoritarian regimes as you know, in their day, [Hugo] Chávez in Venezuela, [Blaise] Compaoré in Burkina Faso, [Islam] Karimov in Uzbekistan and many, many others. And this should be said publicly and clearly from the highest rostrum in the Western world.This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. 

The Iranian government held an official funeral on Tuesday for General Qassem Soleimani killed by a US airstrike in Baghdad. There were emotional speeches in the general’s home town of Kerman in southeast Iran and so many mourners turned out that at least 50 were killed in the crush. On Twitter the Iranian Foreign Minister had a message for President Donald Trump: "Have you seen such a sea of humanity in your life?... Do you still think you can break the will of a great nation and its people?" But were the huge crowds really a sign of national unity? Lois Pryce who wrote a book about crossing Iran on a motorbike and who has friends both inside the country and across the 2 million strong Iranian diaspora finds public opinion far from unanimous. Ever since independence from the USSR almost three decades ago, there’s never been an Uzbek election which outsiders were willing to call free or fair. But this time was meant to be different. On the 22nd of December, Uzbekistan ran its first elections to the parliament and local councils since the country’s long-running authoritarian president Islam Karimov died three years ago. Uzbekistan has long been one of the world’s most repressive countries and under Karimov voting was more of a ritual than an exercise of choice. But some hoped that the man who took over, Shavkat Mirziyoyev, (Meer-zee Yoi -yev) might allow some real reform. A record 25 million dollars were earmarked to run the elections, and Ibrat Safo found a real buzz in the air but wondered what lay beneath. Germany has long been considered a leader in renewable energy – a model even for others to follow with its subsidies for wind and solar. But its so-called “Energiewende” (Ener - GEE -vender ) or energy transition” from fossil fuels to renewables has stalled and it still relies on coal for 40 per cent of electricity generation. That will be phased out within the next eighteen years and nuclear energy will end too by 2022 and some worry whether there will be enough energy to heat homes and keep the lights on. Caroline Bayley has been to one former coal town in the industrial Ruhr region which is under-going its own energy transition. The gargantuan Palace of the Parliament built by Romania’s communist-era dictator, Nicolae Ceaușescu, still looms over the centre of Bucharest. About one-fifth of the capital was bulldozed to make way for the so-called House of the People, its satellite buildings, and the grand avenue leading up to it which was supposed to be a longer, wider version of Champs-Élysee in Paris. Forty thousand residents were forcibly rehoused. The building was long reviled as an evil fortress, a symbol of oppression but it now houses the country’s parliament and Romanians are learning to love it and put it in their Instagram feeds says Tessa Dunlop. More and more tourists are travelling to the Amazon rainforest to drink – and later vomit - a foul tasting liquid containing a natural hallucinogen called Ayahuasca [a-ya-wass-ka]. Indigenous people have been brewing the concoction for thousands of years, mostly for religious or spiritual purposes. It’s considered a medicine, a way to heal internal wounds and reconnect with nature. But, as Simon Maybin’s been finding out in a remote part of Peru, not all the plant’s traditional users are happy about the wave of Westerners in search of a slice of the psychedelic action.

Have you ever heard of Uzbekistan? Would you know where to place it on a map? Could you name its capital? If you answered all three questions correctly, congratulations! You're an expert in international geography. If not, don't worry, it's normal, Uzbekistan is as remote as it is unknown. Lately, however, things are starting to change. Uzbekistan has gone from having one of the most terrifying dictatorships in the world under Islam Karimov to opening its doors to the world. In this video we'll tell you a story you won't want to miss.

« Ceci est une véritable histoire vraie aux sources sourcées. Elle commence à la mort du dictateur ouzbek Islam Karimov. Comme tout despote autoritaire, Islam faisait clairement profiter sa famille… See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

For many years, Uzbekistan was a particularly dangerous place to be a journalist. Speaking out against the government of former president Islam Karimov could lead to torture and a lengthy spell in prison. So it was a surprise for many when in 2004 secret messages started appearing online, containing what seemed like detailed and scandalous information about the president's household. For years, the identity of the writer was kept a secret, and the messages kept coming. Then one day, an inconspicuous football writer called Bobomurod Abdulla was snatched off the streets by the security forces, and the secret was finally out. Image and credit: Bobomurod Abdulla

“Something once whole, broken into so many pieces,” Anna Foster reflects on the toll conflict in the Central African Republic is having on its people. In the capital Bangui, she visits PK5 a Muslim enclave in the mainly Christian city and scene of regular violence. Kate Adie introduces this and other stories from correspondents around the world. As a proudly homophobic, far-right president assumes office in Brazil, Simon Maybin meets some of the country’s gay footballers. Chris Bowlby visits a bastion of loyal Protestantism in the Republic of Ireland. The Orange Order hall may have been refurbished with money from Dublin but it is proudly British. Peter Robertson heads to the hills in Uzbekistan to try and get a clear view of what’s changed there under Shavkat Mirziyoyev who became President following Islam Karimov's death. And Vivienne Nunis encounters a scarlet snouted, goblin-like spirit as she examines the damage caused by a recent typhoon in Japan.

Date of Recording: 05/12/2018 Description: After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the independent republics of Central Asia have constantly tried to create a form of regional order that would preserve their sovereignty while enacting purposeful and pragmatic cooperation over economic, security, and political issues. In the mid-1990s and early 2000s, discourses of ‘brotherhood’ and of ‘century-old ties’ underpinned the creation of several regional organisations were created to serve cooperation and integration, leading scholars and analysts to speculate of a potential ‘Central Asian bloc’ within the post-Soviet space. Yet, these organisations faded away and were dismantled in the light of very limited results and tangible outputs. In the words of many analysts, regionalism ‘failed’. In fact, from the mid-2000s onward, relations between the Central Asian states have been strained and rather cold, despite the avoidance and the absence of outright conflict. With the death of Uzbekistan’s first president Islam Karimov in 2016 and the subsequent ascension to power of Shavkat Mirziyoyev, regional cooperation and Central Asian diplomacy seem to have been rebooted and have received new lymph. Enthusiastic commentaries on the chance of a ‘return of Central Asia’ are now back to the fore once again, and parallels with the 1990s are being drawn. Yet, one may ask: to what extent are international, regional, and local political conditions allowing for such parallels? What is old, and what is new, in the current Central Asian regional order? And finally, how is this order going to develop? Bio: Dr Costa Buranelli has a PhD from the Dept of War Studies, King's and is now a lecturer in the Dept of International Relations at the University of St Andrew's. His research looks at how norms, rules and institutions within international society are localized, understood and practiced in different regional contexts. Dr Buranelli's research has been published in Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Global Discourse, and the Journal of Eurasian studies. He has conducted fieldwork in Central Asia, and in particular Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. __________________________ For more news and information on upcoming events, please visit our website at kcl.ac.uk/warstudies

Russian President Vladimir Putin is scheduled to visit Uzbekistan on October 18-19. Uzbekistan's relations with Russia were often poor during Islam Karimov's 25 years as president. Some are wondering just how far new President Shavkat Mirziyoev can take this new relationship.

Uzbekistan will soon make its first transition of power since it became an independent state more than 25 years ago. In this episode, we discuss expectations for Uzbekistan’s upcoming presidential election after the recent death of President Islam Karimov, and explore the country’s domestic and foreign affairs. The Power Transition Long-time president Karimov had ruled... The post Uzbekistan at a Crossroads appeared first on Matters of State - International Relations Podcast.

Kate Adie introduces dispatches from writers and correspondents around the world. This week: Yolande Knell reports on the boom in civil marriages on Cyprus - for couples from Lebanon and Israel; Roger Hearing reveals what happened when he fell foul of the Russian authorities at the border with North Korea; Jannat Jalil speaks to townspeople in Calais about the impact of the continuing crisis at the so-called Jungle migrant camp; Monica Whitlock considers how lasting Islam Karimov's influence will be in Uzbekistan; and Nick Thorpe assesses what the Turkish and Hungarian celebrations of the 450th anniversary of the Battle of Szigetvar say about relations between the two countries.

Matthew Bannister on The Bishop of Durham the Right Reverend David Jenkins. A respected theologian, he was noted for his controversial views. The diplomat Dame Margaret Anstee who overcame sex discrimination to hold senior roles at the United Nations. She led relief missions at many of the world's major trouble spots. . The President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov who faced international condemnation for his violent treatment of his opponents. And Richard Neville who edited the 1960s counter culture magazine Oz, and faced obscenity charges in a notorious court case.

Oezbekistan is één van de meest gesloten en geheimzinnige landen ter wereld. Ingeklemd tussen Kazachstan in het noorden en Turkmenistan en Afghanistan in het zuiden. Vandaag viert het land haar 25 jarige onafhankelijkheid van de Sovjet-Unie, maar zonder de autoritaire leider Islam Karimov. Deze week kreeg hij een beroerte, zo schreef zijn dochter Lola op Instagram. Of hij nog wel in leven is blijft in nevelen gehuld. Wat zijn de risico's als er met zijn dood een machtsvacuüm ontstaat? Elena Paskaleva is verbonden aan de Universiteit van Leiden en doet al tien jaar onderzoek in Oezbekistan.

Amerikanska jättar dominerar en växande marknad för nötter och i torkans Kalifornien startas nya odlingar. Daniel Öhman och Malin Olofsson berättar om samhällen utan vatten och om hållbara alternativ. Grafik: Så mycket vatten går åt till dina livsmedelNyheter: Nötodlingar vattentjuvar, ICA om inköpenMatens pris handlar i dag om vatten. Men inte vattnet vi dricker utan det dolda vatten som går åt för att produceramatvarorna i affärerna. Mycket av produkterna odlas med hjälp av konstbevattning i områden som inte alls är lämpade för det. Det som händer då, är att det livsviktiga dricksvattnet är på väg att sina.I nöthyllan i en butik i Stockholm finns mycket nötter. Vi har hört hur nyttiga de är med bra fetter protein och näringsämnen. Och de är ett vegetariskt alternativ till kött.Sedan millennieskiftet har försäljningen mer än dubblerats. Mest av allt äter vi av mandlar. Över 6 000 ton importeras varje år, det vill säga en tredjedel av alla nötter i till Sverige.Men mandlarna e törstiga. En enda mandel kräver 4 liter vatten.I butiken ser vi ingen märkning som visar vilken region nötterna kommer ifrån, det står bara USA på påsarna. Men nio av tio mandlar som säljs i världen kommer från Kalifornien, där just vattnet är på väg att ta slut.Mandlarna skulle kunna odlas på annat håll. Vi ska berätta mer om det sen men först beger vi oss till Kalifornien.Från Hilltop Ranchs enorma fabrik kommer mandlar till alla de största kedjorna i Sverige. Varje år producerar de 25 000 ton mandlar. Det är fyra gånger så mycket som vi äter i Sverige på ett år. Företagets vd och grundare Dave Long visar med raska kliv runt på fabriken som är sista anhalten innan mandlarna skickas på export.Det är nästan folktomt inne i fabriken. Från ett grovt rör smattrar mandlar ut på ett löpande band. De trasiga mandlarna har redan sorterats bort.10 ton mandlar i timmen passerar här varje dag. När en truck passerar tittar föraren förvånat på oss. Han är inte van att se människor här.Maskiner gör det mesta av arbetet här. Sorterar bort stenar, En laser letar efter eventuella glasbitar och en tredje maskin sorterar mandlarna i olika.Dave Long köper mandlar från över 300 odlare spridda över hela Central Valley som området i Kalifornien vi befinner oss i heter.Vi kommer in i lagret. Jättelika trälårar längs med väggarna så långt ögat kan se.Utanför gassar solen. Som vanligt. När jag är här i november är det fortfarande torka i Kalifornien. Få platser är så torra som här i Central Valley där huvuddelen av Kaliforniens en miljon ton mandlar odlas. Vattnet som normalt kommer i kanaler från floderna i norr har börjat sina.Men trots torkan planteras nya träd. 100 000 acres bara i år. En yta som motsvarar 22 gånger 22 meter.Dave Long säger att det är logiskt. När priserna går upp så planterar fler träd.Fast kanske blir det ändå för många träd nu. Priserna har gått upp i flera år. Från två till åtta dollar per kilo på bara några år. Priserna kommer gå ner tror han och menar att det är synd.Precis intill fabriken ligger en mandelodling. Spikraka rader med träd, 316,3 per hektar. Inte ett ogräs. Varje träd har en egen ledning som förser den med perfekt mängd vatten.En brunn försörjer den med vatten.För en tid sen tvingades de göra brunnen djupare. Vattnet högre upp hade tagit slut.Plötsligt ser han bekymrad ut.Hittills har vem som helst kunnat borra efter vatten. Men när många borrar så sjunker grundvattnet och man måste borra allt djupare.Nu när du hör det här har väderfenomenet El Nino dragit in över Kalifornien, och det har kommit en del regn. Men det är långt ifrån säkert att regnet kommer hjälpa.När så många borrat djupt ner efter vatten pressas marken ihop. Håligheterna där vattnet fanns försvinner. De kommer inte tillbaka även om regnet kommer.Och, säger han, om torkan kommer tillbaka efter regnet kommer allt grundvatten i Kalifornien ta slut.Central Valley är en av USA:s viktigaste, och yngsta jordbruksregioner. En bergskedja skiljer den från kusten och metropolerna San Fransisco och Los Angeles.Jorden är bland den bästa som finns i USA, Men innan man byggde kanaler som ledde ner grundvatten från floderna i norr var det få som kunde odla här.Nu när torkan är inne på sitt fjärde år är det bara de bönder som varit här längst som får något vatten från kanalerna. De andra måste borra.Det är snart skymning när jag träffar Brad Gleason på Harrys Ranch. En megakrog mitt i ingenstans vid en vägkorsning.Brad är sen. Ett möte drog ut på tiden men han fick lift med ett kompis som kunde flyga honom hit.Den senaste tiden har mandelodlarna fått mycket skit i pressen. Mandelodlingarna står för en tiondel av all vattenanvändning från jordbruket i Kalifornien. Merparten av mandlarna exporteras. I tidningarna står det att de exporterar vatten.Brad tycker det är orättvist. Mandlarna är inte sämre än andra grödor, men ger större intäkter.Men det är inte riktigt sant. Grödor som man planterar år från år kan man strunta i att plantera när det är torka. Mandelträd och pistageträd måste vattnas hela tiden. Det är en långsiktig investering. Tre till sex år tar det innan man kan skörda.   Torkan är ett problem för oss, säger Brad, men vi är inte bovarna. Vi försöker bara få våra träd att överleva.Tvärtom tycker han att nötbönderna behandlas illa. De senaste åren har Brad liksom många andra inte fått något vatten från kanalerna.Det finns vatten i floderna norr om dalen. Det skulle kunna ledas hit. Flera av hans brunnar har sinat å nu har han tvingats borra ny. Men grundvattnet här på den västra sidan av dalen särskilt så djupt ner är illa lämpat för nötodlingarna, det är salt och efter en tid blir jorden obrukbar.Vi åker ut för att titta på hans odlingar. Vid sidan av vägen ligger träd uppdragna med rötterna. Vi var tvungna att ta bort dem säger Brad. Det salta grundvattnet förstörde marken. Träden klarade inte det.Med Kaliforniska mått är Brad ingen av de allra största odlarna. I Sverige skulle han spöa de största godsherrarna. 6 000 hektar.1 600 000 träd. Det är nästan lika många träd som det finns äppelträd i Skåne.Vi svänger in på en skumpig väg mellan två pistageträdodlingar. För första gången ser jag lite vatten. En stor pöl med vatten och gegga sen brunnen de håller på att borra. Det ser ut som en oljerigg.Nästan 600 meter ner i marken borrar de, till en kostnad av 7 miljoner kronor. Vattnet där nere kommer troligen från förhistorisk tid. Det kommer ta hundratals kanske tusentals år att fyllas på igen om det tar slut.Det finns inga garantier när man borrar så här djupt, ingen vet egentligen hur vattentäkterna ser ut där nere. Ibland verkar brunnen funka bra. Och så plötsligt efter bara något år sinar den.Brad har dock ändå hopp om framtiden. Kanske måste en del bönder lägga ner. Men det kommer inte vara mandlar och pistagenötter som försvinner. Utan grödor som ger lägre intäkter. Ska man ha råd att köpa vatten måste man få bra betalt. Då är mandel och pistagenötter bra grödor.Mandelskörden i Kalifornien väntas i år bli en miljon ton. Det utgör 80 procent av hela världsproduktionen.Solen gassar i den lummiga parken några hundra meter från rymdstyrelsen Nasas högkvarter i stadsdelen Pasadena i östra Los Angeles.  Cedric David slår sig ner vid ett picknicbord och plockar upp datorn. Som utlänning får jag inte komma in i Nasas byggnad. Det tar månader att få ett tillstånd.Nasas satelliter kan mäta från rymden hur vattnet försvinner. Cedric klickar upp en länk. En karta över USA som zoomar in på Kalifornien och Central Valley. Ett räkneverk flyttar tiden framåt mot nutiden. Färgen ändras från gul till orange till djupt röd det betyder extrem torka.Hur Nasas satelliter kan räkna ut det här är lite svårt att förklara. Så vi lämnar det här.Hur som helst har extremt mycket vatten försvunnit. 42 kubik kilometer vatten. Det kanske inte säger så mycket men tänk dig en sjö som är tio meter djup. För att rymma så mycket vatten skulle den sträcka sig 64 kilometer i varje riktning. Så mycket vatten har försvunnit.Det är helt ohållbart säger Cedric, även om torkan tar slut kommer vi tömma grundvattenreservoarerna - inte om tusen år - utan inom vår livstid. Vatten försvinner även när det inte är torka.När de rika storbönderna borrar djupare och djupare, blir även deras grannar lidande.De starka pumparna suger inte bara från vattentäkten utan också från sidan från grannarna. Det här skapar spänningar i dalen. För det finns de som inte har råd att borra djupare.Janaki Jagannath är jurist och jobbar för en organisation som erbjuder gratis juridiskt stöd till låginkomsttagare på landsbygden. Allt vatten här är privatägt av jordbrukarna. Trotts att tusentals människor jobbar på fälten är det ingen som har tänkt på deras rättigheter. Som rent vatten tillexempel.I det lilla samhället som vi går omkring i är det torrt på de små trädgårdsplättarna. Vi är helt omringade av mandel och pistageträd. Men till skillnad från bönderna får invånarna här inte använda vattnet till att vattna med, fruktträden i trädgårdarna torkar ut. Och på sommaren, när temperaturen ofta når över 30 grader, blir det jobbigt för barnen som inte kan svalka sig någonstans.Att tappa upp vatten i en liten uppblåsbar pool är inte att tänkta på.Mellan de två samhällena Cantua Creek och El Porvenir går en kanal. De bönder som odlat marken länge häromkring får delar av sitt vatten härifrån. Det är också källan till bybornas vatten.  Ett reningsverk ska göra det rent men det är gammalt och funkar inte något vidare. Nu håller själva marken som husen står på att försvinna.På ett år har marken som husen står på sjunkit med 30 centimeter.Ni kommer kanske ihåg vad Dave Long sa. Han som ägde mandelfabriken. När för många tar för mycket vatten ur marken pressas den ihop. Då sjunker den.På gården utanför sitt hus står Jennifer Rodriques framför en spis. Vattenledningarna är trasiga så det går inte riktigt att vara inne i köket. och den senaste månadens vattenräkning hamnade på 400 dollar. Jag dricker det aldrig, berättar hon.4 000 kronor i månaden för vatten man inte kan dricka. Innan Janakis organisation, grep in tvingades de själva köpa vatten, Nu kommer det vatten på flaska då och då.Jennifer är en av få som talar engelska här i Three Rocks, eller El Porvenir, sanningen som det heter på spanska.Nu är hon rädd till och med för att duscha i vattnet. Huden blir torr och hon får eksem säger hon.Förr i tiden fanns det brunnar här. Men de har sinat berättar Janaki.Att borra nya brunnar skulle inte lösa något. Långvarigt bruk av konstgödsel och bekämpningsmedel har förorenat grundvattnet. Det är ännu giftigare än vattnet från kanalen.Det är ett litet samhälle. Många här har blivit arbetslösa sedan allt fler odlare i området slutat odla grönsaker och gått över till nötter.Jennifer ska flytta till ett annat hus i byn. Hon är glad för att komma från huset med de läckande ledningarna. Men också lite orolig.Det nya huset ligger bara tiotalet meter från pistageträden. Hon är orolig för flygplanen.Planen kommer på kvällen och sprayar någonting. Hon vet inte vad det är de sprayar. Men det luktar som ruttna ägg Man blir yr och får ont i huvudet säger Jennifer. Och min son har svår astmaAtt spraya bekämpningsmedel så här nära byn, om det nu är det de gör är förbjudet även i Kalifornien. Men kontrollen är dålig berättar Janaki. Staten bryr sig inte om de här områdena.Människorna som jobbar inom jordbruket här lever bara tre fjärdedelar så länge som genomsnittet.Jag frågar vem som äger farmen. Jennifer vet inte det.I efterhand lyckas vi hitta ägaren. En fastighetspamp från närmsta storstaden Fresno. Men vi får inte tag på honom och kan inte fråga vad det är de sprayar på fälten. Man kan jämföra det med en diskho säger hon. När disken ligger huller om buller tar den mycket plats. Men när man staplat upp den flyttar den sig inte hur mycket vatten man än håller på. De håligheter som en gång fanns är borta för evigt. Nu hotas hela infrastrukturen i dalen säger hon. Marken är väldigt platt. Och vattnet från kanalerna rinner framåt tack vare en marginell lutning. Även små förändringar kan sabba allt.Hon är orolig. Så här kan det inte fortsätta. Någonting måste hända.Bonden Paradali sladdar in på gården. På tomten odlar de grönsaker till familjen. En bit utanför byn granatäpplen för export och så plockar han tillsammans med de andra byborna mandlar och valnötter och lite pistagenötter uppe i bergen.Jag har fått lift hit med två män från exportföretaget som köper deras varor. De hjälper också till att tolka.Jag hoppar upp på sidovagnen till motorcykeln och vi åker iväg genom fälten där de odlar granatäpplen.Hälften av de låga träden är redan inpackade i lera. För att skydda dem mot iskylan på vintern.Valnötsträden vi passerar är stora och gamla. De levererar fortfarande. De bästa kan ge 300 kilo på ett enda träd. Vi stannar till vid det största.Hur gammalt är det frågar jag. Min farfar vet svarar Paradali med ett skratt. Kanske mer än 150 år.Några getter ligger under trädet och idisslar. Jag plockar upp en nöt från marken och smakar på den. Smaken är intensiv.Byn vi befinner oss i ligger uppe i bergen i södra Uzbekistan nära gränsen till Tadjikistan, 40 mil söderut, Afghanistan.Uzbekistan har ända sedan Sovjetunionens splittring styrts av diktatorn Islam Karimov i vad som närmast kan liknas vid ett korrupt familjevälde. Internationellt har det blivit rubriker i tidningarna när det kommit fram att hans säkerhetstjänst kokat oppositionella i olja. All mark i Uzbekistan ägs av Staten, bönderna får hyra landet mot en avgift. Men de vilda nötterna har inte staten samma kontroll över. All produktion här är ekologisk och de vilda nötterna som plockas är Fairtrade-märkta.Pardali och de andra pekar upp på bergskammen långt bort i fjärran, det är nätt och jämt jag kan se träden. En dryg kvadrat kilometer av mandelträd finns det där uppe. Sex ton kan det bli ett bra år.När de plockar nötterna rider de på åsnor, säger Pardali eller snarare, ibland knuffar vi åsnorna upp. Vi brukar stanna några dagar däruppe innan vi kommer tillbaka.Nötterna är lite mindre än jag är van vid. Smaken är mer intensiv. Koncentrerad.Dels beror det på att de inte vattnas, dels på att det är andra sorter än de som odlas i Kalifornien. Klimatet är som sagt extremt, heta somrar, iskalla vintrar och 300 soldagar. Det är torrt. De träd som växer här måste vara tåliga. De produktiva mandelträden från Kalifornien skulle inte klara en säsong här.Forskningsrapporter som jämfört vilda pistage- och mandelsorter med de kommersiellt odlade har sett att de innehåller mycket mer av de fytokemikalier som stärker vårt immunförsvar och skyddar oss mot sjukdomarDe är glada i byn. Fairtrade-märkningen fungerar så att bönderna utöver det vanliga priset får en premie. Premien måste gå till något gemensamt. Nu ska de borra en brunn.Premien de fick från Fairtrade på 100 000 kronor borde täcka det mesta. Äntligen rent dricksvatten.Tidigare har de bara haft vatten när det kommit smältvatten från bergen. Annars måste de åka en halv mil för att hämta. Men nu ska det bli ändringVi åker vidare till en annan by. En skumpig grusväg. Gråa tegelhus bakom lika gråa tegelmurar.Men öppnar man dörren hittar man en trädgårdsplätt framför varje hus smäckfull med ekologiska grönsaker. I varje trädgård en egen specialitet. En del äter de själva en del torkas och exporteras.Elmira Bertagloni är uppvuxen i Uzbekistan men för det mesta bosatt i Österrike. För 15 år sen startade hon tillsammans med en lokal partner ett företag som exporter vilda nötter och ekologiska, bär frukter och grönsaker som det torkar själva.I början handlade det mest om att tjäna pengar. Först det ekologiska, en växande marknadsnisch. Fairtrade började de med mest för att en brittisk kund tjatade. Men med tiden har hon upptäckt att det känns bra också. I hjärtat. Som nu, byborna har fått råd att dra en gasledning till byn. Det kan bli 20 minus på vintern och husen är inte uppvärmda. Det traditionella sättet att överleva vintrarna har varit att stänga in hela familjen i ett rum och göra upp en eld på torkad koskit i ett hål i golvet på mitten. Sen sitter man där tillsammans för att hålla värmen. I vinter blir det bättre.Nötterna som i Kalifornien hotade hela delstatens vattenförsörjning räddar här liv. De gör bönderna mer oberoende från statens förtryck. De kan borra en brunn så de får rent vatten att dricka och slipper sitta i 18 graders kyla på vintern i ett hål för att hålla värmen genom att elda kobajs.Malin Olofsson och Daniel Öhman daniel.ohman@sverigesradio.se  

Guest: Paul Stronski on Islam Karimov's Uzbekistan. The post Islam Karimov’s Uzbekistan appeared first on SRB Podcast.