Podcasts about Ivan Illich

Gandpa Bill explores :Ivan Illich, in his commentary on Hugh of Saint Victor's Didascalion, explores the medieval understanding of knowledge and learning. He uses the powerful metaphor of "God's Play on Wisdom" to describe how divine wisdom is manifested and communicated through the created world and, particularly, through the study of sacred texts. This isn't a rigid, deterministic transmission, but rather a playful unfolding, inviting human interpretation and engagement.We can draw a compelling analogy here when discussing the concept of God on my podcast. Instead of viewing "God" as a static, fully knowable entity, we can explore how the human understanding of the divine might be akin to interpreting a complex and multifaceted "play" orchestrated by a higher wisdom. This "play" unfolds through our experiences, our relationships, our search for meaning, and even our struggles with doubt and faith.Grandpa Bill WILL BE asking these Questions when Byron Athene actually joins on May 29th (incorporating Illich's analogy):Byron, considering Illich's concept of "God's Play on Wisdom," how might the diverse and often contradictory interpretations of God throughout history be seen as different human readings or engagements with this complex "play"? What psychological factors might influence these varying interpretations?Illich suggests a playful unfolding of divine wisdom. How might this perspective inform our understanding of the role of questioning and doubt in an individual's spiritual or existential journey? Is doubt perhaps an inherent part of engaging with this "play"?The "text" in Illich's analogy refers to sacred writings and the created world. In a modern context, what might be considered the "texts" through which individuals seek to understand or experience the divine, and how does our "reading" of these contemporary "texts" (science, nature, personal experience) shape our concept of God?If our understanding of God is akin to interpreting a "play," how does this analogy impact our perception of religious dogma and doctrine? Are these perhaps like different interpretations or stagings of the same underlying "wisdom"? What are the psychological implications of adhering rigidly to one interpretation versus embracing a more fluid understanding?Illich emphasizes the active engagement of the reader with the text. How does this translate to our personal relationship with the concept of God? Is it a passive reception of information or an active, ongoing process of interpretation and meaning-making?The metaphor of "play" suggests an element of mystery and perhaps even unpredictability. How does this resonate with the human experience of faith, which often involves uncertainty and moments of profound mystery?Drawing on Illich's idea, how might psychological well-being be influenced by an individual's ability to find their own meaningful interpretation within this "play of wisdom," rather than feeling constrained by prescribed understandings of God?Grandpa Bill Asks:Thinking about your own understanding of the divine, what aspects feel like a clearly defined script, and what aspects feel more like an open-ended, improvisational "play" that you are actively participating in? Share your reflections!In what "texts" (whether traditional religious texts, nature, personal experiences, art, etc.) do you find the most compelling "clues" or "insights" into the nature of something greater than yourself? How do you "read" these "texts"?#GodsPlay,#IvanIllich,#InTheVineyardOfTheText,#HughOfSaintVictor,#Wisdom,#Interpretation,#Philosophy,#Theology,#Spirituality,#Psychology,#Podcast,#GrandpaBill,#ByronAthene,#VirtualCreative Solutions for Holistic Healthcare

In this episode of Conversations with Dr. Cowan and Friends, Dr. Tom Cowan and guest Michael critique the foundations and effects of compulsory schooling. They argue that modern public education is rooted in coercion and control, not genuine learning. Drawing on thinkers like Ivan Illich and John Taylor Gatto, they claim that the school system conditions obedience, suppresses creativity, and disconnects children from meaningful, real-life experiences. They advocate for “deschooling” society—replacing forced schooling with child-led, play-based, and intrinsically motivated learning rooted in family, nature, and real work.Support the showWebsites:https://drtomcowan.com/https://www.drcowansgarden.com/https://newbiologyclinic.com/https://newbiologycurriculum.com/Instagram: @TalkinTurkeywithTomFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/DrTomCowan/Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/CivTSuEjw6Qp/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzxdc2o0Q_XZIPwo07XCrNg

Guest Manish Jain - a radical "unlearner" and rethinker of education - is deeply committed to regenerating our diverse local knowledge systems, cultural imaginations and inter-cultural dialogue. Inspired by MK Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore, Sri Aurobindo, Ivan Illich, his village grandmother, Indigenous communities and Jain spiritual philosophy, Manish is one of the leading planetary voices for de-schooling our lives. He has helped thousands of young people escape from factory schooling and recover their dignity, self-worth and "alivelihoods." Manish, a Harvard alumnus and former investment banker with Morgan Stanley, has also worked for UNESCO and UNICEF among other, came to question the dominant economic model, and not least, the Western-style education model that is perpetuating destructive growth and development, and fomenting a 'West is Best' mindset. He is the co-founder of Shikshantar: The Peoples' Institute for Rethinking Education and Development, Swaraj University, India's first self-designed people's university where each learner (ages 17-28) can join and work on their unique path, and the Ecoversities Alliance, a global network of alternative universities.Guest Felipe Viveros is an independent researcher, strategist and consultant specializing in campaigning, program design and fundraising. He has worked with governments and organizations globally pioneering the prototyping and implementation of a new development paradigm, and has served as the European representative of the GNH Centre Bhutan, the board Chair of /TR and at the Sacred Head Waters Initiative. Felipe also is co-writer of "In the Anthropocene" (a favorite FVR song over the years) performed by Nick Mulvey.Production Credits:Tiokasin Ghosthorse (Lakota), Host and Executive ProducerLiz Hill (Red Lake Ojibwe), ProducerOrlando DuPont, Radio Kingston Studio EngineerMusic Selections:1. Song Title: Tahi Roots Mix (First Voices Radio Theme Song)Artist: Moana and the Moa HuntersAlbum: Tahi (1993)Label: Southside Records (Australia and New Zealand)2. Song Title: In the AnthropoceneArtist: Nick MulveyAlbum: N/A - released as a single in October 2019Label: N/A; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYnaQIvBRAEAbout First Voices Radio:"First Voices Radio," now in its 32nd year on the air, is an internationally syndicated one-hour radio program originating from and heard weekly on Radio Kingston WKNY 1490 AM and 107.9 FM in Kingston, New York. Hosted by Tiokasin Ghosthorse (Lakota), who is the show's Founder and Executive Producer, "First Voices Radio" explores global topics and issues of critical importance to the preservation and protection of Mother Earth presented in the voices and from the perspective of the original peoples of the world.Akantu Intelligence:Visit Akantu Intelligence, an institute that Tiokasin founded with a mission of contextualizing original wisdom for troubled times. Go to https://akantuintelligence.org to find out more and consider joining his Patreon page at https://www.patreon.com/Ghosthorse

The Canadian broadcaster David Cayley describes his groundbreaking interviews with the thinker and theologian Ivan Illich, in which Illich describes how it is the very best, the church, became the very worst, in modernity. If you enjoyed this podcast, please consider donating to support our work. Become a Patron!  

In the story of the Good Samaritan Jesus sets love above custom, law, and religious institutions but the corruption of this very best also poses the possibility of the very worst, in the words of Ivan Illich, in the institutionalization of the Church.  If you enjoyed this podcast, please consider donating to support our work. Become a Patron!

Orsborn shares the concept of embracing old age as a transformative process. She emphasizes the importance of accepting reality, embracing mortality, and recognizing one's belovedness. She also touches on the evolutionary purpose of old age and the role of spiritual practices in navigating life's challenges, including illness and loss. Carol Orsborn, Ph.D. received her Masters of Theological Studies and Doctorate in History and Critical Theory of Religion from Vanderbilt University, with post-graduate work in Spiritual Counseling at the New Seminary in Manhattan. She specialized in adult development and ritual studies. She has served on the faculties of Pepperdine, Loyola Marymount, and Georgetown Universities. She is the author of Older, Wiser, Fiercer: The Wisdom Collection (self-published 2019), The Making of an Old Soul: Aging as the Fulfillment of Life's Promise (White River Press 2021)and Spiritual Aging: Weekly Reflections for Embracing Life (Park Street Press 2024).Interview Date: 1/10/2025 Tags: Carol Orsborn, Joan Chittister, fear, denial, God, grace, Tolstoy, Death of Ivan Illich, Ram Dass, hope, expectation, curiosity, Personal Transformation, Spirituality, Aging

Les références : Introduction à Ivan Illich de Thierry Paquot aux éditions de la Découverte Préface d'Hervé Kempf à la réédition de la Convivialité au SeuilVous pouvez mettre un commentaire pour l'épisode. Et même mettre une note sur 5 étoiles si vous le souhaitez. Et même mettre une note sur 5 étoiles si vous le souhaitez. Il est important pour nous d'avoir vos retours car, contrairement par exemple à une conférence, nous n'avons pas un public en face de nous qui peut réagir. Pour mettre un commentaire ou une note, rendez-vous sur la page dédiée à l'épisode.Aidez-nous à mieux vous connaître et améliorer l'émission en répondant à notre questionnaire (en cinq minutes). Vos réponses à ce questionnaire sont très précieuses pour nous. De votre côté, ce questionnaire est une occasion de nous faire des retours. Pour connaître les nouvelles concernant l'émission (annonce des podcasts, des émissions à venir, ainsi que des bonus et des annonces en avant-première) inscrivez-vous à la lettre d'actus.

"Mi hipótesis es que no puede existir una sociedad que merezca el calificativo de “socialista” si la energía mecánica que utiliza aplasta al hombre." "Olvida que el territorio lo crea el hombre con su cuerpo, y toma por territorio lo que no es más que un paisaje visto a través de una ventanilla por un hombre amarrado a su butaca. Ya no sabe marcar el ámbito de sus dominios con la huella de sus pasos, ni encontrarse con los vecinos, caminando en la plaza. Ya no encuentra al otro sin chocar, ni llega sin que un motor lo arrastre. Su órbita puntual y diaria lo enajena de todo." "Perdió la fe en el poder político de caminar"

When Austrian philosopher Ivan Illich was asked about the most revolutionary way to change society, he answered, "Neither revolution nor reformation can ultimately change a society, rather you must tell a new powerful tale, one so persuasive that it sweeps away the old myths and becomes the preferred story, one so inclusive that it gathers all the bits of our past and our present into a coherent whole, one that even shines some light into our future so that we can take the next step…If you want to change a society, then you have to tell an alternative story. In this sermon Neale Proellocks explores this concept, and highlights that the alternative narrative is God's story and it includes an invitation to find your place in it. If you enjoyed this sermon please consider subscribing. CONNECT WITH US Instagram: www.instagram.com/humeridgechurch Facebook: www.facebook.com/humeridgechurch YouTube: www.youtube.com/humeridgechurch Have you made a decision to follow Jesus? Do you have a praise point, or want to request prayer? We would love for you to get in contact with us so we can follow up with you! Please complete the contact form on our website at https://humeridge.church/contact

In this episode, Detlef Schlich and AI co-host Sophia explore the fascinating evolution of human cognition by revisiting key milestones in our intellectual development, beginning with the silent reading revolution inspired by Hugh of St. Victor, as discussed in In the Vineyard of the Text by Ivan Illich. They delve into how silent reading transformed cognitive processes in the 12th century and set the stage for modern introspection. By comparing this cognitive leap to today's advancements in AI, Detlef and Sophia pose the question: Are we on the brink of another cognitive evolution? Join us as we discuss how these shifts in reading, writing, and now artificial intelligence form our collective ‘cultural magma,' each layer bringing profound societal change.Detlef Schlich is a rock musician, podcaster, visual artist, filmmaker, ritual designer, and media archaeologist based in West Cork. He is recognized for his seminal work, including a scholarly examination of the intersections between shamanism, art, and digital culture, and his acclaimed video installation, Transodin's Tragedy. He primarily works in performance, photography, painting, sound, installations, and film. In his work, he reflects on the human condition and uses the digital shaman's methodology as an alter ego to create artwork. His media archaeology is a conceptual and practical exercise in uncovering the unique aesthetic, cultural, and political aspects of media in culture.WEBSITE LINKS WAW BandcampSilent NightIn a world shadowed by conflict and unrest, we, Dirk Schlömer & Detlef Schlich, felt compelled to reinterpret 'Silent Night' to reflect the complexities and contradictions of modern life.https://studiomuskau.bandcamp.com/track/silent-nightWild Atlantic WayThis results from a trip to West Cork, Ireland, where the beautiful Coastal "Wild Atlantic Way" reaches along the whole west coast!https://studiomuskau.bandcamp.com/track/wild-atlantic-wayYOU TUBE*Silent Night Reimagined* A Multilayered Avant-Garde Journey by WAW aka Dirk Schlömer & Detlef Schlichhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAbytLSfgCwDetlef SchlichInstagramDetlef Schlich ArTEEtude I love West Cork Artists FacebookDetlef Schlich I love West Cork Artists Group ArTEEtudeYouTube Channelsvisual PodcastArTEEtudeCute Alien TV official WebsiteArTEEtude Detlef Schlich Det Design Tribal Loop Download here for free Detlef Schlich´s Essay about the Cause and Effect of Shamanism, Art and Digital Culturehttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/303749640_Shamanism_Art_and_Digital_Culture_Cause_and_EffectSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/arteetude-a-podcast-with-artists-by-detlef-schlich/donations

Les références : Introduction à Ivan Illich de Thierry Paquot aux éditions de la Découverte Préface d'Hervé Kempf à la réédition de la Convivialité au SeuilVous pouvez mettre un commentaire pour l'épisode. Et même mettre une note sur 5 étoiles si vous le souhaitez. Et même mettre une note sur 5 étoiles si vous le souhaitez. Il est important pour nous d'avoir vos retours car, contrairement par exemple à une conférence, nous n'avons pas un public en face de nous qui peut réagir. Pour mettre un commentaire ou une note, rendez-vous sur la page dédiée à l'épisode.Aidez-nous à mieux vous connaître et améliorer l'émission en répondant à notre questionnaire (en cinq minutes). Vos réponses à ce questionnaire sont très précieuses pour nous. De votre côté, ce questionnaire est une occasion de nous faire des retours. Pour connaître les nouvelles concernant l'émission (annonce des podcasts, des émissions à venir, ainsi que des bonus et des annonces en avant-première) inscrivez-vous à la lettre d'actus.

Les références : Introduction à Ivan Illich de Thierry Paquot aux éditions de la Découverte Préface d'Hervé Kempf à la réédition de la Convivialité au SeuilVous pouvez mettre un commentaire pour l'épisode. Et même mettre une note sur 5 étoiles si vous le souhaitez. Et même mettre une note sur 5 étoiles si vous le souhaitez. Il est important pour nous d'avoir vos retours car, contrairement par exemple à une conférence, nous n'avons pas un public en face de nous qui peut réagir. Pour mettre un commentaire ou une note, rendez-vous sur la page dédiée à l'épisode.Aidez-nous à mieux vous connaître et améliorer l'émission en répondant à notre questionnaire (en cinq minutes). Vos réponses à ce questionnaire sont très précieuses pour nous. De votre côté, ce questionnaire est une occasion de nous faire des retours. Pour connaître les nouvelles concernant l'émission (annonce des podcasts, des émissions à venir, ainsi que des bonus et des annonces en avant-première) inscrivez-vous à la lettre d'actus.

On this episode of the pod, my guest is David Cayley, a Toronto-based Canadian writer and broadcaster. For more than thirty years (1981-2012) he made radio documentaries for CBC Radio One's program Ideas, which premiered in 1965 under the title The Best Ideas You'll Hear Tonight. In 1966, at the age of twenty, Cayley joined the Canadian University Service Overseas (CUSO), one of the many volunteer organizations that sprang up in the 1960's to promote international development. Two years later, back in Canada, he began to associate with a group of returned volunteers whose experiences had made them, like himself, increasingly quizzical about the idea of development. In 1968 in Chicago, he heard a lecture given by Ivan Illich and in 1970 he and others brought Illich to Toronto for a teach-in called “Crisis in Development.” This was the beginning of their long relationship: eighteen years later Cayley invited Illich to do a series of interviews for CBC Radio's Ideas. Cayley is the author of Ivan Illich: An Intellectual Journey (2022), Ideas on the Nature of Science (2009), The Rivers North of the Future: The Testament of Ivan Illich (2004), Puppet Uprising (2003),The Expanding Prison: The Crisis in Crime and Punishment and the Search for Alternatives (1998), George Grant in Conversation (1995), Northrop Frye in Conversation (1992), Ivan Illich in Conversation (1992), and The Age of Ecology (1990).Show Notes:The Early Years with Ivan IllichThe Good Samaritan StoryFalling out of a HomeworldThe Corruption of the Best is the Worst (Corruptio Optimi Pessima)How Hospitality Becomes HostilityHow to Live in ContradictionRediscovering the FutureThe Pilgrimage of SurpriseFriendship with the OtherHomework:Ivan Illich: An Intellectual Journey (Penn State Press) - Paperback Now Available!David Cayley's WebsiteThe Rivers North of the Future (House of Anansi Press)Ivan Illich | The Corruption of Christianity: Corruptio Optimi Pessima (2000)Charles Taylor: A Secular AgeTranscript:Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome, David, to the End of Tourism Podcast. It's a pleasure to finally meet you. David: Likewise. Thank you. Chris: I'm very grateful to have you joining me today. And I'm curious if you could offer our listeners a little glimpse into where you find yourself today and what the world looks like for you through the lenses of David Cayley.David: Gray and wet. In Toronto, we've had a mild winter so far, although we did just have some real winter for a couple of weeks. So, I'm at my desk in my house in downtown Toronto. Hmm. Chris: Hmm. Thank you so much for joining us, David. You know, I came to your work quite long ago.First through the book, The Rivers North of the Future, The Testament of Ivan Illich. And then through your long standing tenure as the host of CBC Ideas in Canada. I've also just finished reading your newest book, Ivan Illich, An Intellectual Journey. For me, which has been a clear and comprehensive homage [00:01:00] to that man's work.And so, from what I understand from the reading, you were a friend of Illich's as well as the late Gustavo Esteva, a mutual friend of ours, who I interviewed for the podcast shortly before his death in 2021. Now, since friendship is one of the themes I'd like to approach with you today, I'm wondering if you could tell us about how you met these men and what led you to writing a biography of the former, of Ivan.David: Well, let me answer about Ivan first. I met him as a very young man. I had spent two years living in northern Borneo, eastern Malaysia, the Malaysian state of Sarawak. As part of an organization called the Canadian University Service Overseas, which many people recognize only when it's identified with the Peace Corps. It was a similar initiative or the VSO, very much of the time.And When I returned to [00:02:00] Toronto in 1968, one of the first things I saw was an essay of Ivan's. It usually circulates under the name he never gave it, which is, "To Hell With Good Intentions." A talk he had given in Chicago to some young volunteers in a Catholic organization bound for Mexico.And it made sense to me in a radical and surprising way. So, I would say it began there. I went to CDOC the following year. The year after that we brought Ivan to Toronto for a teach in, in the fashion of the time, and he was then an immense celebrity, so we turned people away from a 600 seat theater that night when he lectured in Toronto.I kept in touch subsequently through reading mainly and we didn't meet again until the later 1980s when he came to Toronto.[00:03:00] He was then working on, in the history of literacy, had just published a book called ABC: the Alphabetization of the Western Mind. And that's where we became more closely connected. I went later that year to State College, Pennsylvania, where he was teaching at Penn State, and recorded a long interview, radically long.And made a five-hour Ideas series, but by a happy chance, I had not thought of this, his friend Lee Hoinacki asked for the raw tapes, transcribed them, and eventually that became a published book. And marked an epoch in Ivan's reception, as well as in my life because a lot of people responded to the spoken or transcribed Illich in a way that they didn't seem to be able to respond to his writing, which was scholastically condensed, let's [00:04:00] say.I always found it extremely congenial and I would even say witty in the deep sense of wit. But I think a lot of people, you know, found it hard and so the spoken Illich... people came to him, even old friends and said, you know, "we understand you better now." So, the following year he came to Toronto and stayed with us and, you know, a friendship blossomed and also a funny relationship where I kept trying to get him to express himself more on the theme of the book you mentioned, The Rivers North of the Future, which is his feeling that modernity, in the big sense of modernity can be best understood as perversionism. A word that he used, because he liked strong words, but it can be a frightening word."Corruption" also has its difficulties, [00:05:00] but sometimes he said "a turning inside out," which I like very much, or "a turning upside down" of the gospel. So, when the world has its way with the life, death and resurrection and teaching of Jesus Christ which inevitably becomes an institution when the world has its way with that.The way leads to where we are. That was his radical thought. And a novel thought, according to the philosopher Charles Taylor, a Canadian philosopher, who was kind enough to write a preface to that book when it was published, and I think very much aided its reception, because people knew who Charles Taylor was, and by then, they had kind of forgotten who Ivan Illich was.To give an example of that, when he died, the New York [00:06:00] Times obituary was headlined "Priest turned philosopher appealed to baby boomers in the 60s." This is yesterday's man, in other words, right? This is somebody who used to be important. So, I just kept at him about it, and eventually it became clear he was never going to write that book for a whole variety of reasons, which I won't go into now.But he did allow me to come to Cuernavaca, where he was living, and to do another very long set of interviews, which produced that book, The Rivers North of the Future. So that's the history in brief. The very last part of that story is that The Rivers North of the Future and the radio series that it was based on identifies themes that I find to be quite explosive. And so, in a certain way, the book you mentioned, Ivan Illich: An Intellectual Journey, [00:07:00] was destined from the moment that I recorded those conversations. Chris: Hmm, yeah, thank you, David. So much of what you said right there ends up being the basis for most of my questions today, especially around the corruption or the perversion what perhaps iatrogenesis also termed as iatrogenesis But much of what I've also come to ask today, stems and revolves around Illich's reading of the Good Samaritan story, so I'd like to start there, if that's alright.And you know, for our listeners who aren't familiar either with the story or Illich's take on it, I've gathered some small excerpts from An Intellectual Journey so that they might be on the same page, so to speak. So, from Ivan Illich, An Intellectual Journey:"jesus tells the story after he has been asked how to, quote, 'inherit eternal life,' end quote, and has replied that one must love God and one's neighbor, [00:08:00] quote, 'as oneself,' but, quote, who is my neighbor? His interlocutor wants to know. Jesus answers with his tale of a man on his way from Jerusalem to Jericho, who is beset by robbers, beaten, and left, quote, 'half dead' by the side of the road.Two men happen along, but, quote, 'pass by on the other side.' One is a priest and the other a Levite, a group that assisted the priests at the Great Temple, which, at that time, dominated the landscape of Jerusalem from the Temple Mount. Then, a Samaritan comes along. The Samaritans belonged to the estranged northern kingdom of Israel, and did not worship at the Temple.Tension between the Samaritans and the Judeans in the Second Temple period gives the name a significance somewhere between 'foreigner' and 'enemy.' [00:09:00] In contemporary terms, he was, as Illich liked to say, 'a Palestinian.' The Samaritan has, quote, 'compassion' on the wounded one. He stops, binds his wounds, takes him to an inn where he can convalesce and promises the innkeeper that he will return to pay the bill.'And so Jesus concludes by asking, 'Which of the three passers by was the neighbor?'Illich claimed that this parable had been persistently misunderstood as a story about how one ought to act. He had surveyed sermons from the 3rd through 19th centuries, he said, 'and found a broad consensus that what was being proposed was a, quote, rule of conduct.' But this interpretation was, in fact, quote, 'the opposite of what Jesus wanted to point out.'He had not been asked how to act toward a neighbor, but rather, 'who is my neighbor?' And he had replied, [00:10:00] scandalously, that it could be anyone at all. The choice of the Samaritan as the hero of the tale said, 'in effect, it is impossible to categorize who your neighbor might be.' The sense of being called to help the other is experienced intermittently and not as an unvarying obligation.A quote, 'new kind of ought has been established,' Illich says, which is not related to a norm. It has a telos, it aims at somebody, some body, but not according to a rule. And finally, The Master told them that who your neighbor is is not determined by your birth, by your condition, by the language which you speak, but by you.You can recognize the other man who is out of bounds culturally, who is foreign linguistically, who, you can [00:11:00] say by providence or pure chance, is the one who lies somewhere along your road in the grass and create the supreme form of relatedness, which is not given by creation, but created by you. Any attempt to explain this 'ought,' as correspond, as, as corresponding to a norm, takes out the mysterious greatness from this free act.And so, I think there are at least, at the very least, a few major points to take away from this little summary I've extracted. One, that the ability to choose one's neighbor, breaks the boundaries of ethnicity at the time, which were the bases for understanding one's identity and people and place in the world.And two, that it creates a new foundation for hospitality and interculturality. And so I'm [00:12:00] curious, David, if you'd be willing to elaborate on these points as you understand them.David: Well if you went a little farther on in that part of the book, you'd find an exposition of a German teacher and writer and professor, Claus Held, that I found very helpful in understanding what Ivan was saying. Held is a phenomenologist and a follower of Husserl, but he uses Husserl's term of the home world, right, that each of us has a home world. Mm-Hmm. Which is our ethnos within which our ethics apply.It's a world in which we can be at home and in which we can somehow manage, right? There are a manageable number of people to whom we are obliged. We're not universally obliged. So, what was interesting about Held's analysis is then the condition in which the wounded [00:13:00] man lies is, he's fallen outside of any reference or any home world, right?Nobody has to care for him. The priest and the Levite evidently don't care for him. They have more important things to do. The story doesn't tell you why. Is he ritually impure as one apparently dead is? What? You don't know. But they're on their way. They have other things to do. So the Samaritan is radically out of line, right?He dares to enter this no man's land, this exceptional state in which the wounded man lies, and he does it on the strength of a feeling, right? A stirring inside him. A call. It's definitely a bodily experience. In Ivan's language of norms, it's not a norm. It's not a duty.It's [00:14:00] not an obligation. It's not a thought. He's stirred. He is moved to do what he does and he cares for him and takes him to the inn and so on. So, the important thing in it for me is to understand the complementarity that's involved. Held says that if you try and develop a set of norms and ethics, however you want to say it, out of the Samaritan's Act, it ends up being radically corrosive, it ends up being radically corrosive damaging, destructive, disintegrating of the home world, right? If everybody's caring for everybody all the time universally, you're pretty soon in the maddening world, not pretty soon, but in a couple of millennia, in the maddening world we live in, right? Where people Can tell you with a straight face that their actions are intended to [00:15:00] save the planet and not experience a sense of grandiosity in saying that, right?Not experiencing seemingly a madness, a sense of things on a scale that is not proper to any human being, and is bound, I think, to be destructive of their capacity to be related to what is at hand. So, I think what Ivan is saying in saying this is a new kind of ought, right, it's the whole thing of the corruption of the best is the worst in a nutshell because as soon as you think you can operationalize that, you can turn everyone into a Samaritan and You, you begin to destroy the home world, right?You begin to destroy ethics. You begin to, or you transform ethics into something which is a contradiction of ethics. [00:16:00] So, there isn't an answer in it, in what he says. There's a complementarity, right? Hmm. There's the freedom to go outside, but if the freedom to go outside destroys any inside, then, what have you done?Right? Hmm. You've created an unlivable world. A world of such unending, such unimaginable obligation, as one now lives in Toronto, you know, where I pass homeless people all the time. I can't care for all of them. So, I think it's also a way of understanding for those who contemplate it that you really have to pay attention.What are you called to, right? What can you do? What is within your amplitude? What is urgent for you? Do that thing, right? Do not make yourself mad with [00:17:00] impossible charity. A charity you don't feel, you can't feel, you couldn't feel. Right? Take care of what's at hand, what you can take care of. What calls you.Chris: I think this comes up quite a bit these days. Especially, in light of international conflicts, conflicts that arise far from people's homes and yet the demand of that 'ought' perhaps of having to be aware and having to have or having to feel some kind of responsibility for these things that are happening in other places that maybe, It's not that they don't have anything to do with us but that our ability to have any kind of recourse for what happens in those places is perhaps flippant, fleeting, and even that we're stretched to the point that we can't even tend and attend to what's happening in front of us in our neighborhoods.And so, I'm curious as to how this came to be. You mentioned "the corruption" [00:18:00] and maybe we could just define that, if possible for our listeners this notion of "the corruption of the best is the worst." Would you be willing to do that? Do you think that that's an easy thing to do? David: I've been trying for 30 years.I can keep on trying. I really, I mean, that was the seed of everything. At the end of the interview we did in 1988, Ivan dropped that little bomb on me. And I was a diligent man, and I had prepared very carefully. I'd read everything he'd written and then at the very end of the interview, he says the whole history of the West can be summed up in the phrase, Corruptio Optimi Pessima.He was quite fluent in Latin. The corruption of the best is the worst. And I thought, wait a minute, the whole history of the West? This is staggering. So, yes, I've been reflecting on it for a long time, but I think there are many ways to speak [00:19:00] about the incarnation, the idea that God is present and visible in the form of a human being, that God indeed is a human being in the person of Jesus Christ.One way is to think of it as a kind of nuclear explosion of religion. Religion had always been the placation of a god. Right? A sacrifice of some kind made to placate a god. Now the god is present. It could be you. Jesus is explicit about it, and I think that is the most important thing for Iman in reading the gospel, is that God appears to us as one another.Hmm. If you can put it, one another in the most general sense of that formula. So, that's explosive, right? I mean, religion, in a certain way, up to that moment, is society. It's the [00:20:00] integument of every society. It's the nature of the beast to be religious in the sense of having an understanding of how you're situated and in what order and with what foundation that order exists. It's not an intellectual thing. It's just what people do. Karl Barth says religion is a yoke. So, it has in a certain way exploded or been exploded at that moment but it will of course be re instituted as a religion. What else could happen? And so Ivan says, and this probably slim New Testament warrant for this, but this was his story, that in the very earliest apostolic church. They were aware of this danger, right? That Christ must be shadowed by "Antichrist," a term that Ivan was brave enough to use. The word just has a [00:21:00] terrible, terrible history. I mean, the Protestants abused the Catholics with the name of Antichrist. Luther rages against the Pope as antichrist.Hmm. And the word persists now as a kind of either as a sign of evangelical dogmatism, or maybe as a joke, right. When I was researching it, I came across a book called "How to Tell If Your Boyfriend Is The Antichrist." Mm-Hmm. It's kind of a jokey thing in a way, in so far as people know, but he dared to use it as to say the antichrist is simply the instituted Christ.Right. It's not anything exotic. It's not anything theological. It's the inevitable worldly shadow of there being a Christ at all. And so that's, that's the beginning of the story. He, he claims that the church loses sight of this understanding, loses sight of the basic [00:22:00] complementarity or contradiction that's involved in the incarnation in the first place.That this is something that can never be owned, something that can never be instituted, something that can only happen again and again and again within each one. So, but heaven can never finally come to earth except perhaps in a story about the end, right? The new heaven and the new earth, the new Jerusalem come down from heaven.Fine. That's at the end, not now. So that's the gist of what he, what he said. He has a detailed analysis of the stages of that journey, right? So, within your theme of hospitality the beginnings of the church becoming a social worker in the decaying Roman Empire. And beginning to develop institutions of hospitality, [00:23:00] places for all the flotsam and jetsam of the decaying empire.And then in a major way from the 11th through the 13th century, when the church institutes itself as a mini or proto state, right? With a new conception of law. Every element of our modernity prefigured in the medieval church and what it undertook, according to Ivan. This was all news to me when he first said it to me.So yeah, the story goes on into our own time when I think one of the primary paradoxes or confusions that we face is that most of the people one meets and deals with believe themselves to be living after Christianity and indeed to great opponents of Christianity. I mean, nothing is more important in Canada now than to denounce residential schools, let's say, right? Which were [00:24:00] the schools for indigenous children, boarding schools, which were mainly staffed by the church, right?So, the gothic figure of the nun, the sort of vulpine, sinister. That's the image of the church, right? So you have so many reasons to believe that you're after that. You've woken up, you're woke. And, and you see that now, right? So you don't In any way, see yourself as involved in this inversion of the gospel which has actually created your world and which is still, in so many ways, you.So, leftists today, if I'm using the term leftists very, very broadly, "progressives," people sometimes say, "woke," people say. These are all in a certain way super Christians or hyper Christians, but absolutely unaware of themselves as Christians and any day you can read an analysis [00:25:00] which traces everything back to the Enlightenment.Right? We need to re institute the Enlightenment. We've forgotten the Enlightenment. We have to get back to the, right? There's nothing before the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment is the over, that's an earlier overcoming of Christianity, right? So modernity is constantly overcoming Christianity. And constantly forgetting that it's Christian.That these are the ways in which the Incarnation is working itself out. And one daren't say that it's bound to work itself out that way. Ivan will go as far as to say it's seemingly the will of God that it should work itself out that way. Right? Wow. So, that the Gospel will be preached to all nations as predicted at the end of the Gospels." Go therefore and preach to all nations," but it will not be preached in its explicit form. It will enter, as it were, through the [00:26:00] back door. So that's a very big thought. But it's a saving thought in certain ways, because it does suggest a way of unwinding, or winding up, this string of finding out how this happened.What is the nature of the misunderstanding that is being played out here? So. Chris: Wow. Yeah, I mean, I, I feel like what you just said was a kind of nuclear bomb unto its own. I remember reading, for example, James Hillman in The Terrible Love of War, and at the very end he essentially listed all, not all, but many of the major characteristics of modern people and said if you act this way, you are Christian.If you act this way, you are Christian. Essentially revealing that so much of modernity has these Christian roots. And, you know, you said in terms of this message and [00:27:00] corruption of the message going in through the back door. And I think that's what happens in terms of at least when we see institutions in the modern time, schools, hospitals, roads essentially modern institutions and lifestyles making their way into non modern places.And I'm very fascinated in this in terms of hospitality. You said that the church, and I think you're quoting Illich there, but " the church is a social worker." But also how this hospitality shows up in the early church and maybe even how they feared about what could happen as a result to this question of the incarnation.In your book it was just fascinating to read this that you said, or that you wrote, that "in the early years of Christianity it was customary in a Christian household to have an extra mattress, a bit of candle, and some dry bread in case the Lord Jesus should knock at the door in the form of a stranger without a roof, a form of behavior that was utterly [00:28:00] foreign to the cultures of the Roman Empire."In which many Christians lived. And you write, "you took in your own, but not someone lost on the street." And then later "When the emperor Constantine recognized the church, Christian bishops gained the power to establish social corporations." And this is, I think, the idea of the social worker. The church is a social worker.And you write that the first corporations they started were Samaritan corporations, which designated certain categories of people as preferred neighbors. For example, the bishops created special houses financed by the community that were charged with taking care of people without a home. Such care was no longer the free choice of the householder, it was the task of an institution.The appearance of these xenodocheia? Literally, quote, 'houses for foreigners' signified the beginning of a change in the nature of the church." And then of course you write and you mentioned this but "a gratuitous and truly [00:29:00] free choice of assisting the stranger has become an ideology and an idealism." Right. And so, this seems to be how the corruption of the Samaritan story, the corruption of breaking that threshold, or at least being able to cross it, comes to produce this incredible 'ought,' as you just kind of elaborated for us.And then this notion of, that we can't see it anymore. That it becomes this thing in the past, as you said. In other words, history. Right? And so my next question is a question that comes to some degree from our late mutual friend Gustavo, Gustavo Esteva. And I'd just like to preface it by a small sentence from An Intellectual Journey where he wrote that, "I think that limit, in Illich, is always linked to nemesis, or to what Jung calls [00:30:00] enantiodromia, his Greek word for the way in which any tendency, when pushed too far, can turn into its opposite. And so, a long time ago, Illich once asked Gustavo if he could identify a word that could describe the era after development, or perhaps after development's death.And Gustavo said, "hospitality." And so, much later, in a private conversation with Gustavo, in the context of tourism and gentrification, the kind that was beginning to sweep across Oaxaca at the time, some years ago, he told me that he considered "the sale of one's people's radical or local hospitality as a kind of invitation to hostility in the place and within the ethnos that one lives in."Another way of saying it might be that the subversion and absence of hospitality in a place breeds or can breed hostility.[00:31:00] I'm curious what you make of his comment in the light of limits, enantiodromia and the corruption that Illich talks about.David: Well I'd like to say one thing which is the thought I was having while you, while you were speaking because at the very beginning I mentioned a reservation a discomfort with words like perversion and corruption. And the thought is that it's easy to understand Illich as doing critique, right? And it's easy then to moralize that critique, right? And I think it's important that he's showing something that happens, right? And that I daren't say bound to happen, but is likely to happen because of who and what we are, that we will institutionalize, that we will make rules, that we will, right?So, I think it's important to rescue Ivan from being read [00:32:00] moralistically, or that you're reading a scold here, right? Hmm. Right. I mean, and many social critics are or are read as scolds, right? And contemporary people are so used to being scolded that they, and scold themselves very regularly. So, I just wanted to say that to rescue Ivan from a certain kind of reading. You're quoting Gustavo on the way in which the opening up of a culture touristically can lead to hostility, right? Right. And I think also commenting on the roots of the words are the same, right? "hostile," "hospice." They're drawing on the same, right?That's right. It's how one treats the enemy, I think. Hmm. It's the hinge. Hmm. In all those words. What's the difference between hospitality and hostility?[00:33:00] So, I think that thought is profound and profoundly fruitful. So, I think Gustavo had many resources in expressing it.I couldn't possibly express it any better. And I never answered you at the beginning how I met Gustavo, but on that occasion in 1988 when I was interviewing Illich, they were all gathered, a bunch of friends to write what was called The Development Dictionary, a series of essays trying to write an epilogue to the era of development.So, Gustavo, as you know, was a charming man who spoke a peculiarly beautiful English in which he was fluent, but somehow, you could hear the cadence of Spanish through it without it even being strongly accented. So I rejoiced always in interviewing Gustavo, which I did several times because he was such a pleasure to listen to.But anyway, I've digressed. Maybe I'm ducking your question. Do you want to re ask it or? Chris: Sure. [00:34:00] Yeah, I suppose. You know although there were a number of essays that Gustavo wrote about hospitality that I don't believe have been published they focused quite a bit on this notion of individual people, but especially communities putting limits on their hospitality.And of course, much of this hospitality today comes in the form of, or at least in the context of tourism, of international visitors. And that's kind of the infrastructure that's placed around it. And yet he was arguing essentially for limits on hospitality. And I think what he was seeing, although it hadn't quite come to fruition yet in Oaxaca, was that the commodification, the commercialization of one's local indigenous hospitality, once it's sold, or once it's only existing for the value or money of the foreigner, in a kind of customer service worldview, that it invites this deep [00:35:00] hostility. And so do these limits show up as well in Illich's work in terms of the stranger?Right? Because so much of the Christian tradition is based in a universal fraternity, universal brotherhood. David: I said that Ivan made sense to me in my youth, as a 22 year old man. So I've lived under his influence. I took him as a master, let's say and as a young person. And I would say that probably it's true that I've never gone anywhere that I haven't been invited to go.So I, I could experience that, that I was called to be there. And he was quite the jet setter, so I was often called by him to come to Mexico or to go to Germany or whatever it was. But we live in a world that is so far away from the world that might have been, let's say, the world that [00:36:00] might be.So John Milbank, a British theologian who's Inspiring to me and a friend and somebody who I found surprisingly parallel to Illich in a lot of ways after Ivan died and died I think feeling that he was pretty much alone in some of his understandings. But John Milbank speaks of the, of recovering the future that we've lost, which is obviously have to be based on some sort of historical reconstruction. You have to find the place to go back to, where the wrong turning was, in a certain way. But meanwhile, we live in this world, right? Where even where you are, many people are dependent on tourism. Right? And to that extent they live from it and couldn't instantly do without. To do without it would be, would be catastrophic. Right? So [00:37:00] it's it's not easy to live in both worlds. Right? To live with the understanding that this is, as Gustavo says, it's bound to be a source of hostility, right?Because we can't sell what is ours as an experience for others without changing its character, right, without commodifying it. It's impossible to do. So it must be true and yet, at a certain moment, people feel that it has to be done, right? And so you have to live in in both realities.And in a certain way, the skill of living in both realities is what's there at the beginning, right? That, if you take the formula of the incarnation as a nuclear explosion, well you're still going to have religion, right? So, that's inevitable. The [00:38:00] world has changed and it hasn't changed at the same time.And that's true at every moment. And so you learn to walk, right? You learn to distinguish the gospel from its surroundings. And a story about Ivan that made a big impression on me was that when he was sent to Puerto Rico when he was still active as a priest in 1956 and became vice rector of the Catholic University at Ponce and a member of the school board.A position that he regarded as entirely political. So he said, "I will not in any way operate as a priest while I'm performing a political function because I don't want these two things to get mixed up." And he made a little exception and he bought a little shack in a remote fishing village.Just for the happiness of it, he would go there and say mass for the fishermen who didn't know anything about this other world. So, but that was[00:39:00] a radical conviction and put him at odds with many of the tendencies of his time, as for example, what came to be called liberation theology, right?That there could be a politicized theology. His view was different. His view was that the church as "She," as he said, rather than "it," had to be always distinguished, right? So it was the capacity to distinguish that was so crucial for him. And I would think even in situations where tourism exists and has the effect Gustavo supposed, the beginning of resistance to that and the beginning of a way out of it, is always to distinguish, right?To know the difference, which is a slim read, but, but faith is always a slim read and Ivan's first book, his first collection of published essays was [00:40:00] called Celebration of Awareness which is a way of saying that, what I call know the difference. Chris: So I'm going to, if I can offer you this, this next question, which comes from James, a friend in Guelph, Canada. And James is curious about the missionary mandate of Christianity emphasizing a fellowship in Christ over ethnicity and whether or not this can be reconciled with Illich's perhaps emphatic defense of local or vernacular culture.David: Well, yeah. He illustrates it. I mean, he was a worldwide guy. He was very far from his roots, which were arguably caught. He didn't deracinate himself. Hmm. He was with his mother and brothers exiled from Split in Dalmatia as a boy in the crazy atmosphere of the Thirties.But he was a tumbleweed after [00:41:00] that. Mm-Hmm. . And so, so I think we all live in that world now and this is confuses people about him. So, a historian called Todd Hart wrote a book still really the only book published in English on the history of CIDOC and Cuernavaca, in which he says Illich is anti-missionary. And he rebukes him for that and I would say that Ivan, on his assumptions cannot possibly be anti missionary. He says clearly in his early work that a Christian is a missionary or is not a Christian at all, in the sense that if one has heard the good news, one is going to share it, or one hasn't heard it. Now, what kind of sharing is that? It isn't necessarily, "you have to join my religion," "you have to subscribe to the following ten..." it isn't necessarily a catechism, it may be [00:42:00] an action. It may be a it may be an act of friendship. It may be an act of renunciation. It can be any number of things, but it has to be an outgoing expression of what one has been given, and I think he was, in that sense, always a missionary, and in many places, seeded communities that are seeds of the new church.Right? He spent well, from the time he arrived in the United States in 51, 52, till the time that he withdrew from church service in 68, he was constantly preaching and talking about a new church. And a new church, for him, involved a new relation between innovation and tradition. New, but not new.Since, when he looked back, he saw the gospel was constantly undergoing translation into new milieu, into new places, into new languages, into new forms.[00:43:00] But he encountered it in the United States as pretty much in one of its more hardened or congealed phases, right? And it was the export of that particular brand of cultural and imperialistic, because American, and America happened to be the hegemon of the moment. That's what he opposed.The translation of that into Latin America and people like to write each other into consistent positions, right? So, he must then be anti missionary across the board, right? But so I think you can be local and universal. I mean, one doesn't even want to recall that slogan of, you know, "act locally, think globally," because it got pretty hackneyed, right?And it was abused. But, it's true in a certain way that that's the only way one can be a Christian. The neighbor, you said it, I wrote it, Ivan said it, " the neighbor [00:44:00] can be anyone." Right?But here I am here now, right? So both have to apply. Both have to be true. It's again a complementary relation. And it's a banal thought in a certain way, but it seems to be the thought that I think most often, right, is that what creates a great deal of the trouble in the world is inability to think in a complementary fashion.To think within, to take contradiction as constituting the world. The world is constituted of contradiction and couldn't be constituted in any other way as far as we know. Right? You can't walk without two legs. You can't manipulate without two arms, two hands. We know the structure of our brains. Are also bilateral and everything about our language is constructed on opposition.Everything is oppositional and yet [00:45:00] when we enter the world of politics, it seems we're going to have it all one way. The church is going to be really Christian, and it's going to make everybody really Christian, or communist, what have you, right? The contradiction is set aside. Philosophy defines truth as the absence of contradiction.Hmm. Basically. Hmm. So, be in both worlds. Know the difference. Walk on two feet. That's Ivan. Chris: I love that. And I'm, I'm curious about you know, one of the themes of the podcast is exile. And of course that can mean a lot of things. In the introduction to An Intellectual Journey, you wrote that that Illich, "once he had left Split in the 30s, that he began an experience of exile that would characterize his entire life."You wrote that he had lost "not just the home, but the very possibility [00:46:00] of home." And so it's a theme that characterizes as well the podcast and a lot of these conversations around travel, migration, tourism, what does it mean to be at home and so, this, This notion of exile also shows up quite a bit in the Christian faith.And maybe this is me trying to escape the complementarity of the reality of things. But I tend to see exile as inherently I'll say damaging or consequential in a kind of negative light. And so I've been wondering about this, this exilic condition, right? It's like in the Abrahamic faith, as you write "Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all begin in exile.And eventually this pattern culminates. Jesus is executed outside the gates of the city, nailed to a cross that excludes him even from his native earth." And you write that "exile is in many ways the [00:47:00] Christian condition." And so, you know, I've read that in the past, Christian monks often consider themselves to be homeless, removed from the sort of daily life of the local community in the monasteries and abbeys and yet still of a universal brotherhood. And so I'd like to ask you if you feel this exilic condition, which seems to be also a hallmark of modernity, this kind of constant uprooting this kind of as I would call it, cultural and spiritual homelessness of our time, if you think that is part of the corruption that Illich based his work around?David: Well, one can barely imagine the world in which Abram, who became Abraham said to God, no, I'm staying in Ur. Not going, I'm not going. Right? I mean, if you go back to Genesis and you re read that passage, when God shows [00:48:00] Abraham the land that he will inherit, it says already there, "there were people at that time living in the land," right?Inconvenient people, as it turns out. Palestinians. So, there's a profound contradiction here, I think. And the only way I think you can escape it is to understand the Gospel the way Ivan understood it, which is as something super added to existing local cultures, right? A leaven, right?Hmm. Not everything about a local culture or a local tradition is necessarily good. Mm hmm. And so it can be changed, right? And I would say that Illich insists that Christians are and must be missionaries. They've received something that they it's inherent in what they've [00:49:00] received that they pass it on.So the world will change, right? But Ivan says, this is in Rivers North of the Future, that it's his conviction that the Gospel could have been preached without destroying local proportions, the sense of proportion, and he put a great weight on the idea of proportionality as not just, a pleasing building or a pleasing face, but the very essence of, of how a culture holds together, right, that things are proportioned within it to one another that the gospel could have been preached without the destruction of proportions, but evidently it wasn't, because the Christians felt they had the truth and they were going to share it. They were going to indeed impose it for the good of the other.So, I think a sense of exile and a sense of home are as [00:50:00] necessary to one another as in Ivan's vision of a new church, innovation, and tradition, or almost any other constitutive couplet you can think of, right? You can't expunge exile from the tradition. But you also can't allow it to overcome the possibility of home.I mean, Ivan spoke of his own fate as a peculiar fate, right? He really anticipated the destruction of the Western culture or civilization. I mean, in the sense that now this is a lament on the political right, mainly, right? The destruction of Western civilization is something one constantly hears about.But, he, in a way, in the chaos and catastrophe of the 30s, already felt the death of old Europe. And even as a boy, I think, semi consciously at least, took the roots inside himself, took them with him [00:51:00] and for many people like me, he opened that tradition. He opened it to me. He allowed me to re inhabit it in a certain way, right?So to find intimations of home because he wasn't the only one who lost his home. Even as a man of 78, the world in which I grew up here is gone, forgotten, and to some extent scorned by younger people who are just not interested in it. And so it's through Ivan that I, in a way, recovered the tradition, right?And if the tradition is related to the sense of home, of belonging to something for good or ill, then that has to be carried into the future as best we can, right? I think Ivan was searching for a new church. He didn't think. He had found it. He didn't think he knew what it was.I don't think he [00:52:00] described certain attributes of it. Right. But above all, he wanted to show that the church had taken many forms in the past. Right. And it's worldly existence did not have to be conceived on the model of a monarchy or a parish, right, another form that he described in some early essays, right.We have to find the new form, right? It may be radically non theological if I can put it like that. It may not necessarily involve the buildings that we call churches but he believed deeply in the celebrating community. As the center, the root the essence of social existence, right? The creation of home in the absence of home, or the constant recreation of home, right? Since I mean, we will likely never again live in pure [00:53:00] communities, right? Yeah. I don't know if pure is a dangerous word, but you know what I mean?Consistent, right? Closed. We're all of one kind, right? Right. I mean, this is now a reactionary position, right? Hmm. You're a German and you think, well, Germany should be for the Germans. I mean, it can't be for the Germans, seemingly. We can't put the world back together again, right?We can't go back and that's a huge misreading of Illich, right? That he's a man who wants to go back, right? No. He was radically a man who wanted to rediscover the future. And rescue it. Also a man who once said to hell with the future because he wanted to denounce the future that's a computer model, right? All futures that are projections from the present, he wanted to denounce in order to rediscover the future. But it has to be ahead of us. It's not. And it has to recover the deposit that is behind us. So [00:54:00] both, the whole relation between past and future and indeed the whole understanding of time is out of whack.I think modern consciousness is so entirely spatialized that the dimension of time is nearly absent from it, right? The dimension of time as duration as the integument by which past, present and future are connected. I don't mean that people can't look at their watch and say, you know, "I gotta go now, I've got a twelve o'clock." you know.So, I don't know if that's an answer to James.Chris: I don't know, but it's food for thought and certainly a feast, if I may say so. David, I have two final questions for you, if that's all right, if you have time. Okay, wonderful. So, speaking of this notion of home and and exile and the complementarity of the two and you know you wrote and [00:55:00] spoke to this notion of Illich wanting to rediscover the future and he says that "we've opened a horizon on which new paradigms for thought can appear," which I think speaks to what you were saying and At some point Illich compares the opening of horizons to leaving home on a pilgrimage, as you write in your book."And not the pilgrimage of the West, which leads over a traveled road to a famed sanctuary, but rather the pilgrimage of the Christian East, which does not know where the road might lead and the journey end." And so my question is, What do you make of that distinction between these types of pilgrimages and what kind of pilgrimage do you imagine might be needed in our time?David: Well, I, I mean, I think Ivan honored the old style of pilgrimage whether it was to [00:56:00] Canterbury or Santiago or wherever it was to. But I think ivan's way of expressing the messianic was in the word surprise, right? One of the things that I think he did and which was imposed on him by his situation and by his times was to learn to speak to people in a way that did not draw on any theological resource, so he spoke of his love of surprises, right? Well, a surprise by definition is what you don't suspect, what you don't expect. Or it couldn't be a surprise.So, the The cathedral in Santiago de Compostela is very beautiful, I think. I've only ever seen pictures of it, but you must expect to see it at the end of your road. You must hope to see it at the end of your road. Well the surprise is going to be something else. Something that isn't known.[00:57:00] And it was one of his Great gifts to me that within the structure of habit and local existence, since I'm pretty rooted where I am. And my great grandfather was born within walking distance of where I am right now. He helped me to look for surprises and to accept them also, right?That you're going to show up or someone else is going to show up, right? But there's going to be someone coming and you want to look out for the one who's coming and not, but not be at all sure that you know who or what it is or which direction it's coming from. So, that was a way of life in a certain way that I think he helped others within their limitations, within their abilities, within their local situations, to see the world that way, right. That was part of what he did. Chris: Yeah, it's really beautiful and I can [00:58:00] see how in our time, in a time of increasing division and despondency and neglect, fear even, resentment of the other, that how that kind of surprise and the lack of expectation, the undermining, the subversion of expectation can find a place into perhaps the mission of our times.And so my final question comes back to friendship. and interculturality. And I have one final quote here from An Intellectual Journey, which I highly recommend everyone pick up, because it's just fascinating and blows open so many doors. David: We need to sell a few more books, because I want that book in paperback. Because I want it to be able to live on in a cheaper edition. So, yes. Chris: Of course. Thank you. Yeah. Please, please pick it up. It's worth every penny. So in An Intellectual Journey, it is written[00:59:00] by Illich that "when I submit my heart, my mind, my body, I come to be below the other. When I listen unconditionally, respectfully, courageously, with the readiness to take in the other as a radical surprise, I do something else. I bow, bend over toward the total otherness of someone. But I renounce searching for bridges between the other and me, recognizing that a gulf separates us.Leaning into this chasm makes me aware of the depth of my loneliness, and able to bear it in the light of the substantial likeness between the Other and myself. All that reaches me is the Other in His Word, which I accept on faith."And so, David at another point in the biography you quote Illich describing faith as foolish. Now assuming that faith elicits a degree of danger or [01:00:00] betrayal or that it could elicit that through a kind of total trust, is that nonetheless necessary to accept the stranger or other as they are? Or at least meet the stranger or other as they are? David: I would think so, yeah. I mean the passage you've quoted, I think to understand it, it's one of the most profound of his sayings to me and one I constantly revert to, but to accept the other in his word, or on his word, or her word, is, I think you need to know that he takes the image of the word as the name of the Lord, very, very seriously, and its primary way of referring to the Christ, is "as the Word."Sometimes explicitly, sometimes not explicitly, you have to interpret. So, when he says that he renounces looking for bridges, I think he's mainly referring [01:01:00] to ideological intermediations, right, ways in which I, in understanding you exceed my capacity. I try to change my name for you, or my category for you, changes you, right?It doesn't allow your word. And, I mean, he wasn't a man who suffered fools gladly. He had a high regard for himself and used his time in a fairly disciplined way, right? He wasn't waiting around for others in their world. So by word, what does he mean?What is the other's word? Right? It's something more fundamental than the chatter of a person. So, I think what that means is that we can be linked to one another by Christ. So that's [01:02:00] the third, right? That yes, we're alone. Right? We haven't the capacity to reach each other, except via Christ.And that's made explicit for him in the opening of Aylred of Riveau's Treatise on Friendship, which was peculiarly important to him. Aylred was an abbot at a Cistercian monastery in present day Yorkshire, which is a ruin now. But he wrote a treatise on friendship in the 12th century and he begins by addressing his brother monk, Ivo, and says, you know, " here we are, you and I, and I hope a third Christ."So, Christ is always the third, right? So, in that image of the gulf, the distance, experiencing myself and my loneliness and yet renouncing any bridge, there is still a word, the word, [01:03:00] capital W, in which a word, your word, my word, participates, or might participate. So, we are building, according to him, the body of Christ but we have to renounce our designs on one another, let's say, in order to do that. So I mean, that's a very radical saying, the, the other in his word and in another place in The Rivers North of the Future, he says how hard that is after a century of Marxism or Freudianism, he mentions. But, either way he's speaking about my pretension to know you better than you know yourself, which almost any agency in our world that identifies needs, implicitly does. I know what's best for you. So Yeah, his waiting, his ability to wait for the other one is, is absolutely [01:04:00] foundational and it's how a new world comes into existence. And it comes into existence at every moment, not at some unimaginable future when we all wait at the same time, right? My friend used to say that peace would come when everybody got a good night's sleep on the same night. It's not very likely, is it? Right, right, right. So, anyway, there we are. Chris: Wow. Well, I'm definitely looking forward to listening to this interview again, because I feel like just like An Intellectual Journey, just like your most recent book my mind has been, perhaps exploded, another nuclear bomb dropped.David: Chris, nice to meet you. Chris: Yeah, I'll make sure that that book and, of course, links to yours are available on the end of the website. David: Alright, thank you. Chris: Yeah, deep bow, David. Thank you for your time today. David: All the best. And thank you for those questions. Yeah. That was that was very interesting. You know, I spent my life as an interviewer. A good part of my [01:05:00] life. And interviewing is very hard work. It's much harder than talking. Listening is harder than talking. And rarer. So, it's quite a pleasure for me, late in life, to be able to just let her rip, and let somebody else worry about is this going in the right direction? So, thank you. Get full access to ⌘ Chris Christou ⌘ at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe

Al Roxburgh and Jenny Sinclair talk with David Cayley about the insights of the Austrian Catholic priest, philosopher and social critic Ivan Illich (1926-2006). Through his work at the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) on the show “Ideas,” David came to know Illich personally and became one of his leading interpreters.  David's conversation with Al and Jenny outlines Illich's main lines of thought.  They discuss Illich's insights into the negative consequences of modernity in terms of education, medicine, gender, technology and power, and his view of the West as a corruption of Christianity. What emerges is an introduction to the depth and richness of Illich's thought as a significant resource in the face of today's unravelling.David Cayley has been a writer, broadcaster and documentary maker for more than 30 years. Known for documenting the philosophy of 20th Century Christian intellectuals, he has studied Ivan Illich, George Grant, and Rene Girard. He is the author of many books and has received many awards. David is the pre-eminent authority on his friend, the priest philosopher, Ivan Illich.  - Links -For Alan J Roxburgh:http://alanroxburgh.com/abouthttps://www.themissionalnetwork.com/author/alan-roxburgh/X.com/Twitter: https://x.com/alanjroxburgh?lang=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/alan.roxburgh.127/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thecommonsnetworkJoining God in the Great Unraveling https://www.amazon.ca/Joining-God-Great-Unraveling-Learned/dp/1725288508/ref=sr_1_Leadership, God's Agency and Disruptions https://www.amazon.ca/Leadership-Gods-Agency-Disruptions-Confronting/dp/1725271745/refJoining God, Remaking Church, Changing the World: The New Shape of the Church in Our Time https://www.amazon.ca/Joining-Remaking-Church-Changing-World/dp/0819232114/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2NHGW8KB7L0SQ&keywords=Alan+J+Roxburgh&qid=1687098960&s=books&sprefix=alan+j+roxburgh%2Cstripbooks%2C130&sr=1-3For Jenny Sinclair:Website: https://togetherforthecommongood.co.uk/from-jenny-sinclairLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenny-sinclair-0589783b/X.com/Twitter: https://x.com/homeFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/TogetherForTheCommonGoodUKInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/t4cg_insta/For David Cayley:www.davidcayley.comLinks to the conversations with Ivan Illich; https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEZ9EYTtCpN0B46hzH2inM9VrYzaD7UvEBooks by David Cayley:vIvan Illich: An Intellectual JourneyGeorge Grant in ConversationIvan Illich in ConversationBooks by Ivan Illich:Medical NemesisDeschooling SocietyTools for ConvivialityGenderDisabling Professions Get full access to Leaving Egypt at leavingegyptpodcast.substack.com/subscribe

David and I discuss the legend and rare-bird genius of Ivan Illich as well as his trials and tears, weighing out a few of Illich's key notions, including anti-Christ and the corruption of Christianity, counter-productivity, the ethics of the gaze, and the prayerful awareness that arises from and makes room for celebration. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cewgreen.substack.com/subscribe

Joey Taylor & Sam Pressler speak with Pete Davis about Join or Die, which he directed with Rebecca Davis.The Lost Prophets PodcastPete's Interview with SamDedicated by Pete DavisBowling Alone by PutnamThe Upswing by PutnamSum of Us by McGheeAgainst Everyone with Conner Habib PodcastWeird Studies PodcastLindy Effect - Nicholas Nassim TalebThe MaintainersQuest for Community by NisbetFebruary 2nd, 1968 by Wendell Berry Small is Beautiful by SchumacherThe Creation of the American Republic by WoodOur Divided Political Heart by DionneTriplets of Evil Speech by KingBoy in the Bubble by Paul SimonJane Macelevy, Eddie Glaude, Frederick Law Olmsted, Abraham Joshua Heschel, Jane Jacobs, Buckminster Fuller, Ralph Nader, Paul Goodman, Ella Baker, Ivan Illich, Dorothy Day, Peter Maurin, Marshal McLuhan, Tony Judt, Thomas Merton, Michael Lind, Frank Capra, Elias Krim, Roberto Unger, Alexis De Tocqueville, Priya Parker

Grandpa Bill today talks about-In the Vineyard of the textGrandpa Bill's Holistic Healing Hour is a podcast dedicated to exploring the intersection of ancient wisdom and modern wellness. Join host Grandpa Bill as he delves into holistic healing practices, natural remedies, and spiritual insights. In this episode, GB explores the philosophical and educational concepts presented in Ivan Illich's In the Vineyard of the Text, focusing on Chapter Five: Scholastic Reading. Brief Description of Chapter Five and the Book Overall: In the Vineyard of the Text is a seminal work by Ivan Illich that explores the history and culture of the book. Chapter Five: Scholastic Reading delves into the evolution of reading practices from the medieval period to the modern age. Illich critiques the standardization of education and the commodification of knowledge. He emphasizes the importance of individual agency and the cultivation of a personal relationship with books. Grandpa Bill Asks: How does the standardization of education impact the quality of learning? Do you believe that standardized tests and curricula stifle creativity and individuality? What is the role of technology in education? Does technology enhance or hinder the learning process? #GrandpaBill, #HolisticHealing, #InTheVineyardOfTheText,#IvanIllich, #Education, #Philosophy, #ScholasticReading, #Podcast, #YouTube,: "The Future of Education: A Deep Dive into Illich's In the Vineyard of the Text""Beyond Standardized Tests: A Holistic Approach to Learning""The Power of Personal Reading: A Reflection on Illich's Insights" Grandpa Bill today is Encouraging listeners to: Leave comments: Sharing your thoughts, questions, or personal experiences related to the podcast topic. Interact: Engaging with the podcast by liking, subscribing, and sharing it with friends and family. Holistic Health Secrets and Life-Sales Strategies with Grandpa BillNourish Your Soul, Boost Your Business:The BH Sales Kennel Kelp Holistic Healing Hour ExperienceWebsite: https://www.7kmetals.com/grandpabillYouTube: Bill Holt@billholt8792Social Media: https://www.facebook.com/bill.sales.524Social Media:https://www.instagram.com/bradybrodyboy12/Voicemail Message Board: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/bhsalesJOIN US EVERY TUESDAY AT 6PM. EST.Seth Leaf Pruzansky Freedom Snap-⁠https://freedomsnap.org/Seth/⁠https://www.imawakenowwhat.com/BH Sales Kennel Kelp Holistic Virtual MallPatriot Supply Link:⁠⁠⁠https://mypatriotsupply.com/?rfsn=5615494.137cb6⁠⁠⁠Health Ranger Link:⁠⁠⁠https://www.healthrangerstore.com/?⁠⁠rfsn=301296.96452b2&utm_source=HR_Affiliate&utm_campaign=14708&utm_affiliate=301296⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Healer.com⁠⁠⁠⁠: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.HealerCBD.com/?ref=11⁠⁠Tim Doyle Path to Oneness-https://thepathtooneness.com/Byron Athene -https://byronathene.com/Isabella Thor,NLP-https://isabellathor.com/Seth Leaf Pruzansky Freedom Snap-⁠https://freedomsnap.org/Seth/⁠

Questions? Comments? Text Us!What happens when your world is suddenly turned upside down, and the answers you seek seem elusive? In this episode of What's On Your Mind, we share the latest reflections from Rachel, a mother who felt a divine hug as she waited hour by hour as her son fought for his life. Through the support of loved ones and the act of journaling Bible verses, Rachel found the peace and strength she needed, ultimately witnessing her son's recovery. Rachel's story is a testament to resilient faith and communal love inspiring "fierce faith" and trust in divine guidance. Jerry and Scott discuss the necessity of living intentionally, filled with gratitude, even amid life's curveballs. Drawing from personal experiences and literary works like Tolstoy's "The Death of Ivan Illich," the two highlight the universal nature of suffering and the comfort that comes from trusting a higher power.You have a spiritual compass- are you following God's pull? Don't miss this enriching episode filled with heartfelt stories, practical advice, and spiritual wisdom. Other Series:Life Wisdom Project- How to live a wiser, happier, and more meaningful life with special guests.From God To Jerry To You- A series calling for the attention of spiritual seekers everywhere, featuring breakthroughs, pathways, and illuminations.Two Philosophers Wrestle With God- Sit in on a dialogue between philosophers about God and the questions we all have.What's On Our Mind- Connect the dots with Jerry and Scott over the most recent series of episodes.What's On Your Mind- What are readers and listeners saying? What is God saying?Resources:READ: "Yes, That Is Certainly Me."WATCH: What's On Your Mind Series PreviewWHAT'S ON YOUR MIND PLAYLISTHashtags: #whatsonyourmind #godanautobiography #experiencegodWould you like to be featured on the show or have questions about spirituality or divine communication? Share your story or experience with God! We'd love to hear from you!

Bradley and I talk with David Goa about the priesthood of all believers, the history of mission movements, confusions about hierarchy, the need for the strictures of liturgy and ordained ministry, Ivan Illich, and the crucial difference between communion and communication. Here's David's reflections on the royal priesthood, which we reference at the top: And here is his account of the day he spent with Ivan Illich, every bit as wild as he suggested. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cewgreen.substack.com/subscribe

It's here! Lecture 1 of Introduction to Ivan Illich at Theory Underground with Bryan Weeks, which took place on June 13th of 2024. You can access the rest of the course here: https://theoryunderground.com/courses/illich-1     ABOUT / CREDITS / LINKS Become a monthly TU Tier Subscriber to access to the TU HUB, which includes past, ongoing, and upcoming courses, special events, office hours, clubs, and critical feedback that will help you evolve your comprehension capacities and critical faculties, via the website here: https://theoryunderground.com/product/tu-subscription-tiers/    Don't have time for that but want to help anyway? Consider supporting the patreon here: Welcome to Theory Underground. https://www.patreon.com/TheoryUnderground   Get TU books at a discount: https://theoryunderground.com/publications   Theory Underground is a lecture, research, and publishing platform by and for working class intellectuals, autodidacts, and academics who want to do more than they are able to within the confines of academia.   Think of Theory Underground like a Jiu Jitsu gym for your brain. Or like a post-political theory church. It doesn't matter. None of the analogies will do it justice. We're post-identity anyway. Just see if the vibe is right for you. We hope you get something out of it!   If you want to help me get setup sooner/faster in a totally gratuitous way, or support me but you don't care about the subscription or want to bother with the monthly stuff, here is a way to buy me something concrete and immediately useful, then you can buy me important equipment for my office on this list (these items will be automatically shipped to my address if you use the list here) https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/2MAWFYUJQIM58?   Buy me some coffee: https://www.venmo.com/u/Theorypleeb https://paypal.me/theorypleeb   If Theory Underground has helped you see that text-to-speech technologies are a useful way of supplementing one's reading while living a busy life, if you want to be able to listen to PDFs for yourself, then Speechify is recommended. Use the link below and Theory Underground gets credit! https://share.speechify.com/mzwBHEB Follow Theory Underground on Duolingo: https://invite.duolingo.com/BDHTZTB5CWWKTP747NSNMAOYEI See Theory Underground memes here: https://www.instagram.com/theory_underground/ https://tiktok.com/@theory_underground   Missed a course at Theory Underground? Wrong! Courses at Theory Underground are available after the fact on demand. https://theoryunderground.com/courses   MUSIC CREDITS Logo sequence music by https://olliebeanz.com/music https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode Mike Chino, Demigods https://youtu.be/M6wruxDngOk            

Bryan Weeks on Ivan Illich, the schooling system, and changing educational institutions. If you want to sign up for Introduction to Illich, you can enroll here: http://theoryunderground.com/courses/illich-1     ABOUT / CREDITS / LINKS Become a monthly TU Tier Subscriber to access to the TU HUB, which includes past, ongoing, and upcoming courses, special events, office hours, clubs, and critical feedback that will help you evolve your comprehension capacities and critical faculties, via the website here: https://theoryunderground.com/product/tu-subscription-tiers/    Don't have time for that but want to help anyway? Consider supporting the patreon here: Welcome to Theory Underground. https://www.patreon.com/TheoryUnderground   Get TU books at a discount: https://theoryunderground.com/publications   Theory Underground is a lecture, research, and publishing platform by and for working class intellectuals, autodidacts, and academics who want to do more than they are able to within the confines of academia.   Think of Theory Underground like a Jiu Jitsu gym for your brain. Or like a post-political theory church. It doesn't matter. None of the analogies will do it justice. We're post-identity anyway. Just see if the vibe is right for you. We hope you get something out of it!   If you want to help me get setup sooner/faster in a totally gratuitous way, or support me but you don't care about the subscription or want to bother with the monthly stuff, here is a way to buy me something concrete and immediately useful, then you can buy me important equipment for my office on this list (these items will be automatically shipped to my address if you use the list here) https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/2MAWFYUJQIM58?   Buy me some coffee: https://www.venmo.com/u/Theorypleeb https://paypal.me/theorypleeb   If Theory Underground has helped you see that text-to-speech technologies are a useful way of supplementing one's reading while living a busy life, if you want to be able to listen to PDFs for yourself, then Speechify is recommended. Use the link below and Theory Underground gets credit! https://share.speechify.com/mzwBHEB Follow Theory Underground on Duolingo: https://invite.duolingo.com/BDHTZTB5CWWKTP747NSNMAOYEI See Theory Underground memes here: https://www.instagram.com/theory_underground/ https://tiktok.com/@theory_underground   Missed a course at Theory Underground? Wrong! Courses at Theory Underground are available after the fact on demand. https://theoryunderground.com/courses   MUSIC CREDITS Logo sequence music by https://olliebeanz.com/music https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode Mike Chino, Demigods https://youtu.be/M6wruxDngOk            

On this episode, my guest is Manish Jain, a man deeply committed to regenerating our diverse local knowledge systems, cultural imaginations and inter-cultural dialogue. Inspired by MK Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore,  Ivan Illich, his illiterate village grandmother, his unschooled daughter, indigenous communities and Jain spiritual philosophy, he is one of the leading planetary voices for deschooling our lives and reimagining education. He has served for the past 25 years as Chief Beaver (ecosystems builder) of Shikshantar: The Peoples' Institute for Rethinking Education and Development based in Udaipur, India and is co-founder of some of the most innovative educational experiments in the world - the Swaraj University, the Jail University, Complexity University, Tribal Farmversity, the Creativity Adda, the Learning Societies Unconference, the Walkouts-Walk-on network, Udaipur as a Learning City, the Families Learning Together network, Berkana Exchange.  He co-launched the global Ecoversities Alliance with 500+ members in 50 countries. Show Notes:Kidnapped by the American DreamGrandma's UniversityReclaiming our Cultural ImaginationCultural Imagination for the Culturally HomelessThe Radical and Exponential Power of TrustUnlearning Cultural Appropriation in the Oral TraditionJugard, or “playful improvisation”Being Reclaimed by AncestorsSwaraj University - Money, Love, and DeathAlivelihoods and DeadlihoodsTraditions of Hospitality in RajasthanEcoversitiesHomework:Swaraj University WebsiteEcoversities WebsiteJugaad (Wikipedia)Transcript:[00:00:00] Welcome, Manish, to the End of Tourism podcast. Thanks for joining me today. Thank you, Chris. Great to be here. Great to be with you. Speaking of here, I was wondering if you could share with our listeners where you find yourself today and maybe what the world looks like for you where you are. Yes, I live in a very magical place called Udaipur.It's in Rajasthan, India. I have been here for the last 25 years. Before that I was moving cities every year. I was living in the U. S. and Europe. And my village is about two hours from where I live, from the city. And I have lots of relatives here, lots of ancestors around. And this happens to be one of the major tourist destinations of India.So it's an interesting combination of very [00:01:00] cosmopolitan kind of global jet set coming in, but also lots of traditional culture, local knowledge, still alive. We were lucky to be called backwards and underdeveloped. And so many things have remained but again under, under continuous threat by kind of urbanization and global economy.But yeah, it's a very beautiful place, lots of palaces, lakes all kinds of animals on the street. On a good day you'll see an elephant walking down the street or a camel just in our neighborhoods and yeah, I love it here. So it's, I mean, it's found a place in my heart for sure. Hmm. What a gift. What a gift to, to live in a place that you love and, you know, it seems to be that question at the heart of the themes of the podcast and in that regard, I wanted to begin by asking you a little bit about your journey, Manish. So[00:02:00] from what I've read, from what I've heard, a lot of your work centers around de schooling and unlearning, specifically with Swaraj University and other educational endeavors, Ecoversities being one of them.And I'd like to return to those themes and projects in a little bit and start by asking you, among other things, about your earlier accolades as a Harvard graduate and someone with a degree from Brown University. One of your bios says that you worked for, among others the American multinational investment bank, Morgan Stanley, as well as UNESCO, UNICEF, World Bank, and USAID in South Asia, Africa, and the former Soviet Union.And so I'm wondering if you'd be willing to share what led to your initial involvement in these rather prominent institutions, and then subsequently, what led to leaving them behind thereafter? Yeah, thank you. Yeah, hearing that [00:03:00] always gives me the shivers a little bit. It's like such a long time ago now. But so I kind of actually grew up with a deep sense of wanting to serve, serve the world. And when I was growing up I actually, I tell people I was kidnapped when I was three years old, born in India, but then taken to the U. S. Kidnapped by the American dream, which I over time realized was a nightmare for most of the planet. So this deep sense of service has always been, been with me, maybe from my mother, from my father, from my grandparents, many, many sources from, inspired by also Gandhi and, and Tagore and many other Indian freedom fighters.But I kind of grew up with this narrative, if you want to serve, you should go to the big places, the places of big power, those institutions, that's where you can influence, that's where you can make the most impact. And so that kind of was a trajectory that I, I kind of [00:04:00] got put on I kind of was very good.I never liked being in these institutions, but I was very good at faking it I faked it through school all the way to Harvard and, and so I was pretty good at faking it and eventually it caught up with me and I started feeling like I was becoming a fake. So, but going to those places I thought there were, you know, those were the centers of power and that when I got there, I started feeling that these places, each of these places, one by one, I started realizing that they were actually quite powerless in many ways, surrounded by a sense of scarcity and fear and very limited imagination.And so one by one, I became disillusioned with each of each of those places. I was expecting that, you know, these would be the places which could help serve humanity, but I realized that they were built on, you know, this continuous model of extraction and colonization and exploitation of [00:05:00] life.And so even with education, I felt like, okay education will be the solution and I started realizing that education was a huge part of the problem. And so that's what led me started me on the de schooling path to try to see how we can find other ways besides relying on these institutions and the logic of capitalism and commodification to solve our problems. You know, over time I started really developing a severe mistrust of experts.I was one of them, like, although I'm fake and so are the rest of these guys. So by the time I was 28, I hit the wall. And I was like I don't have anywhere else to go, I've been to all these big places, and I don't really see, see any hope from them. I don't think they can be repaired either or that they can actually take the kinds of initiatives that are needed to change the game.So that's what led me back to India then[00:06:00] to be with my illiterate village grandmother. And I thought I'll take care of her. And then I, my wife and I realized that we had inadvertently become part of our grandmother's university and she was our unlearning guru. To both Get beyond I would say a lot of our own fears and anxieties, get beyond a lot of the, let's say Western liberal do gooder frameworks, get beyond our attachment to institutions just to solve things for us and start to understand and remember, I think remembering is a word that I have discussed many times with old common friend of ours, Gustavo Esteva, but start to remember that we have much more richness and wealth and creativity, possibility within us and our, and within our communities. So that's been a little bit of the journey to re remember and reclaim and reimagine things.I [00:07:00] remember seeing in one of your talks that you said that your work or to you, what you understood your work to be is, is a way of reclaiming our cultural imagination. I'm wondering if you could elaborate a little bit on that. Yeah, I think basically I think the deepest form of colonization has happened is to our imaginations.And there is a phrase from the eighties from Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher called TINA. "There Is No Alternative." So, as there was an uprising that started happening around the world questioning the dominant development paradigm, the global economy, it was quickly suppressed, repressed by this phrase, TINA.This is the best system that we have, and you know, there's, there's nothing beyond it, so you should just try to improve what's there. And so I think what then [00:08:00] people are forced into is to try to fix or let's say work with what is the existing frameworks and definitions that we have been fed about things like progress or development or success or happiness and then we are all in a very deep endless losing race to try to catch up with something.And we're not even sure what happens when you win. Maybe that's where it hit me. You know, there's a saying, if you, if you beat them at their own game, you lose everything. And so I kind of started realizing that personally, and also when I was looking at the development paradigm more different more closely.So I think, you know, what else is possible first of beyond the kind of logic of the rational mind, what's possible beyond the anthropocentric perspectives that we have on life, what's possible beyond global corporations and institutions deciding what's best for us, what's [00:09:00] possible beyond markets and technologies as the solutions for all of the planet's woes.I think that's what we're trying to explore when I talk about cultural imagination. And I, I think that the first step is to open up the definitions again. This is another thing I think many of my elders, Gustavo, and, Ivan Illich and a person here in India who was a friend of Gustavo's, Claude Alvarez, many were urging us that we need to open up the definitions of things.So that's what usually I think in a lot of the decolonial movements, what didn't happen that we accepted their definitions of development of the good life, all of those things. And then we started pursuing that, but actually it's a very exciting time that we can actually crack that open. And see, okay, what is it?Little Bhutan, a country of 700, 000. People asking, you know, what is happiness? And saying that[00:10:00] you know, the West, you guys have all the money, you guys have all the technology, you have all the armies, but are your people happy? So I think, you know, this is happening in obviously in Latin America, "buen vivir," in India, Swaraj, so many movements, which I think are challenging the given definitions and creating a space for us to dream differently, to tap into a different worldview which recognizes a sense of the sacred and recognizes that we are not just, you know, cogs in the machine in terms of our purpose on this earth. So I think those are, that's a little bit of what I mean by reclaiming the cultural imagination. Hmm. And you mentioned Swaraj and I'm really excited to dive into that and see where this notion of reclaiming cultural imagination fits there in a place and not just in philosophies.But I wanted to ask you this kind of this little follow up question in regards to the cultural imagination. Because we've [00:11:00] had the great honor to befriend and learn from people like Gustavo. But I think of my family and friends and compañeros, colleagues in Toronto, major North American metropolis.And I wonder how reclaiming the cultural imagination looks like or could be for people who would consider themselves either cultural orphans or culturally homeless. You know I mean, you and I have distinct ties, it seems, and a lived memory to the places our people moved or migrated from or still live in.And so there's a bridge of sorts that already exists that on some level can still be crossed. What about the people who have no lived memory of where their people come from or who would admit, or at least can offer up the idea that they have no culture? Yeah, so, oh, that's a great question. So, [00:12:00] I think maybe the first thing I would kind of offer in that situation is that one is a question of how to reconnect to the land and the territory you live in the place, the water, the rivers, the mountains, the forests. There's a tremendous amount of memory that, that lives in the place which can help us recover parts of ourselves that have been lost. The other is, I think, in terms of reconnecting to our bodies again, there's a tremendous amount of wisdom. We can recover again from our own bodies, from our breath also reconnecting to our breath in a very profound way and help us recover things.And also when I talk about culture, I think the essence of culture without being an essentialist, is is what I call gift culture. Mm-Hmm. So this culture of, of connection, of care, of kindness, of trust, of hospitality, of [00:13:00] forgiveness. There's so many traditions like that, wherever we are, and we can also create new traditions around these things.And so, a lot of times we confuse culture for the food or for the clothes or for the music of a place. But I think the deeper level of all culture is a gift culture, which is a reminder of the interconnectedness of life, the thread that is woven through all of us, connects us to something very sacred and even divine in some sense.So, I think that reconnecting to the spirit of kindness and care is a huge step. We've been doing a lot of experiments over the years around gift culture and reconnecting to a field of trust again. I call it the radical and exponential power of trust.Much of our work and I would almost say in the miracles that I see every day in our work are because of this field of trust that we have been able to reconnect to and this is what my [00:14:00] grandmother, I think, was helping me to reconnect to in terms of culture is because I remember growing up in the U. S. this continuous thing of don't trust anyone, don't trust your neighbors, don't trust anyone, somebody, anybody is being kind to you because they may have an angle. They may steal from you or cheat from you or whatever, and I think it took me a lot of healing to come out of that and that has been a phenomenal journey in terms of opening up possibilities for how I connect, and one other thing I would say is that.A lot of, I know this has been a major unlearning area because I used to be very critical of all of this cultural appropriation that we see in the West, people picking up things in here, here and there. But as I've been in India and I've become more connected to the oral traditions, very different kind of ethics and philosophy and ways of, of living and doing things that lives in an oral tradition.Like [00:15:00] I grew up with this strong fear of, you know, plagiarism. You know, that was the one thing Harvard and Brown hammer you is about plagiarizing. Cite every word. Chris said this, or Gustavo said this, right? And I found in the oral tradition, there's a different kind of trickster level playfulness that you can take anything, play with anything.You don't have to cite, you can modify, you can change, you can adapt. And I think I've been trying to bring that more into these conversations around cultural appropriation, because I think people get so afraid nowadays of being bashed for exploring a different culture for taking things.Obviously, there is a level of depth and engagement and commitment, dedication to understanding something that I would invite in that. But being able to pick up things, I think has been part of our culture. People take things and spread them and appropriate them in ways that keep them alive and moving so it's something I've been exploring a [00:16:00] lot is that it seems very much more controlling and part of the old paradigm to say that we need to protect and there are certain cultural gatekeepers and certain kinds of people who who will tell you you're right or wrong in the culture.So I also would want to open up that conversation, exploration with people. Thank you. You know what I mean? You know what I mean with that? Yeah. Yeah, definitely. It definitely points towards a notion of cultures being static and that there being a degree of authenticity, a kind of original foundation or culture for a people which seems to be a relic of 19th century anthropology and things like that.And, and a restriction that we are just these bodies in this present time. You know, in India, obviously we talk about reincarnation and so there, there may be other, other cultures within us and that we've lived that [00:17:00] want to express themselves and want to be opened in this life as well, which maybe our body and our place doesn't necessarily give us that opportunity, but the possibility exists, or the the desire even if is there so. I would want to invite us to all of that as well. Mm hmm, and you've been speaking a lot about how your time in India has really been an opportunity for you to unlearn, maybe disassociate a little bit from the taught worldview that you had in the United States.And this next question comes from a friend of ours dear friend Erin, and She wanted to ask about your move to India or move back depending on how you choose to understand it and how that experience has been for you as someone who grew up on the other side of the world and what do you think it means in the context of [00:18:00] your migration to be claimed or reclaimed by a place.Beautiful. Yeah. I think it's been quite a powerful and even I would say magical journey because as you said, the place and the people reclaim me. Part of it is that, you know, my relatives are here, my ancestors are here. And so at times when I felt, you know, a little bit out of place they reminded me that I belong here and I'm welcome here.And I think what I've made a very strong effort to do is to reground myself in different ways and maybe those ways have been made the transition more smooth or beautiful in one way. So one is like, you know, a lot of the ideas, for example, or work that I'm doing I've tried to find cultural reference points and stories that makes sense because initially when I came, a lot of the things I was talking about, [00:19:00] people were like, oh, that's another Western idea. That's something you're just bringing. It's not Indian, blah, blah, whatever. So I started to look for stories in the past. So when I talk about my university, Swaraj University, I tell people it's 5, 000 years old. Our first chancellor was from the Mahabharata, Ekalavya, the story of Ekalavya, the first documented, self-designed learner and so that all of a sudden something clicks differently for people of how they hear it, how they connect it. When I talk about, for example, when we used to talk a lot, Erin, since you brought her up, we explored a lot of zero waste and upcycling together.There's a word in Hindi, jugard, which means playful improvisation. So, using our own words to describe it rather than trying to take everything from English and translate it. But also I'd say, you know, like people would say, again, zero waste. This is a Western sustainability thing. I said, no no, wait a second.Our grandmothers are all zero waste masters. So, you [00:20:00] know, let us understand that all of these ideas are actually connected to many things that we have in our own culture. So that's made it a very beautiful thing because it's not only being welcoming, it's actually unleashing a lot of energy that had been pent up with people like fear and you know, self -limiting, self-belief, self -suppression in a sense.So all of a sudden hearing that, Oh, this is actually has roots in who we are, has opened up a lot for ways we engage in people to accept me and some of the ideas and experiments we've been sharing. So that's been good. And I think the other thing is really a kind of regrounding. So when I moved back, I was good at PowerPoint and Excel.My worldview was through Microsoft products, right? So what I learned again was to reconnect to farming and our food systems. And I think Aerin and Yeyo's journey is also, we've been together on this for many years, but [00:21:00] also to local language again, and you know, making our own clothes, building our own buildings, you know our own healing techniques and plants here. So, just reconnecting to a lot of those things have helped the place to welcome me in different ways and also me to be able to build different relationships with a lot of diverse people here as well. And I think the third thing is really that just to add was like this, one of the deschooling ideas was to core is to shed these labels of failures of looking, you know, at only educated people as intelligent.So there's so much wisdom and creativity and beauty and love that is with people who don't have degrees. And so being able to see that because I was able to let go of these labels and these frameworks has really helped me again, beautifully connecting with many people and many energies here.Wonderful. And [00:22:00] do you think that those, those points that you just mentioned, that they were causes or consequences of you and your people there opening Swaraj University? Or did it evolve into that? It happened, you know, like I said, we have more than a thousand faculty in Swaraj University, and they are grandmothers and farmers and artisans and mountains and lakes and, and trees, the human, the more than human. The one other thing that's really been very powerful is, you know, the place I live in, I would say about 80 percent of the people living here talk to their ancestors. Like without a shaman, they can, you know, like my cousins or my aunt can channel ancestors and we would have all night prayer rituals to talk, connect with them, invite them.And it's like people, and for me with my western trained scientific mind, I [00:23:00] couldn't understand this initially and then it started to open up once I kind of allowed myself to breathe with it opened up a whole different set of possibilities also in engagement to the place where the ancestors were welcoming me. As well to this place. So, that has been beautiful. And another thing that happened was I met, again, a lot of traditional healers. So 25 years ago when I was meeting them was a huge amount of skepticism. My mother's a doctor in the U. S. and she doesn't trust anything Ayurvedic or folk medicines or anything.So when I met them, I was skeptical, but as I spent time with them, and started seeing that they're, they actually have some very deep power. And when I asked them, you know, how did you learn all of this stuff? Because you think of this plant with this, you know, the bark of this and the, you have to boil that with the roots of this and mix it with this.I'm like, so many combinations and permutations, right? And I'm like, they didn't have supercomputers. [00:24:00] So I asked them, how did you guys learn this? And they said, what do you think? And I very proudly used to say trial and error, you know, that must be the scientific method. And they would laugh like crazy.And I'm like, what, what was it like that? That's so primitive trial and error. It's so primitive. I'm like, what? And they would, I said, how did they do it? They said, Oh, we could, our ancestors could talk to the plants. And so once I kind of started to allow that worldview to permeate me, it started to create a different sense of connection to the place, I think.And so it's been a very beautiful journey to in a sense, one can say rewild myself here. And are those, are those themes incorporated into swarajs, and I don't want to say curriculum, because we all know that's a four letter word for a lot of people, but but in terms of de schooling, in terms of unlearning, in terms of, these kinds of old time [00:25:00] learnings, what does a student maybe encounter at Swaraj?Yeah. So there's no curriculum per se, but we have, you know, a few different elements to it. It's all derived from living together, right? So, one is obviously, we call it learning from the gift of conflict. So as you're living together, there's conflicts that start to emerge all the time.So those conflicts are very beautiful entry points into kind of reflecting, if you, once you move beyond the blame narrative to reflect on yourself, what's triggering you, why do you feel disturbed about it? So very, very powerful opportunities to reflect on oneself. We have also what we call a lot of unlearning challenges.So those are optional, but we've created different challenges because we felt there's a lot of conditioning that people come into. Swaraj with and they're around many different areas, but I would say three of the common ones are around most [00:26:00] common around money unlearning our free fear, anxiety scarcity that's related to the money system.Even our self worth gets tied so much to the money system. So, we have a lot of different experiments around that. The second is around love. Both starting with self love, but then how we understand love, how we relate, notions of jealousy, inferiority, all kinds of things which are tied to love.And the third is then death. Death. And so are so these are places that we explore a bit. We have different experiments where people can, you know, for example, and imagine your death would be an invitation that we would invite people into a process. So there's a lot of unlearning experiments. And then the third is that people actually then have a lot of space to design their own personal programs of what they want to explore.And in that process, because you're living in a community, lots of informal learning is happening. Peer to peer, your friend is doing [00:27:00] something. Maybe you start, like, I'm not interested, but after a month of seeing your friend, or a few months, you start, it's just something starts, you know, entering into your system and you realize, Oh, maybe I do like this or this is interesting.And your friend leaves it. I've seen cases, a friend leaves it and the other person picks it up and you know, takes it forward also. So, all of this kind of cross pollination is happening all the time, which is very beautiful. So those are some of the things that happen in Swaraj. And I think where we would invite this is we are becoming more, I think we've become more and more bold over the years, like with this idea of ritual and the sacred. So, in India, there was a lot of, you know first from the left, a lot of bashing of ritual and sacred as these were Brahmanical tools to suppress and these are superstitious. And these tools are, you know, the Marxist idea that these are to [00:28:00] control the masses.And then also, it was bashed because these are ways to cement a kind of fascist Hindu paradigm which is against minorities and things. So, there was a lot of, lot of stories running in our heads around ritual. And then our own personal experiences that oftentimes meaningless, they become fractured, they become rigid and so what we've tried to do is really reclaim the space of ritual in Swaraj.And part of that is with our ancestors or with the more than human. And so inviting people to look at ritual in a very different way has been very interesting. And sometimes I'm involved in rituals and I'm like, what are you doing? The inner voice says, dude, what are you doing?You know, like, who are you at this? And, you know, so all of that old stuff that we kind of grew up with in terms of the scientific analytical mind, which sees everything that it can't understand as [00:29:00] superstition sometimes reappears in certain ways, but I think it's been part of the journey to really create a space at least to engage with this, and so in Swaraj very much it's, it's there as well, and, and maybe the, the way we explain it is there's a need to go beyond the kind of the rational, there's a, there's limits to the rational, logical fragmented mind of how it can see or what it can make sense of.We often even talk about, you know, the way we're trained to think about the crisis is part of the crisis. So, you know, so this space of entering into kind of a liminal energy, a different frequency together is maybe very powerful. And those can be through many different ways, right? Through music, through dance, through food, through fasting.In India, it's really through silence, you know, so it doesn't always have to be plant medicines, which you find more in Latin America and Africa, but in India, meditation and silence and fasting were and [00:30:00] breathing were really different ways that have been experimented over the centuries for people to enter into a different kind of consciousness together.Well, it sounds like an incredible place and an incredible project. I hope if the winds allow me to travel again in a way that maybe they once did that I'd be able to experience that myself. Yes, we have a long, we Udaipur and Oaxaca. So the chances for those winds appearing are pretty good.Amen. Amen. And speaking of Oaxaca our mutual friend, Yeyo had wanted me to ask you about this formulation of yours and all he wrote was livelihoods as opposed to deadlihoods. Oh yes, a alivelihoods, alivelihoods. We made a distinction because a lot of people are wondering what can I do today [00:31:00] in the world. And so the first thing is to help them see that most of what the university, the conventional university is preparing us for are what I call deadlihoods. The work, whether you're in law or in finance or in psychology or I.T., somehow or other, they're tied to a deadlihoods economy that is extractive, military, violent. So, how can we start to understand how we ourselves are implicated in that kind of economy. And so that's one part of it. But then to also think about, you know, the work that's needed today in the world is what I call alivelihoods. And that starts with, you know, what makes my spirit come alive?Because we've we've heard this, "lots of work is soul sucking." So, what is the work that actually nourishes our soul? And gives us meaning and purpose, you know? Lets us reconnect that, you know meaning, purpose, spirituality is not something you [00:32:00] just do on a Sunday or you do in a class, but it's actually tied to the work you're doing in the world and how do we integrate that?What is the kind of work that is helping my community come alive? That is actually shifting power from global corporations back into communities, which are kind of, what is the work that's building, weaving the bonds of trust? And care, kindness, compassion back into community life. And what is the work that is regenerating our ecosystems?So what I call our real wealth. So how do we compost the money system? And start to regenerate real wealth with it. Our health, our forests, our soils, our waters, which are all over the world are in massive, massive degradation stages right now. And how do we regenerate the social bonds again?The trust networks again, that can give us a sense of security, of care, of belonging, of respect, of [00:33:00] dignity. So that's kind of the loose framework we have for that. And I think one other element is that what is the work that will help us shift the worldviews that we have?So the worldview of the planet is being a dead entity and human beings being the only intelligent beings on this planet and the kind of fear that is driving much of the decision making. How do we start to shift to a different worldview that many indigenous communities had a sense of, much better sense of.So, what is the work that can help us shift the narratives of who we are? Why are we on this earth together? Why are we, you know, perpetuating these ideas of ownership or of borders of you know, so many things that we have kind of internalized, which are fundamental to the modernist project.Is there a way to start to unravel these or shift these? So what is the work that allows us that? So I call all of that, all of that a livelihoods, really, and the invitation is to help [00:34:00] people think about how they can be doing that. And I think the other element in that, which is really important is, how do we move beyond this like individual self help kind of narrative we've been fed. You know, like the problem is in you. You have to fix yourself. Whereas how, how do we shift it more to how do we want to understand the systems and the institutions and how they're operating, but also, you how do we focus more of our care and our energy and our healing around healthy community, rebuilding healthy community, because that's what will give us a different sense of power, a different sense of possibility and things.So that's a little bit about it. There's much more, many layers, but just to give you a sense.Yeah, thank you for that. You know, I'm reminded in this, in this context of deadlihoods and the kind of modern condition and the economies that prevail as a result. There is and has been, especially in the last two centuries, this kind of not only degradation of community, but of course, the dissolution[00:35:00] of community and in the sense of people moving to the big city or other countries for better lives.And sometimes necessarily. So like sometimes it's simply their only option, right? And, this is very, very much evident to me in the work that I do here in Oaxaca. And you know, I had come across this declaration from 2009 in a, a very rural village in the Mixtec region of Oaxaca, where a group of peasant families from different villages alongside their migrant kin or family spoke for days about the consequences of their movements, and at the end of that three day assembly, declared alongside the right to migrate, the right to stay home and the right to not migrate, and so I'm kind of curious what kind of dynamics you've seen in India In terms of that economic impulse to [00:36:00] move, to leave the village, to migrate and maybe what part Swaraj and endeavors like it might play in those dynamics.Yeah. So I think, part of it is you're saying is physically forced displacement due to development projects, massive development projects or war. But a lot of the displacement has been sold to people package as to people that the urban lifestyle or the American lifestyle is the lifestyle and what you're leading is impoverished, is insignificant, is backwards. You know, there's all kinds of ways. And so much of what education role was is to convince us that somehow the urban lifestyle is what is to be aspired for. So a lot of people move because of that. I have my experience with rural people and working with rural people is that a lot of them, they're like, "we're quite happy where we're at. But what happens is when our cousin comes from the city, they bring [00:37:00] fancy phones and motorcycles and money and they show off and that's what really makes us feel really bad." And then we have to, what we've tried to do is to counter that with, you know reminding people of what a shitty life urban life is.Most people are living in slums. Most people are, if you're not, you're living under continuous stress and tension to make ends meet in polluted environments these days and lots of traffic. And so I at least, you know, try to remind people that in their villages, they may not have that many material things but they're the Kings of the village.They have fresh air. They have clean places, good water to drink still. They have good food, fresh food they're eating. So that's been an interesting journey. Sometimes people understand, particularly the older people understand. This is the other thing that schooling played a major role is to try to kill the voices of wisdom.So, like my grandmother or other elders would be [00:38:00] told, "Oh, you're uneducated. What do you know about what is a good life or what is, you know, the way forward? And so those voices still are silenced quite a bit because young people go to school for some years and then they think they are much more knowledgeable about what life is all about or what's important in life.So, I think what's interesting is that what we're saying about the breakdown of what the urban success story was or the urban model, it's becoming more and more clear to people, like they're seeing that so there are people I know who are moving back. Udaipur is a very small city and a lot of people who have been connected with us have decided to stay in Udaipur rather than moving to Delhi or Bombay, which has been the trend.And so I think it's a very important thing to keep looking at. I think if people see if they have a good life in smaller places, a lot of people are ready to come [00:39:00] back. Because the stress, the continuous stress and speed of big city life is I feel is taking a toll on people and also the whole promise is there's jobs and everything.And so you see more and more unemployment also happening in big cities. So, I think there's an interesting question right now in people's minds of what, what to do and where to go.So you know, it very much seems that one of the ways that what I'll call, I guess, well, either modern people or cultural Americans seem impoverished by is in the realm of hospitality. The lack of hospitality towards not only their neighbors at home, but, but abroad among hosts, you know, most people stay in hotels or Airbnbs. Most tourists anyways, they eat at chain restaurants. They're taught a transactional worldview and all exchange tends to end up in a customer service evaluation. And I feel that this is very much what [00:40:00] tourism has done to that part of the culture, that we would otherwise refer to as hospitality.And so I'm curious in your opinion how would you define radical hospitality? And how have you seen it perhaps as an antidote for the industrial hospitality modern people so often encounter. Yeah. I would that's a great question. So I think I've had the experience in being in Rajasthan of many traditions of hospitality and I would even say radical in the sense that all over India we say that " treat our guests like gods." So that's probably as radical as you could get with hospitality, if I treat you like a god, right? And what it means to me is, not to God in the sense of the pedestal of God or somebody remote, but actually God in the sense of this is my way [00:41:00] to find another connection to the divine in all of us, the divine that connects all of us.And so when I am able to receive somebody with that spirit, I'm able to touch into something very deep within myself also. And we have so many traditions here which again, in our work, we're trying to recover and remind people, remember in different ways. I would just share a couple of things around that.So one is like, in the desert, when it gets really hot up to 50 degrees Celsius, probably the most hospitable and sacred thing you can do is offer somebody water. So with the industrial consumer tourism, we have a parallel underground system happening.So you can go to stores and you'll see bottled water, for example, where people are paying and they buy it. But if you kind of look closely, you'll see on almost every corner of the old city where, where [00:42:00] most of the tourists come, there are clay pots, which people fill up every day for which are called piaos.So the tradition was that to offer any passerby, any stranger, water, is one of the highest gifts you can honor with them because it's so hot and so I've seen women fill water and carry it from even very far away to offer it to strangers, which is so humbling and so powerful that people would actually be able to offer this.So you can see these pots, people are sitting there sometimes, sometimes the pots are just filled and left with a glass for people to fill themselves and drink. But this is a very powerful way to remind us that there is a different way to relate both to resources like water and how we see it, which is non commodified.And so my grandmother would never think of charging money for water. If I ever told her, she'd be like, what is wrong with those [00:43:00] people? There must be some real deep sickness in them. "Let's go charge money for water." And so I think that, you know, that's an example of an entry to a different understanding of what is water, what is our relationship with each other and I wouldn't say what is water, almost you could say who is water. That question gets opened up as well through this act.And so the other thing around radical hospitality and I care, I would say there's some traditions that are called guptan here, which is kind of the invisible giving tradition.So a lot of what do you find, hospitality these days, is around showing off or people should know who's serving you and who's giving you. And here, there's another sense of care that is given where nobody knows who is the giver and to try to remove that arrogance of the giver when care is offered.And so it's offered with a deep sense of service, but to try to remove the ego element that I am the giver, I'm the one who's [00:44:00] helping somebody or being hospitable to them in some way. So I think that's also been quite inspiring to me, how to enter into that real space of humility as part of a radical hospitality tradition.And I think that these things do have a very essential role to play in challenging what's happening in the world and, and building different kinds of models and systems, because if care and connection is not part of that I don't know what the, what the new models, what they would stand on.And so these are this has to be the foundation of something that can grow. And every time, you know, if you ask me every few years, it deepens and changes because of experiences here. When I first I heard about it from Gustavo. I was like, "Oh, this is so beautiful." But I had relatively little ideas of how it would actually look every day.I see more and more examples of it in living practice here where I live. So yeah, it gives me a lot of hope that [00:45:00] maybe that's one of the keys to finding our way forward.Well, thank you, Manish, for your time today and this wonderful, wonderful conversation. Before I let you go to sleep and probably tend to family, I'd like to ask, how might our listeners find out more about your work, about Swaraj University, and I know we didn't have time to speak about it, but the Ecoversities project.Yeah, it's been wonderful to, to talk with you, Chris. I do hope that we can welcome you someday to Udaipur as well. The one thing I would say is that Swaraj University is part of this alliance, translocal alliance around the world called Ecoversities, so a network of like 500 plus alternative universities in 50 countries. And the idea [00:46:00] was that, you know, these are, in a sense, kind of part of an underground railroad, if you would say for people who are walking out of the system or trying to figure out how they can live differently on the planet together. And the beautiful thing is that, you know, anyone can declare themselves an ecoversity, their community.And there's a huge diversity of things, ranging from the farmversities and the forestversities and the riverversities to, you know, like deathversities and travelersversities grandmothers' universities and jail universities and all kinds of spaces. So, this is really to reclaim different kinds of knowledge systems and different learning processes that have never been valued by conventional universities.And to maybe start to create a space, as I said, to live together, to reclaim our hands and our hearts and our bodies and [00:47:00] our homes as well as our holistic heads And to try to dream, to dream something together. So we have a website, we have gatherings, I would invite people to, to come and and visit us and connect with different eco overseas around the world.I have a 21 year old daughter. She's been unschooled. She never looked at a textbook or an exam or a classroom really in her life, except, you know, like we took her to see children in a classroom, like you take kids to see animals in the zoo so she could see what it was like for a couple of days.But so, you know, really wanted to create a model, not only, I mean, for myself, for her, for other young people to be able to learn and be in different kinds of communities and experiments around the world. So, we invite you all to help create the new models that the world needs with us.I'll make sure that all of those links and [00:48:00] resources that you mentioned, Manish, are there on the End of Tourism website when the episode launches. And on behalf of our listeners, blessings on your day, your path, your tongue, and thank you so much for joining me today. Thanks, Chris. Thanks for your wonderful work and good luck with the new projects that are emerging in your life.Thank you, Manish. Get full access to ⌘ Chris Christou ⌘ at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe

Arjun Khemani is a 17-year-old writer and podcaster who dropped out of high school to help lead support at Airchat, the social network co-founded by Naval Ravikant. As the host of the Arjun Khemani podcast, Arjun has spoken to a wide range of guests including David Deutsch, David Perell and Naval Ravikant. His Substack, Progress Good, “serves as a defense against the anti-Enlightenment tradition, exploring progress, rationality, and optimism.” Arjun joins the show to discuss why education should be voluntary, the moral case for selfishness, the pessimism of ultimacy and MUCH more! Important Links: Arjun's Twitter Progress Good (Arjun's Substack) Show Notes: The Myth of the Good Old Days The Citadel of Science Generational Warfare Why Education Should Be Voluntary Misunderstanding Money Escaping the Altruism Trap: the Case for Selfishness Coercion & Moral Righteousness The Pessimism of Ultimacy The Hunt for Better Problems Arjun's Leap Into the Unknown Reimagining Education What's Next? Arjun as Emperor of the World MORE! Books Mentioned: One Summer: America 1927; by Bill Bryson The New Inquisition: Irrational Rationalism and the Citadel of Science; by Robert Anton Wilson The Road to Serfdom; by Friedrich Hayek The Lessons of History; by Will & Ariel Durant Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behaviour; by David R. Hawkins Deschooling Society; by Ivan Illich

THIS ONE IS AN AMAZING VIDEO SO PLEASE WATCH ON YT: https://youtu.be/d-FhCfjTPDk Ivan Illich is the most important thinker of institutions, technology, tools, and the human condition who got overhyped while simultaneously misunderstood and then eclipsed by Foucault and Habermas on the one side, and Freire, hooks, and Giroux on the other. We're calling for a critical, sincere, and earnest return to Ivan Illich. Bryan Weeks, one of the core TU instructors (who co-taught The Idea of the University course) has put this together and will be leading lectures and discussions around the texts he considers to be most essential to understanding Illich on his own terms but for our times. LIMITED TIME COUPON DEAL: for 20% off all tiers us ILLICH4PD (expires at the end of April) Sign up here: https://theoryunderground.com/product/illich-1/           ABOUT / CREDITS / LINKS Become a monthly TU Tier Subscriber to access to the TU HUB, which includes past, ongoing, and upcoming courses, special events, office hours, clubs, and critical feedback that will help you evolve your comprehension capacities and critical faculties, via the website here: https://theoryunderground.com/product/tu-subscription-tiers/ (Whatever tier you subscribe to in the month of March 2024 will be promoted to the privileges of the next one up (e.g. Tier 1 will have Tier 2 privileges, etc.!).)   Don't have time for that but want to help anyway? Consider supporting the patreon here: Welcome to Theory Underground. https://www.patreon.com/TheoryUnderground   Get TU books at a discount: https://theoryunderground.com/publications   Theory Underground is a lecture, research, and publishing platform by and for working class intellectuals, autodidacts, and academics who want to do more than they are able to within the confines of academia.   Think of Theory Underground like a Jiu Jitsu gym for your brain. Or like a post-political theory church. It doesn't matter. None of the analogies will do it justice. We're post-identity anyway. Just see if the vibe is right for you. We hope you get something out of it!   If you want to help me get setup sooner/faster in a totally gratuitous way, or support me but you don't care about the subscription or want to bother with the monthly stuff, here is a way to buy me something concrete and immediately useful, then you can buy me important equipment for my office on this list (these items will be automatically shipped to my address if you use the list here) https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/2MAWFYUJQIM58?   Buy me some coffee: https://www.venmo.com/u/Theorypleeb https://paypal.me/theorypleeb   If Theory Underground has helped you see that text-to-speech technologies are a useful way of supplementing one's reading while living a busy life, if you want to be able to listen to PDFs for yourself, then Speechify is recommended. Use the link below and Theory Underground gets credit! https://share.speechify.com/mzwBHEB Follow Theory Underground on Duolingo: https://invite.duolingo.com/BDHTZTB5CWWKTP747NSNMAOYEI See Theory Underground memes here: https://www.instagram.com/theory_underground/ https://tiktok.com/@theory_underground   Missed a course at Theory Underground? Wrong! Courses at Theory Underground are available after the fact on demand. https://theoryunderground.com/courses   MUSIC CREDITS Logo sequence music by https://olliebeanz.com/music https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode Mike Chino, Demigods https://youtu.be/M6wruxDngOk            

Spätestens seit Fukuyama in den 1980ern das "Ende der Geschichte" ausrief, galt die liberale Demokratie in westlichen Gesellschaften lange Zeit unangefochten als überlegenes politisches System. Angesichts rechtspopulistischer Strömungen, zunehmender gesellschaftlicher Ungleichheit und einer schleppenden Reaktion auf den menschengemachten Klimawandel geraten die Prinzipien des liberalen Denkens heute jedoch zusehends in Erklärungsnot. Einige sprechen gar von einer "Krise des Liberalismus". Grund genug für eine Bestandsaufnahme hier im Podcast: Welche Antworten kann der Liberalismus und sein Freiheits-Begriff auf die drängenden Probleme unserer Gegenwart noch bieten? Sind liberale Ideen überhaupt mit einer ökologischen Transformation unserer Gesellschaft vereinbar? Und wie könnte ein zeitgemäßer Liberalismus aussehen, der die verkürzte Perspektive einer neoliberaler Politik überwindet? Über all das sprechen wir in dieser Folge mit dem Wirtschaftswissenschaftler und Nachhaltigkeitsexperten Prof. Dr. André Reichel.

Paris Marx is joined by Zachary Kaiser to discuss the power of tech interfaces, why data isn't an accurate reflection of the world, and why we need to discuss democratic decomputerization.Zachary Kaiser is an Associate Professor of Graphic Design and Experience Architecture at Michigan State University. He's also the author of Interfaces and Us: User Experience Design and the Making of the Computable Subject.Tech Won't Save Us offers a critical perspective on tech, its worldview, and wider society with the goal of inspiring people to demand better tech and a better world. Support the show on Patreon.The podcast is made in partnership with The Nation. Production is by Eric Wickham. Transcripts are by Brigitte Pawliw-Fry.Also mentioned in this episode:Paris is speaking in Auckland on February 18 at an event hosted by Tohatoha.Zachary wrote about dream reading technologies for Real Life.Zachary mentions specific works by David Golumbia, Ivan Illich, Aaron Benanav, John Cheney-Lippold, Thomas F. Tierney, Marisa Brandt, Arturo Escobar, and James Ferguson.Support the show

On this episode, my guests are and of the Podcast.Clementine Morrigan is a writer and public intellectual based in Montréal, Canada. She writes popular and controversial essays about culture, politics, ethics, relationships, sexuality, and trauma. A passionate believer in independent media, she's been making zines since the year 2000 and is the author of several books. She's known for her iconic white-text-on-a-black-background mini-essays on Instagram. One of the leading voices on the Canadian Left and one half of the F*****g Cancelled podcast, Clementine is an outspoken critic of cancel culture and a proponent of building solidarity across difference. She is a socialist, a feminist, and a vegan for the animals and the earth.Jay is a writer, artist and designer from Montreal and is the author of the Substack jaylesoleil.com and the zine series What Else Is There to Live For. Jay is also the co-host of F*****g Cancelled.Show Notes:Clementine & Jay's TravelsThe NexusIdentitarianism and Identity PoliticsGentrification & SolidarityHow Nationalism Leaks into the LeftThe Contradictions of IdentitarianismFreedom, Limits and GuesthoodBorders and BiomesThe Quest for Offline CommunitiesRadical & Reciprocal HospitalityAuthenticityHomework:Clementine's SubstackJay's Substack (including Dumplings & Domination)Clementine's ShopJay's StoreF*****g Cancelled ShopF*****g Cancelled PodcastTranscriptChris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the pod, Clementine and Jay. It's an honor to have you both here today. Each of your work both individually and together has been a great influence on mine and definitely eye-opening and if I can say so much needed in our time. So thank you for joining me. Jay: Thank you, man. Thanks for having us.Clementine: Thanks for having us.Chris: So, I'd like to start, if we can, by asking you both where you find yourselves today and what the world looks like for you through each of your eyes.Jay: Well, we both find ourselves in Montreal which is where we live. I was working in homeless shelters for years and then I got let go cause I tried to unionize the one I was working at. Actually I succeeded in unionizing the one I was working at. And they mysteriously did not have any money to renew my contract after that.And yeah, so I'm writing and I just launched a new solo podcast about like world history outside of the West. And so I've been working on that. It's called [00:01:00] dumplings and domination, which are two things that human beings love. And Yeah, so that's, that's what I'm up to. Clementine: Yeah, so I'm also, yeah, I find myself in Montreal, in the snow, and I guess, relevant to the topics of this podcast one of the things I'm grappling with now is my perpetual existence as a unilingual anglophone in the city of Montreal, which is a bilingual city, but it's a French city, like.Actually. And I'm planning on having a child and I'm planning to have this child here. And so I'm facing the dilemma of being like an English speaker whose child is not going to just be an English speaker. And so I really need to learn French, basically. So this is my struggle, because being 37 and only speaking one language my entire life, it's like super hard to learn another language.And I've really, really struggled. A couple times I've made an attempt to learn French, and it's like really [00:02:00] frustrating, but that is one of the things I'm grappling with. I feel like it's relevant to the podcast, because in many ways, even though I've lived in Montreal for like almost seven years, there's a way in which I still am kind of like a tourist here, because I haven't learned the language.So, will I complete my transition into becoming Quebecois? Chris: Yeah, maybe so. Jay: Only time will tell. Chris: I was just reading this biography of Ivan Illich, who's like was an Austrian philosopher and he said that like trying to learn a new language, especially if you're immersed in the place is the greatest measure or degree of poverty that one can undertake because of the degree of dependence that they have on other people and not just dependence, but like dependence on their hospitality, assuming it exists in order to, you know, be able to understand what you're saying and communicate in that way. Clementine: Like Montreal is interesting because at least in the neighborhood that I live and in many places in [00:03:00] Montreal, it's functionally bilingual. So it's not like learning in an immersive environment as if you went somewhere and everybody's speaking that language.So you kind of just have to or you won't be able to communicate. Like you have to learn here. You know, when I'm fumbling around trying to speak French, people just start speaking English to me because even if they're a francophone, like, at least in the neighborhoods where I live, most people are bilingual, and they speak better English than I do French, so they will accommodate me, which is polite of them, and also, It does not help me learn, you know?Jay: Whereas the government of Quebec will not accommodate you. Clementine: No, the government will not accommodate you at all. And so, like, it's only in circumstances where, like, I desperately need to understand where, like, there's no, there's absolutely no accommodation. So. Chris: And that kind of touches on my next question, which is, you know, in terms of the travels that you two have.Has there been that degree of poverty elsewhere? I mean, I imagine you might have traveled to other places maybe in Canada, maybe elsewhere. [00:04:00] What have your travels taught you each, if anything, about the world, about your lives, about culture? Jay: Yeah. I had kind of an unusual relationship with travel.Because as a kid, I moved to a different country every like three or four years cause of my parents work. And so, yeah, I grew up like in Asia and not just like dipping into a place and then like leaving right away but spending years of my life in each country. Right. And like learning the languages and stuff.And so, yeah, I think that was a quite an unusual way to kind of experience travel as a kid. And I think that it did definitely have a lot of impact on me. Because I think that travel in general, I think is a wonderful and amazing thing, you know, which is why people like to do it. And it can be really profound for your mind and your understanding of the world and of other people, you know but obviously there's travel and then there's [00:05:00] travel.I feel really grateful that I was able to see so much of the world by living there, you know and I think that it was really important for me in my kind of embodied understanding that other people and other parts of the world are, you know, just as real and just as important and just as embedded in history as I am and as like the people are in my passport country, which happens to be Canada, you know?Clementine: Yeah. I've traveled a little bit, but I think for me, like, When I was young, I was too crazy to travel, you know, and I truly mean that, like I have complex PTSD and like as much as my life was so chaotic and like really, like, you know, on F*****g Cancelled, Jay and I talk about how we're both alcoholics in recovery, like, When I was drinking, I always wanted to be someone who traveled, and my life was very, like, chaotic and full of violence and danger and all those types of things, but the PTSD made it really hard to do [00:06:00] anything because I was always scared, you know and being a woman traveling... like, in recovery, I've wanted to try to travel more, but the combination of one being a woman traveling alone, it does come with certain risks to it.You're more vulnerable in certain ways and then add that to the PTSD. It's like... it's super anxiety producing, you know, so it's something that I've done a little bit but not as much as I would have liked to and I guess we'll see like what the future holds with that. One thing is is that like I learned to drive pretty late.I learned to drive in my 30s and once I learned to drive going on road trips was actually a way that really opened up travel for me because having my car with me gave me this sense of like safety, basically, that I could leave a situation like I was there with my car. So I had like the independence to like not be dependent on like strangers because I was afraid of them basically.But we went on a podcast tour last [00:07:00] year and drove like all across the United States in like a month and like drove down to like Arizona and like back up the West coast. And like, that was really, really cool. Chris: Beautiful. Thank you both. And so, you know, it might seem a little strange for you two to be invited on a podcast about tourism, migration, hospitality given that, you know, perhaps on the surface of things, your work doesn't appear to center around such things, but I've asked you both to speak with me today, in part, because I see a lot of parallels between what you've both referred to as the nexus in your work and what I refer to as the, a touristic worldview. And so to start, I'm wondering if you two could explain for our listeners, what the nexus is and its three main pillars.Clementine: So, in shorthand, or in, like, common language, you might call it social justice culture. There's a lot of different ways that this culture has been talked about but it's a particular [00:08:00] way of doing politics on the left, or left of center. And. Like, Jay and I come from inside this culture, so we are coming from inside social justice culture, being, like, leftists and being queer people and having existed in, like, progressive social justicey spaces for our entire adult lives, basically.And basically, we're noticing that there wasn't really language to talk about some of the phenomenons that were happening inside social justice culture or even, you know, social justice culture itself doesn't really give itself a name. Like we can call it social justice culture or we could call it something else, but it doesn't really have a name that it like claims for itself.It basically describes itself as like just doing politics or like being morally correct, you know, right? Yeah, being right. So we just started using the nexus as kind of like a placeholder for talking about a phenomenon that like doesn't really have a name. And we were trying to describe like this social phenomenon that we were totally [00:09:00] immersed in that there wasn't really language to describe. And we pulled out like three components that we saw interacting with each other to produce this phenomenon that we were calling the Nexus. And those pillars or components would be cancel culture, social media, and identitarianism. So, you maybe want to say more. Jay: Yeah, and we were just noticing how like when those three components were interacting on the left, you know they were producing a kind of like fourth thing that we were calling the Nexus and it's just like cancel culture was kind of this, you know, this culture of disposability and very sort of like intense acrimony functioned to sort of like boundary the whole thing and to keep, you know, certain views out and keep certain views in and sort of like establish the boundaries of what was thinkable or not.And the identitarianism provided the sort of ideological underpinning of the whole thing, like a way of making sense of the world, a [00:10:00] way of thinking about any problem and any issue, you know? And then social media was kind of the medium in which it was all taking place. And that was providing a lot of the kind of like the scaffolding of what it ended up looking like.Yeah. Does that make sense? Chris: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you both. And so I like to start then if I can with with identitarianism and you know as it pertains to, I guess, the end of tourism podcast and the way I've come to understand it is that to be a tourist isn't just to be a foreigner, but a stranger to the place one inhabits.And so in this sense, I feel that people can be tourists in their own homes and to a large degree the housing crisis, among many others seems to enable and ennoble this, you know, people know that they won't be able to afford a rent increase. And so they don't bother getting to know their neighbors or participating in the community.And beyond that community is often described in demographic terms, you know, the black community, the queer community, et cetera. But rarely [00:11:00] anymore in terms of the diverse people that you actually live beside or near. And so, for me, this is where tourism not only hits home, but is kind of unveiled as maybe beginning at home.You know, it's not just an industry, but something akin to a lifestyle or culture, as you said, Jay, of disposability. And so in this context, what I understand is identitarianism seems to enable this kind of touristic mentality of not needing to think of myself as a person of consequence in my building or in my neighborhood because I'll be out of here in another year or two anyway, right?And so I'm curious what you think of this idea and whether you think that identitarianism is a consequence of these crises that exist today, like the housing crisis, like landlordism, for example. Jay: Yeah, I definitely think it's all connected.And I think that I think that a huge part of all of this, right, is accelerating alienation that people are experiencing under the [00:12:00] dominant form of neoliberal capitalism. And alienation just describes this deep embodied sense of disconnection from oneself, from one's work and from one's fellows.And this is a concept that goes all the way back to Marx and before him even, you know, but Marx, I think correctly identified that capitalism had a mechanism within it that amplified this, this sense and created more of it. And I think that as we hurdle down the path of neoliberal apocalypse, we're sort of like more and more exposed to the sense of alienation.And so what does that mean? It means that we end up feeling like we don't know who we are. We don't know where we are. We don't know who the people around us are. We're just sort of floating, we're atomized, you know. We don't have roots or the connections that we do have feel fleeting and shallow.You know, and it produces obviously a deep sense of like misery in a lot of people, [00:13:00] whether they know it or not, I would say. But it also produces a longing for connections that feel real and that feel authentic. And I think that the turn towards identitarianism that has become more and more apparent over the last like decade or so both on the left and the right because I think that the rise of like the alt right, for example, was very much an identitarian movement as well. Yeah, it's that, that pivot towards identitarianism is a consequence of people feeling like they have no connections and they really want connections. They want to feel embedded in something, you know and so they're looking for other forms of community that they can belong to other than the communities that they actually live in, you know, because those communities that they actually live in have started to feel so disconnected and illusory, right?I do have more to say about the concept of like authenticity and all of this, which I think is like really foundational to tourism. But I will pass the mic. Well, I feel like we're probably going to get [00:14:00] into it later. Clementine: Okay. Well, yeah. So I mean, I think when talking about identitarianism, it's useful to make the distinction between identitarianism and identity politics.And we make that distinction on the podcast, but in case listeners aren't really familiar with the term identitarianism, I think it's useful for us to be a little bit clear about what we mean. And basically, identitarianism is distinct from identity politics. So, identity politics is just basically saying that identity matters when we're thinking about what is affecting people's lives, right?And when we're organizing politics, when we're trying to think of solutions where we can make the world better, identity is going to play a role. And that just means we're acknowledging that things like racism exists, homophobia exists, like, sexism exists, that the ways that our lives are shaped are impacted by identity.And like, we agree with that, we're not against that, as a framework. But identitarianism takes identity politics to a new place, where it basically does two main things to it. One, it [00:15:00] acts as if identity groups are homogenous, or share, like, very intense essential qualities, you know? So, when you make a statement, like, the BIPOC community thinks this.You're being identitarian and you're also being essentialist because you're actually making a statement in which you're saying that billions of people share a view, which is incorrect and also, like, very disrespectful to the vast diversity of thought that exists within any identity group, right? So it's actually like, it's an expression of essentialism and this belief that, like identity groups share essential qualities.And it erases, like, the vast political differences and personal differences that don't exist always within any identity group. And then secondly, Identitarianism acts as if identity is the primary or only way that power functions. So when we're trying to understand, like, what is wrong with the world, and what is going on, and why are we all suffering?Identitarianism [00:16:00] encourages us to look first, and maybe only, at identity as the way in which power is divided and organized. And so, in this way, you know, we have people, like basically collecting identity points. And what I mean by that is, like, adding up their various identities to try to understand their lives and their access to power.So people will be like, okay, I have these identities that are considered marginalized identities, and then I have these identities that are considered privileged identities. And so if I do some math, I'll be able to figure out where I stand in terms of power, right? And this is a total oversimplification of the way that power works.Identity is probably impacting your life in various ways. and may have a role in like your access to power, but it is not the only thing, and it's not as simple as just adding and subtracting to try to figure this out, and many, many things are lost when we are only using identity as the way to understand power, and so like when you're talking about, I just want to say that like that what you said [00:17:00] about people moving, I think is really fascinating because I moved like every year or two years.My entire, like actually I kind of haven't stopped because I've only lived where I currently live for like just about two years. So, I've basically been doing that since I was 16. I'm 37. Wow. Chris: Wow. Wow. Clementine: You know, and like, I don't mean cities, but I mean neighborhoods and at least apartments, you know, and actually my current neighborhood I've lived in probably the longest that I've ever lived anywhere but I've still moved several times and I've managed to stay in the same neighborhood, but like over the course of my teenage years, all my entire twenties and into my thirties, like, I was just constantly moving.And, you know, I, I had a sense of place in terms of the city I lived in. Like, I was living in Toronto for most of for my twenties. But I lived all over that f*****g city. Like, all over that city. You know, I didn't live in any particular neighborhood. And so because of that, like, I didn't really have that sense of like place and like there wasn't really a point in knowing my neighbors because it's true. I was going to [00:18:00] be moving and I knew that and so that is like a material reality that is being structured by capitalism and by landlords and rent and not having enough money and not having housing security.And identitarianism isn't really helping me to understand that, right? Like I can't really make sense of that experience if my only lens that I'm looking at the situation with is identity. And that's just like one example, but there's many, many things that, identity as if it's our only frame is not going to help us to understand.Jay: Or like it, it might help you feel like you understand it, but it's probably not going to give you a very good explanation, you know clear picture. Yeah, it's like there's this word that I stumbled across recently. I think it's like "monocausotaxophilia" I'm pretty sure is what it is and it's like the it's like the obsessive belief that like one there's like one answer for everything or like one thing can help you explain everything and it's it's like a common like logical fallacy that humans fall into, where like we just we discover something that really seems like it's right and then we're [00:19:00] like this can explain everything we can just apply this to everything, you know, and I think that identitarianism is like a an excellent example of this tendency that humans have Chris: Yeah.Wow. Kind of monotheism for politics, I guess. It's fascinating for me because I see a lot of these identitarianist dynamics play out in the context of tourist cities and the one that I lived in, still live around, just not in anymore.And then of course the people that I interview who deal with over tourism and of course all the crises that come with it. And so You know, like in the early pandemic, for example, in places like Oaxaca or Medellin in Colombia, for example, they suddenly became hotspots for digital nomads and other tourist escapees.And the consequences of over tourism in these places already existed, but once travel restrictions had [00:20:00] dropped and vaccines were doled out, places like this, and maybe the more obvious ones like Bali or Hawaii or Barcelona those consequences exploded and, you know, the number of visitors skyrocketed. And so both local people and foreigners opened Airbnb after Airbnb, and this is kind of what ended up happening in a lot of places in the, in the course of, you know, a couple of years essentially deepening the economic and social divisions in those places. And so what we've seen is that people simply tend to point their finger at the tourists, at the foreigner, ignoring the economic and political issues that affect these things.And so, what's arisen on the internet at least have been faceless social media accounts basically cancelling tourists or foreigners for you know anything you can think of for being cheap, people complaining about prices on their YouTube video or whatever, and others criticizing local cultures for X Y Z Zed pardon me and some Some who [00:21:00] refuse to, like, to speak the local language, for example, all of which, you know, constitutes bad behavior.And even still, like, other people, foreigners who become landlords in their new homes, right, who move to another country and just, you know, rent a nice place and then put it on Airbnb or something. And so, I'm curious about the individual? And why do you think, in so many of these cases, especially in regards to people who claim to be leftists or anarchists or radicals, that the focus is squarely put on individuals or individual behavior as opposed to the conditions or systems that created that behavior?Jay: Oh yeah, I mean, we've become like ludicrously unable to actually look at structural causes of anything in a way that allows us to formulate policy and work towards policy. Like, I think that like one of the major like failings of the left currently is that it is, especially in like the Anglo world, like completely f*****g unmoored from policy.I think in the US there's like a really [00:22:00] obvious reason for that, which is that there is, you know, no political party that's even remotely. So the idea that you could, that you could have policy that you like is sort of like nonsense to people in the first place. Right.So everything then becomes about either it would become either about individual behavior or about some sort of like more radical revolutionary option, you know but the radical revolutionary option doesn't exist. So it's all about the individual behavior. And a comparable situation is going on elsewhere in the Anglosphere as well where the sort of like political avenues for policymaking are severely lacking.So I think that there's this like strong, strong emphasis on the individual, on individual behavior, on moralizing on sort of angrily saying what should be true rather than working with like, you know, like reality. Yeah. Clementine: Yeah, I think that people, like, we haven't seen an effective left in our lifetime, like, you know, like we haven't seen the left making gains, like, for [00:23:00] millennials, like basically for our entire lives, you know?We haven't seen movements be successful, and so we feel very powerless. Like, there's a deep, deep sense of powerlessness in the face of capitalism and in the face of climate change and in the face of so many of the horrible conditions that we're living under, and we don't have a lot of evidence of things working, but we know we have the power to take down some individual person and publicly humiliate them and destroy their life.And so I think people get very addicted to that sense of power because it is like a balm to the abject helplessness that we feel under capitalism where we don't have a lot of power to really make the changes that we want to make, you know, but one of the things we're always talking about on the podcast is how cancel culture, while it provides this like temporary relief and this feeling like we're doing something like we have power.In fact, it erodes the very conditions that would allow us to have real power and the conditions that would allow us to have real power are solidarity. Right. Like, the one thing that the working class of the world [00:24:00] has that the capitalists don't is our numbers, right?Like, they have all the money and the use of force, you know? But we, there's just lots of us, and also we are the ones who make all their s**t. Like, or like, run their little online companies or whatever it is that they're doing now. Yeah, exactly. So, it's like literally the workers of the world are the ones who actually make capitalism run and there are no profits if the workers of the world organized and f*****g withdrew their labor, right? But currently, we don't have any conditions of like an organized working class movement that could actually threaten to do something like that. And so, there's no real avenue. Like unions have been like totally f*****g eroded there's no solidarity.There's no, like Workers movement that is being effective. I mean there are attempts at it like there was I don't know what happened with it because I'm off social media now, and I haven't been checking the news, but there was a gigantic like uprising of Bangladeshi textile workers who were like going on strike and like the police were trying to totally shut them down.I don't know what ended up happening kind of disappeared off my radar, but I think any movement for solidarity, you [00:25:00] know, cancel culture b******t aside, because honestly, it is such a distraction. Like it's annoying and it's a distraction would have to move towards like international solidarity.And I think that this is something that... we don't even have, like, solidarity, like, where we live, let alone solidarity, like, across the globe with workers in different places, you know? But under global capitalism, I think we're going to have to start looking with an internationalist lens and thinking about what would it look like to have the workers of the world actually uniting.Jay: Yeah. It reminds me of gentrification, you know? It's like, individual gentrifiers are sure like annoying, right? You know, people who sort of like don't belong there and are bringing their like annoying habits into the neighborhood or whatever, you know, and driving up prices and all this.But at the end of the day, this is like a structural issue that can only be solved by policy, right? You can't, you can't just sort of like be hostile towards gentrifiers and expect that to sort of like end up with anything other than you being angry and other people perhaps being frightened for like a couple of years until the [00:26:00] process of gentrification is complete.And I think that you know, there's like a similar thing with tourism, you know, I mean, tourism is just kind of like gentrification on like a, an international scale in a certain sense. Yeah. Chris: Yeah. Yeah. I mean here in Oaxaca, tourism is like 85 90 percent of the economy in the center of the city. And so it's all changing really quickly, wherein, people are sometimes hearing more English than Spanish in the streets, right? Not just in Oaxaca, but in other places as well. So there's this relative and understandable kind of resentment against the foreigner, but then when we have these gatherings and, you know, people ask me, well, like, "what should we do?" And I say, "well, go talk to the tourist, like, you can build solidarity with that person, even if it's by them understanding what's going on here, and maybe not coming back. As an extreme example, right. But what's also happened as a result, not just this waving or wagging the finger at the individual, but also in the context of identitarianism, reconvening the nation state.[00:27:00] And so my next question.. It kind of feeds off of the first and has to do with the effects or consequences of this kind of pseudo cancel culture that arises from tourism crises in places like Oaxaca and others. And so what you tend to see are locals identifying tourists or foreigners based on skin color.In Latin America, you know, the tourist is by and large the gringo, or the gringa, basically a white American. And what's happening as a result, especially among people who consider themselves, again, leftist or anarchist, is that they end up self identifying in opposition to the foreigner. And so what we see is an over identification, or what I will call anyways an over identification, with one's own skin color, class, and especially, especially now, nationality.And so, understanding the other as American means I'm Mexican or Colombian, or whatever, right? And I'm curious whether or not either of you consider [00:28:00] identitarianism to be a child of nationalism or how nationalism fits into these contemporary understandings of identitarianism.Jay: Right, right. Well, okay, I definitely have some thoughts about that for sure. I would say that like, nationalism is certainly one of the kind of original modern identities, right?And it was very much like crafted on purpose to be that, which I think that a lot of people don't know, unless they've like, you know, done like a sociology degree or something, but nationalism and the nation itself was like a modern invention created a couple of hundred years ago for specific political purposes, namely to unite quite disparate populations within at that time, mainly like European countries and to try to get the children of those people to think of themselves as like French instead of Breton, you know and to get them to speak French instead of Breton, right? As an example. And there is similar cases all over Europe. Anyways, that being aside, yes, like [00:29:00] nationalism certainly is like a form of identity and one of the most important forms of modern identity. I think that when we talk about identitarianism, often we end up not talking about nationalism very much because on the left, nationalism tends to be sort of like not the most important identity.It's one that you kind of downplay, especially if your nationality is one of the privileged Western rich nationalities, right? However, obviously if your nationality might you know get you points in, in whatever sort of like game you're playing, then you might, you might play it up.Clementine: Yeah, I have a couple things to say about this. I mean, one, the nexus or social justice culture, that we talk about on F*****g Cancelled, comes out of the United States of America. And the United States of America, they don't know that they're in the United States of America. So, Jay: This might be surprising to people because of the number of flags that are everywhere in America, but they don't know that they're in america.Clementine: They think they're just in the world. They think that that is the world, you know? And so, [00:30:00] there is this like, this lack of awareness or like basically they're not contextualizing what they're thinking and doing in an American context, even though it is, and then they're exporting that to the rest of the world, especially like English speaking places.But then it like leaks out from there. But it is an American way of understanding things based in an American context and an American history, right? And so you see this a lot with identitarianism where the popular framings and understandings around race, for example, that are going around social justice culture right now are specifically coming out of an American context and American constructions around race, and they don't map on perfectly to other contexts, but because it's being exported, because Americans are exporting their culture all over the world, we, in other places, are expected to just take it on and to start using that framework. And people do, but it doesn't really work properly. It doesn't really make sense in a different context. So that is a way in which like nation kind of disappears even though it is operating [00:31:00] in the way that identity is actually being shaped. Another thing that happens, and Jay and I were just talking about this for an upcoming episode. Another thing that happens is that because in North America anyway, like we don't really use nation as a category in identitarian thought, what ends up happening is that people actually racialize their national identity in a weird way to make it make sense in identitarianism. And so one of the ways that this can happen is that people from South America who are white, in a Northern American context, are sometimes racialized and considered people of color because they are not speaking like English as a first language, for example, or because there's cultural markers that are showing them as not North American, and so therefore they are impacted by various types of discrimination and so on and so forth, but in their context, they are actually racialized as white, but then in North [00:32:00] America, they may be racialized as non-white. And so this actually comes through like a I mean, first of all, it shows that race is like a made up category that can shift and be expressed in different ways.But also it is partially like the narcissism of North America that can't conceptualize difference, basically, and understand that, like, a person can actually be white and from South America and speak Spanish, for example. Jay: Which, like, this can also sometimes, we were joking about this, too, because it's true, like, this can also sometimes extend to people not being sure about, for example, like Portuguese people, and sort of like racializing Portuguese people on the basis of their sort of supposed affinity with like Latin America.⌘ Chris Christou ⌘ is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Yeah. Yeah. And I don't know, one thing that I want to mention too, you're just reminding me of this because of my research that you, that you mentioned is that like racialism, which is the idea that race is important and, and as a major identity category that people should care about a lot, let's put it that way, has often existed very [00:33:00] uneasily with nationalism.And so for a lot of like neo Nazis, they're not necessarily like opposed to nationalism, but they would, they would treat racial affinity with much more importance than they would a national affinity, especially when the national affinity is seen to have been kind of polluted by like foreign elements, for example, you know, and a big part of the national project has been to say that, like, we are all members of this national identity, sort of like, no matter who we are, blah, blah, blah. Right. And obviously some of us are more than others, right, is usually is how it's gone, but it tries to integrate like many different groups of people, including, you know, in the United States, for example, including like black Americans.Right. And, you know, the project of the integrated military, for example, has been a big part of the American national imaginary but if you're a white racist, you're not interested in a sort of national identity that, that includes black Americans as [00:34:00] well.Right. And this is also somewhat true on the left in different ways. But yeah, I'll just put that out there. Yeah. And then I guess the only other last thing I would like to say about this is that when we are anti essentialist and anti identitarian on the left, one of the things that, that like an anti racism that is rooted in an opposition to essentialism will argue and put forth is that race is a constructed and made up concept, right, which is something that I believe: race is not a real thing.It is like racism is real, but racism is based on the invention of this way of dividing up people based on race. And so there's a lot of anti essentialist leftists who are arguing this, but one thing that is important is to not confuse race, which is a made up category, with culture and ethnicity, which are real things, right?And one of the things, like, Jay and I have been talking about, and we're going to do an episode about this, or, like, related to these ideas, is, like, we actually care a lot about things, like, language protection, [00:35:00] culture protection, like the importance of people being able to keep and protect their cultural identities is like, it's a very important thing in respecting people's like human dignity.And in Canada, where colonialism has so thoroughly attacked indigenous Canadian people's cultures. They don't have their languages anymore. And like, Protecting language is, like, hugely important for people's mental health and well being, right? So, dividing those two things, that being, like saying race isn't real doesn't mean that we're not in favor of protecting culture and language.Yeah. Chris: Right, right, right. Of course. What's interesting about the, I guess, the reactions to overtourism here, it's not just that, Oh, the gringo is an American, so I'm a Mexican, but it's also racialized. It's also, okay. So who I see on the street, white people, and because I'm dark skinned, it reinforces those dualities, binaries, et cetera but it re-racializes local people, and in the context of Mexico [00:36:00] anyways the roots of their understandings of their racializedness, if I can say that comes from the imposition of race, of races, by the Spaniards, onto them, and saying this is who you are now, 400 years ago.Right? And so the new invasion, the tourism, right, is recapitulating that dynamic in ways in which people internalize the racial impositions that were put on them 400 years ago. Or their ancestors, right, I should say. So it's just mind boggling.Clementine: Yeah, I think, I think it's interesting though, right? Because how do we hold, like, the importance of culture and language and ethnicity while also acknowledging that those things were always shifting, changing, like, were never a static, constant thing, you know?That always included diversity, and within it, language is always changing and evolving. Culture is always changing and evolving, but also those things are real things that you can speak about and point to, and definitely notice when they'restolen from you or when you're no longer allowed to speak your language.Right. So yeah, like, I think we tend to go [00:37:00] to extremes. It's either like it doesn't exist or it's not important, or it's like a very essential, like static thing that has always only been one thing. Chris: Yeah, and also for a lack of history, right? I've been doing this investigation into Macedonian culture, ethnicity, history, etc, in part because my father is a first generation immigrant to Toronto, but from Agaean Macedonia and, you know, the Ottoman Empire was there controlling those lands for four or 500 years.And so the Ottomans were Muslim and the Macedonians weren't Macedonians to them, they were Christians. They were a Christian race, Mm-Hmm regardless of their language. And then when the Ottoman Empire fell, the Greeks and the Bulgarians ended up fighting over that territory, that land, that a lot of people considered to be Macedonian.And so the Greeks and the Bulgarians referred [00:38:00] to the Macedonians as the Macedonian race, no longer the Christian race, but the Macedonian race. So anyways, beyond that, once you get into the 20th century and start speaking in a global context, it's like, no, no, no, they're not the Macedonian race, they're a white race from Macedonia.And so, just this idea that race is inherently tied to skin color is very contemporary and it depends, of course, where it's coming from and who it's coming from, right? This idea of what race is becomes very fluid. I wanted to ask you two about escapism. I was just listening to your episode on freedom as a principle. Mm hmm. One of your most recent episodes and in it, you two speak of carceral institutions, jails, obviously, and I don't think it's very difficult to imagine how a touristic worldview, one built around escapism arises so fervently among people who feel powerless [00:39:00] to change the conditions in the culture that are oppressive and domineering.At the same time the glorification and commodification of that escapism through tourism creates a kind of a culture of abandonment and disposability, in the sense that you're leaving behind all your people and then once you get to this place, well, you're actually not responsible for anything you do there because it's not my, it's not my people, not my home.And so I'm curious, do you think that the freedom, that is usually couched in the freedom of movement has limits? And what do you make of the the inability to stay still in the context of all this?Jay: Man. Yeah, I mean it just makes me think about my own sort of like internal struggles that I have where like, basically like whenever I'm not doing very well, I have this part of me that wants nothing more than to just f**k off and travel sort of like indefinitely. It's like one of my strongest like internal urges, you know.I [00:40:00] don't know. I just keep thinking about that. But yeah, I mean, another thing that comes to mind for me, that is not, not a direct answer to your question, but it's just something that's coming up for me is that like, I think for like so many people in the wealthy West, you know they live in places that are comfortable because they're in the wealthy West, but they're like psychologically so destructive because it's just like these like vistas of like parking lots and like box stores and like depressing nothing places that no one could ever love and I think that like for a lot of people, and I hate to say this because it sounds like snobbish, you know, but it's like, whether or not they know it they are being psychologically attacked by the f*****g places that they live, you know, and there's a part of them that is like, I want nothing more than to get out of here, you know, and see something beautiful, and my question is sort of like, why can't we live in beautiful places? You know, and, and I actually like do live in a beautiful place and I love where I live, you know, [00:41:00] and the neighborhood in Montreal where I live is like gorgeous, you know it's a beautiful place to just walk around and look at stuff.It's very f*****g pretty. And there's a reason why I live here, you know, and I lived in other parts of the city and, and I gave up. You know, bigger, cheaper apartments to live here because I like how it looks and I like how it makes me feel to sort of like leave my house and f*****g walk around. And other people like it too.Millions of people come to Montreal as tourists. We actually have tourists in this neighborhood. And, and like when I leave my house and like walk around the corner, there's like lineups of tourists, you know that I have to sort of like navigate to like get to the gym.Because they're flocking around because it's f*****g nice here. But like a lot of places in North America are really not nice. They're not nice places to look at. They're not nice places to live. You can't f*****g walk anywhere, even if you wanted to you know, everything basically looks the same as everything else, you know?And yeah, it's not surprising to me that people would want to get out of there. Right. Also though, as I say this, it's not just North America that people [00:42:00] come from when they're tourists, right. Right. We're seeing like a gigantic increase in tourism from countries like China. Japan has always produced a lot of tourists, you know? So I think like part of it is just that like, as people get wealthier the desire to just see different things and whatever is always present in people and if they can do it, like there's no particular reason why they wouldn't but I think that it's, it's definitely worth trying to imagine what travel could look like and what like guesthood could look like, you know outside of a context where it's all just like this very commodified process that is not necessarily very great for the people who are on the kind of like hosting end of it.But yeah, again, like I live in a heavily touristed city, but apart from the tourists being quite annoying to have to walk around, like when there's like snow everywhere and they're taking up the whole sidewalk apart from that, and the fact that like Airbnb is a big problem in Montreal they don't bother me much here and I think that like a big part of that is just the, like, you know, Montreal is a very wealthy city, you know, so like an influx of like wealthy [00:43:00] foreigners doesn't like impact it that much other than to sort of like inject cash into the economy, which is not such a bad thing, right? And I do think that like part of the answer to all this is that we need to be like taking seriously internationalist solidarity and like the development of places that are not as developed.And it reminds me of like sort of debates about immigration to the West, you know, and it's like immigration, is a complicated topic and people have lots of different opinions about it, but like a lot of people on the liberal left will, will, will act like immigration is all by itself, like an amazing, awesome thing, always. And then people on the right will act like it's this terrible thing always. And I'm like, I don't know, it's kind of a neutral thing, you know, like there are good and bad things about it. Obviously people being able to travel is like a nice thing. I'll just say this, like, I think that like immigration is a good thing when the places that people are coming from are not so undeveloped or so poor that it's like forcing people out. Right. You know what I mean? And yeah, I dunno, , that was, that was like five [00:44:00] different tensions, so That's great. Chris: Love it. Clementine: So what, what is coming up for me is I saw this drawing that was like of whales swimming in the ocean.And it was like, basically saying something like, borders aren't real, because like, there's no borders in the ocean for whales or whatever. And this is part of this, like, thing on the left, and it's kind of related to what Jay was just saying, that, like, on the left, we do have this, this big like, belief in things like open borders or just free movement, free travel as, like, this positive and, kind of obviously good thing that we should support and I understand it, but at the same time, the fantasy that there aren't different areas in the natural world is false.There might not be borders, but there are biomes. And one of the things about travel that I don't think gets talked about a lot, and that is a big issue with, like, environmental destruction, is actually the reality of biomes and the fact that the movement of people across the world at the rapid way that we do it now [00:45:00] is moving plants, microbes, fungus from biome to biome and in different biomes the way that evolution works is that, like, those ecosystems were totally separate for all of this time, and then when some new, plant, animal, microbe, fungus gets into this new ecosystem, it may be that the other beings that live there have no defense against it, right? And then it causes massive problems, such as what goes on with invasive species.But like, just as a random example, like one of the major things that's causing extinction of bats is the introduction of this fungus into North America that comes from Europe or something and it comes on like tourists. They come and they don't know that they have it on them because it's just like little fungus and then they go and they visit bat caves and then they accidentally infect the bats and the bats are all getting sick and dying, you know, and so I just bring up this random example because the question of like what does it mean to be responsible when we go somewhere [00:46:00] when Even us just going there can cause problems that we didn't intend, you know?And it is a really complicated question. I'm not saying I necessarily have the answer. But especially from an environmental perspective, even if we get climate change under control, even if we deal with, you know fossil fuels, which we're not even close to dealing with, but even if we deal with that, we would still have this big question of, if we are going to continue to travel, say we get rid of planes, and then we have like airships and we're able to fly in a way that's not killing the climate, we still have this big question about what it means when we're bringing things on our clothes by accident.And I'm kind of like, instead of like security at airports, like I wonder if there could be like these places where we go in and we basically have to like leave our things. And like, when we arrive, we get like a special clothes that we wear. I don't know what it would look like because we're carrying fungus on our clothes.Jay: So. It would be really interesting to think about borders in a better world, you know and what that might look like, because I can imagine something like where it's like a supra national kind of like agreement between [00:47:00] different countries and stuff. And like the border is the border of the biome, not the border between the countries, you know?Clementine: Yeah, and I was just talking about it on like an environmental level, which I do think is very important and doesn't really get talked about enough. But I also think we can look at this on a human level where, you know, if we're thinking about like invasive species and like a plant coming in and just growing and taking over, we can also think about how when we bring.You know, for example, English, we can think about English as an invasive species, you know, like English is a species that's going to go there and because it's the language that if people speak more than one language, one of the languages that they speak might be English because it's kind of like taken over the world, then it means more and more people are going to be speaking English and then other languages are going to start dying out.And so this is like literally what an invasive plant species does, you know? And so I think, We need to think about that when we're bringing English into a space. Like, what are we doing in that space? How are we changing that space by bringing English into it? And I say that very self consciously as a unilingual English speaker, but [00:48:00] it is, you know, like.So, like, this idea of what it means to be a responsible guest, what it means to be somewhere, to visit somewhere, we need to think about, not even just the more obvious things, like throwing our garbage around, or being totally disrespectful, or using a place as a party spot, and then leaving, like, all of those things, I think, are very obviously disrespectful, and we need to be more considerate, but there's even more subtle ways, where just our very presence and the way that we bring ourselves can have an impact that we don't intend. That I think is part of the conversation about what it can mean to, to travel in a more ethical and responsible way. Chris: Amen. Amen. Yeah, I'm reminded of, and I don't know how relevant it is for the conversation, but I'm reminded of Terrence McKenna, the great psychedelic bard. He had a hypothesis that the main vehicle of evolutionary change or growth wasn't human beings or mammals, for example, but language.And we were just vehicles for language's evolution and spreading. And that languages are just fighting this secret battle, this secret [00:49:00] war. But, anyways. To speak to what both of you are saying, I interviewed, a man named Daniel Pardo in the first season of the pod, this activist from Barcelona, and he said, you know, "in no way can tourism be sustainable because we can't extend it to everyone on the planet. Like, it's actually impossible to ensure that seven or eight billion people can go on vacation once a year or fly. Right? He said, "there's no right to fly." And, so it's important to ensure that people have these freedoms, but then to what extent can they actually be applied? And I remember being back in Toronto last summer for a few months, and there were whole families and communities of migrants sleeping in front of churches on the street because from what I understand, the Canadian government the year previous had let in something like a million migrants and maybe half of them went to Toronto because it's the financial hub of the country. And there was [00:50:00] simply nothing for them there. There was no plan for them, by the government, there was no jobs, no social support, nothing, right?And so they ended up on the street, sleeping on the street in front of churches, en masse. In terms of the people that I knew who grew up there, and myself, we had never seen that before. And so you can create the freedom to migrate and things like that but what is at the end of that movement, right? So there are definitely these dynamics and nuances that need to be spoken of in terms of travel and the way people travel and the borders and, and biomes that affect the way we move. Yeah, and of course, I could go on and on. I have two more questions for you two, if that's alright? Sure. Okay. So on some of the f*****g canceled podcast episodes you have subtitled the theme of the quest for the offline left. And, you know, I think [00:51:00] largely emphasizing the word offline. And so, you know, what do you think being together offline and organizing offline can do to people whose lives have been shaped around online and social media mentalities?I mean, the three of us are more or less of the age that we still have a lived memory of life before the internet, but what about those who don't? Clementine: Yeah, absolutely horrifying. I mean, I think we are social animals who evolved to be together, looking at each other's faces, like, talking and being in the same space together.Like the alienation that Jay was talking about before, like both leads to our compulsive social media use and our desperate attempt to find community through that, and also completely contributes and worsens the problem, making it a million times worse where we are staring at our phones when we are literally, actually, physically together and could be having a conversation.And that is really like sad and depressing. And I [00:52:00] think that in terms of organizing across difference building solidarity with people... like on the Internet, we can believe that a community is people who share either like an interest or an identity category with us. And that is a community online whereas in real life, community is going to be full of people who are not necessarily like ourselves, who we might not share interests in common with, and we might not share identities in common with, but they actually are the people who are in our spaces in real life, and we actually share many things in common with them that we might not realize because we share a place together, we share a world together and being able to build relationships with people who are different from ourselves is, first of all absolutely necessary as a political strategy if we want to get anything done on the left.But also, it's deeply enriching for our human lives, you know, to be able to meet and talk to people who are not exactly the same, not the same age, not sharing the same politics, like, who are just different from ourselves. So I think it's very important. The other thing is like, the absolute erosion of our [00:53:00] attention span due to social media.I have recently not been on Instagram for, like, a month, and I feel like my brain is, like, damaged, and I'm, like, recovering from a severe damage to my attention span, you know? Like, I wasn't able to read books for years, because I just didn't have an attention span to, like, really keep up with it.It was, like, way harder for me than it used to be when I was younger, you know? Because I have been on the feed that is giving me just five second blips of information and then giving me something else and getting my brain hooked on this, like, dopamine response cycle, which is absolutely horrifying.So, I think it's also really bad for us, like, mentally in terms of our ability to think critically and at length and to, like, pay attention to what we're thinking about. Yeah, Jay: I think that the internet gives people the illusion that things are happening that are not actually happening You know like I don't know you make a a really good post and 2, 000 people like it Wow.Okay. They're all scattered across the f*****g planet. [00:54:00] You know what I mean? It doesn't, you don't know them. It doesn't translate into anything, right? It feels good. And you feel like maybe you're influencing the discourse or something like that, you know but it doesn't translate into anything.And it can give you It can give you the idea that like to be politically active and to be politically successful is to get more people liking your f*****g posts or whatever, you know, but it's not true, right? It also gives people the illusion and Clementine was gesturing at this that a group of people, it's not even really group, it's like a category of people that are like you, is a meaningful sort of group to be in. But let's say like, take like queer people, like LGBTQ community. Okay. And then you extrapolate that to like the whole world, or you can even just extrapolate it to like North America. You know, that's like a scattering of people that are spread out over this enormous geographic area.You couldn't possibly meet them all. Not only because there's so many of them, but also because they're so scattered, right? And you couldn't possibly organize them all and like, and so [00:55:00] on. And, and it's not a community. It's not a community. It is. It's like there's a word I'm looking for and I was, I've been trying to think of it for the past, like five minutes, but I'm just going to say it's like an electorate or something rather than like rather than like a community, you know it's like this, it's this like demographic group that like marketers might market to you or that politicians might try to get to vote for them or something like that. But that's not, that's not what a community is. That's not what a real group is like a real group automatically encompasses difference.Like a, a sort of like authentic human group, like always has differences of like age and occupation and often ethnicity and all these sorts of internal differences that, you know, human groups have always had. Right. And when we try to sort of like make these groups based on identity, which the internet makes very, very, very easy.We like miss. The people that were actually around, like, yeah, but yeah, as for the offline left, I mean, we desperately need to be organizing and in the real world, and I think that[00:56:00] that's not to say that like you can't do anything on the internet.Like the internet obviously has massive advantages for many, many reasons, you know. F**k, there's this like, there's this like image in my head. I'm a very like visual person. I get these like pictures in my head and then I'm like, I have to explain this picture. But it's like the, the thing about like the, the, the groups being this, these kind of like electorates, it's like, if you are this electorate, then you're only choice is to sort of petition your leaders to do something for you. You know what I mean? But like if you are a real and authentic community, you can organize your community to enact something in the real world, you know? And I don't want us to always be in the position of petitioning our leaders, because it presupposes the leaders, it presupposes that we accept their authority, you know, it presupposes that we don't have another option other than to allow a tiny class of parasitical, like rich people to rule everything for us, you know but I would like us to move away from that.Clementine: Yeah. Like just one other thing about that is you'll [00:57:00] see, you know, this gesturing towards actual organizing but through posting, but it's missing the actual organizing piece, which involves building relationships, right? And building trust. And so one of the things you'll, you'll see, like in the last couple of years, I've seen it a few times with different political things that are going on where people will just randomly call for like a mass strike and they'll make a post about it.And they'll be like, on this day, we are calling for people to strike for like this political issue. I saw it for like abortion rights in the United States and I recently saw it for solidarity with Palestine. But it's like, people can't just walk out of their jobs randomly because they will be fired.Like, the point of unions and the point of organized labor is that you have this guarantee where all of these people are taking this risk together in an organized and strategic way and they are trusting each other that they are doing it together and it is their numbers that makes it so that the boss can't just fire them all.And they have strike fund. There's a lot of them and they're [00:58:00] supporting each other to do this and it's organized and they've actually built enough relationship to be like, okay, I trust that my fellow workers are going to do this with me. So, like when I take this risk, it's like the risk is mitigated by the numbers and I know I'm not alone in it.Right. But a social media post cannot produce that. It is not relationship. And so random people reading that, like they're like, "should I just walk out of my job tomorrow?" Like, probably if they do that, they're going to be the only person at their job who's doing that, and they're just going to be fired or reprimanded, best case scenario. And that is not organized at all. And, and so then people are like, "Why aren't you guys walking out of your job? This is not solidarity." And it's like, "you're right. It's not solidarity. Because the solidarity hasn't been built." Like, you have to actually build trust with people to get them to take risks. And if you don't build that trust, and you don't have those actual real relationships, it's not a good idea for people to take those risks because they'll be by themselves taking those risks. Chris: Yeah, begs the question if in order to have solidarity with people elsewhere, does it [00:59:00] have to exist at home first?Clementine: I would say yeah. Absolutely. Jay: And solidarity is kind of meaningless if it's just you. Like it kind of has to be organized, you know, like in some meaningful fashion and that can take place in a small scale or a large scale. But if it was just you feeling solidaristic, like it doesn't, yeah, Clementine: like for example, with the Bangladeshi textile workers, you know. If there was organized labor in North America and say, for example, that like the H&M's were unionized, which I do not think that they are, but if the H& Ms were unionized because, like, the clothing at H&M all comes from Bangladesh, the workers could choose to do a solidarity strike, to strike alongside the Bangladeshi workers, so that the retailers were striking alongside the textile workers, right?And that would be very effective and very cool if that was happening, but in order for that to happen, the retail workers first have to be organized, and they have to have unions, and they actually have to have like an organized labor force here in order to do any kind of meaningful action in [01:00:00] solidarity with the workers in Bangladesh.Chris: Food for thought. Yeah. Thank you both. So my final question. Of the main themes of the pod, one is radical hospitality, which, to me at least, stands as a kind of antidote to industrial hospitality. You know, the systems, the

On how to respond to conformity.   Lias Saoudi, frontman of the British band Fat White Family, joins us to talk about rock, popular culture and contemporary unfreedom. We discuss: Why are the kids taking less drugs? Can we respond to our nihilistic times with nihilistic art? What is the nature of conformity today? How to challenge conformity without sneering at the masses? Is there a romantic revival going on? Why is Lias interested in Ivan Illich? If living cheaply in big cities is now very difficult for artists, will something new emerge from the provinces? Links: Ten Thousand Apologies: Fat White Family & the Miracle of Failure, Lias Saoudi & Adelle Stripe, White Rabbit Books Punk's spirit is broken, Lias Saoudi, UnHerd Is modern medicine making us sick?, Lias Saoudi, UnHerd Forthcoming album: Forgiveness Is Yours /353/ Bunga Sells Out ft. Jason Myles - on music and the spectacle /359/ Apollo Gets High ft. Benjamin Fong - on drugs in America

SELECTED LINKS FROM THE EPISODETeach Your Kids: Website | LinkedIn | X | Instagram | Substack | Facebook | TikTokManisha: LinkedIn | X | Instagram | FacebookJoin our premium community with expert support and adviceTeach Your Kids Blog PostsNot school or homeschooling, but modular learningThe Ultimate Modular Learning ChecklistWhat's a typical homeschool day look like?Related ResourcesMastery Learning Hour  Time-Codes00:00:00 — Introduction to Modular Learning and Manisha Snoyer's Background00:02:00 — Critique of Traditional Schooling and Homeschooling Models00:09:00 — Educational Webs: Ivan Illich's Influence and Implementation00:10:20 — Practical Examples of Modular Learning in Diverse Settings00:14:20 — Building Community and Sharing Resources in Modular Learning00:15:00 — The Future of Education: Inviting Listeners to Join the Movement This podcast was recorded on Riverside and is made possible through a generous grant from the Vela Education FundVELA Education Fund is catalyzing a vibrant alternative education ecosystem. VELA provides trust-based funding to entrepreneurs, fosters community-building and knowledge-sharing, and increases visibility through storytelling that promotes cultural awareness and acceptance of the out-of-system space. Today, VELA serves the largest community of out-of-system education entrepreneurs in the country, with over 2,000 community members. About half of VELA's community members operate small learning environments, and the other half are ecosystem and community builders offering direct services and support across the out-of-system space. Learn more at velaedfund.org.This site contains product affiliate links. We may receive a commission if you make a purchase after clicking on one of these links.

Author, activist and educator, Dougald Hine returns to the show this week for a discussion that is simultaneously timely and timeless. If you've been following along on the blog, you'll know that I have been wrestling with how to say things, with whom and to what end, given how the world is going. One of the topics I had been meaning to record on for months now was the resurgence of Christianity: whether it is surprising or not, whether it is automatically reactionary, whether it is a sign of things improving or devolving. And I tried coming at that from several angles -including recording a whole solo show before leaving Paraguay on the topic that I didn't release- but found none of them were satisfactory. Then I messaged Dougald about it, and it turns out it's an area he is also exploring, both personally and 'culturally' (whatever that means) right now. Plus, he's something of an aficionado of the works of Ivan Illich -whose insight is especially useful in these times. So he graciously agreed to come back on the show to prove that two heads are definitely better than one. We explore the possible why of Christianity's resurgence, who 'owns' it and what happens if we don't engage, plus its different forms and mutations. Then we turn to Ivan Illich himself, beginning with a biography and an overview of his thought, before finishing with what he might have to say about these very strange times we are living through. (And depending on when you catch this episode, there is still time to get in on some Illich discussions with Dougald. Details in the show notes. An excellent discussion. Enjoy!         Show Notes Dougald's Substack. Subscribe for access details for the Illich discussions. Here's a series from Dougald's substack called Into The Deep exploring Christianity's return: The Ruined Church. Stranger Friends. What Happened in the Cathedral. Regrowing A Living Culture: A School Called Home. Dougald's first appearance on the show, discussing At Work In The Ruins.

Philosopher and writer Nina Power is senior editor and columnist at Compact Magazine. She is the author of “One Dimensional Woman” (2009) and “What do Men Want? Masculinity & Its Discontents” (2022). She left her position as Senior Lecturer of Philosophy at Roehampton University after more than a decade in academia. Peter Boghossian spoke with Nina about the current manifestation of the “battle of the sexes,” where men have become a socially permitted target of hatred and blame. Nina discusses the curious ideal of a homogenous human being, an aim to un-gender the sexes to make men and women interchangeable. She says it is a mistake that traditional masculine virtues—strength, judgment, responsibility—are being coded as right-wing values that must be dismantled alongside “the patriarchy.” Peter and Nina also discuss sex differences, male suicide, Nina's break with the Labour Party, the state of philosophy, Aristotle's categories of friendship, intellectual conformity, Ivan Illich, Rebecca Tuvel, activist attacks, leftism, the beauty of changing one's mind, and more. Nina received a Ph.D. in philosophy from Middlesex University and an MA and BA in philosophy from the University of Warwick. She was a senior lecturer in philosophy at Roehampton University and has taught at various British universities. She is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and a member of the British Philosophical Association. She cohosts the podcast The Lack with Helen Rollins and Benjamin Studebaker. More from Nina:“What do Men Want? Masculinity & Its Discontents” by Nina Power Compact Magazine “The Lack” podcast Nina on X Nina on Substack Watch this episode on YouTube.

New Courses at Parallax: https://parallax-media.eu/courses/og-rose-look-at-the-birds-of-the-air https://parallax-media.eu/courses/the-hard-way-with-luke-behncke Subscribe to our Substack: https://parallax.substack.com/ Parallax Events: https://parallax-media.eu/parallax-academy-calendar Parallax Academy: https://parallax-media.eu/curriculum Membership: https://parallax-media.eu/parallax-academy-calendar A finalist for the UNO Press Lab Prize and Pushcart Nominee, O.G. Rose's creative works appear at The Write Launch, Allegory Ridge, Ponder Review, Iowa Review online, The William and Mary Review, Assure Press, Toho Journal online, O:JA&L, West Trade Review, Broken Pencil, Burningword, and Poydras Review. While at the University of Virginia, O.G. Rose worked collaboratively with other artists at Eunoia, a creative community Rose helped develop. Rose now lives on a farm with three children, manages a venue named Mead Lake Lodge, and teaches piano using visuals from the DLG Pattern Method. Their published books include The Conflict of Mind (2021), Thoughts (2022), and Belonging Again: Part 1 (2023). A conversation with Daniel Gardner of O.G. Rose and Cadell Last about the new course coming up at Parallax and the difference between planning and being prepared. A rich philosophical discussion. "Cadell Last is an anthropologist, philosopher and therapist focused on biocultural evolution, mind-matter relation and future speculations. He earned his PhD in interdisciplinary and complexity studies at the Evolution, Cognition and Complexity group at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. He is also the author of over a dozen academic publications and several books: Global Brain Singularity and Sex, Masculinity, and God. He is the founder of The Philosophy Portal. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/podcast-c709ee4/message

The Greco-Egyptian syncretistic god Serapis was used by the 3rd century BCE Ptolemaic pharaohs to impose Greek cultural hegemony and consolidate political power. The Alexandrian Serapeum, sometimes referred to as The Great Library of Alexandria's “daughter library,” may be seen as an archetype for institutions where religion and secular knowledge come together for the reproduction of ideologies. The Serapeum, however, is by no means unique in this regard; libraries have always incorporated religious symbols and rituals into their material structures. Very little research has been conducted concerning the sociocultural and historical impact of this union of temple and information institution or how this dynamic interrelationship (even if it may now be implicit or partially concealed) stretches from the earliest Mesopotamian proto-libraries to our present academic ones. Serapis explores the role of the historical and legacy religious symbols and rituals of the academic library (referred to as the “Serapian Library”) as a powerful ideological state institution and investigates how these symbols and rituals support hegemonic structures in society. Specifically, the book examines the role of the modern secular “Serapian” academic library in its historical context as a “sacred space,” and applies the theories of Karl Marx, Louis Althusser, Ivan Illich, and other thinkers to explain the ramifications of the library as crypto-temple. Jen Hoyer is Technical Services and Electronic Resources Librarian at CUNY New York City College of Technology. Jen edits for Partnership Journal and organizes with the TPS Collective. She is co-author of What Primary Sources Teach: Lessons for Every Classroom and The Social Movement Archive. 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

The Greco-Egyptian syncretistic god Serapis was used by the 3rd century BCE Ptolemaic pharaohs to impose Greek cultural hegemony and consolidate political power. The Alexandrian Serapeum, sometimes referred to as The Great Library of Alexandria's “daughter library,” may be seen as an archetype for institutions where religion and secular knowledge come together for the reproduction of ideologies. The Serapeum, however, is by no means unique in this regard; libraries have always incorporated religious symbols and rituals into their material structures. Very little research has been conducted concerning the sociocultural and historical impact of this union of temple and information institution or how this dynamic interrelationship (even if it may now be implicit or partially concealed) stretches from the earliest Mesopotamian proto-libraries to our present academic ones. Serapis explores the role of the historical and legacy religious symbols and rituals of the academic library (referred to as the “Serapian Library”) as a powerful ideological state institution and investigates how these symbols and rituals support hegemonic structures in society. Specifically, the book examines the role of the modern secular “Serapian” academic library in its historical context as a “sacred space,” and applies the theories of Karl Marx, Louis Althusser, Ivan Illich, and other thinkers to explain the ramifications of the library as crypto-temple. Jen Hoyer is Technical Services and Electronic Resources Librarian at CUNY New York City College of Technology. Jen edits for Partnership Journal and organizes with the TPS Collective. She is co-author of What Primary Sources Teach: Lessons for Every Classroom and The Social Movement Archive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

The Greco-Egyptian syncretistic god Serapis was used by the 3rd century BCE Ptolemaic pharaohs to impose Greek cultural hegemony and consolidate political power. The Alexandrian Serapeum, sometimes referred to as The Great Library of Alexandria's “daughter library,” may be seen as an archetype for institutions where religion and secular knowledge come together for the reproduction of ideologies. The Serapeum, however, is by no means unique in this regard; libraries have always incorporated religious symbols and rituals into their material structures. Very little research has been conducted concerning the sociocultural and historical impact of this union of temple and information institution or how this dynamic interrelationship (even if it may now be implicit or partially concealed) stretches from the earliest Mesopotamian proto-libraries to our present academic ones. Serapis explores the role of the historical and legacy religious symbols and rituals of the academic library (referred to as the “Serapian Library”) as a powerful ideological state institution and investigates how these symbols and rituals support hegemonic structures in society. Specifically, the book examines the role of the modern secular “Serapian” academic library in its historical context as a “sacred space,” and applies the theories of Karl Marx, Louis Althusser, Ivan Illich, and other thinkers to explain the ramifications of the library as crypto-temple. Jen Hoyer is Technical Services and Electronic Resources Librarian at CUNY New York City College of Technology. Jen edits for Partnership Journal and organizes with the TPS Collective. She is co-author of What Primary Sources Teach: Lessons for Every Classroom and The Social Movement Archive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Greco-Egyptian syncretistic god Serapis was used by the 3rd century BCE Ptolemaic pharaohs to impose Greek cultural hegemony and consolidate political power. The Alexandrian Serapeum, sometimes referred to as The Great Library of Alexandria's “daughter library,” may be seen as an archetype for institutions where religion and secular knowledge come together for the reproduction of ideologies. The Serapeum, however, is by no means unique in this regard; libraries have always incorporated religious symbols and rituals into their material structures. Very little research has been conducted concerning the sociocultural and historical impact of this union of temple and information institution or how this dynamic interrelationship (even if it may now be implicit or partially concealed) stretches from the earliest Mesopotamian proto-libraries to our present academic ones. Serapis explores the role of the historical and legacy religious symbols and rituals of the academic library (referred to as the “Serapian Library”) as a powerful ideological state institution and investigates how these symbols and rituals support hegemonic structures in society. Specifically, the book examines the role of the modern secular “Serapian” academic library in its historical context as a “sacred space,” and applies the theories of Karl Marx, Louis Althusser, Ivan Illich, and other thinkers to explain the ramifications of the library as crypto-temple. Jen Hoyer is Technical Services and Electronic Resources Librarian at CUNY New York City College of Technology. Jen edits for Partnership Journal and organizes with the TPS Collective. She is co-author of What Primary Sources Teach: Lessons for Every Classroom and The Social Movement Archive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/religion

The Greco-Egyptian syncretistic god Serapis was used by the 3rd century BCE Ptolemaic pharaohs to impose Greek cultural hegemony and consolidate political power. The Alexandrian Serapeum, sometimes referred to as The Great Library of Alexandria's “daughter library,” may be seen as an archetype for institutions where religion and secular knowledge come together for the reproduction of ideologies. The Serapeum, however, is by no means unique in this regard; libraries have always incorporated religious symbols and rituals into their material structures. Very little research has been conducted concerning the sociocultural and historical impact of this union of temple and information institution or how this dynamic interrelationship (even if it may now be implicit or partially concealed) stretches from the earliest Mesopotamian proto-libraries to our present academic ones. Serapis explores the role of the historical and legacy religious symbols and rituals of the academic library (referred to as the “Serapian Library”) as a powerful ideological state institution and investigates how these symbols and rituals support hegemonic structures in society. Specifically, the book examines the role of the modern secular “Serapian” academic library in its historical context as a “sacred space,” and applies the theories of Karl Marx, Louis Althusser, Ivan Illich, and other thinkers to explain the ramifications of the library as crypto-temple. Jen Hoyer is Technical Services and Electronic Resources Librarian at CUNY New York City College of Technology. Jen edits for Partnership Journal and organizes with the TPS Collective. She is co-author of What Primary Sources Teach: Lessons for Every Classroom and The Social Movement Archive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/communications

New Courses at Parallax: https://parallax-media.eu/courses/og-rose-look-at-the-birds-of-the-air https://parallax-media.eu/courses/the-hard-way-with-luke-behncke Subscribe to our Substack: https://parallax.substack.com/ Parallax Events: https://parallax-media.eu/parallax-academy-calendar Parallax Academy: https://parallax-media.eu/curriculum Membership: https://parallax-media.eu/parallax-academy-calendar I asked Jordan about his relationship with the philosopher and historian Ivan Illich and how that relates to his concept of Civium and his recent article: https://deepcode.substack.com/p/from-city-to-civium Jordan Hall is a visionary philosopher celebrated for his groundbreaking insights into the realms of collective intelligence, sense-making, and the intricate tapestry of modern civilization. With a keen intellect and a penchant for unraveling complex societal dynamics, he has emerged as a guiding light in our quest to fathom the intricacies of our rapidly changing world. Hall's contributions to the global discourse extend beyond his words; he is a true architect of change. His work illuminates pathways for societies and communities to deftly navigate the labyrinthine challenges of the 21st century, offering a compass for those seeking to understand and shape our collective destiny. (written with the help of ChatGPT) --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/podcast-c709ee4/message

Course Starts Saturday, November 4th: https://parallax-media.eu/courses/og-rose-look-at-the-birds-of-the-air ` Parallax Substack—sign up here: https://parallax.substack.com/ Parallax Events: https://parallax-media.eu/parallax-academy-calendar Parallax Academy: https://parallax-media.eu/curriculum Parallax Membership: https://parallax-media.eu/membership Parallax Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/1IBCLy7a4KhNXsH5ejtCaM As the second instalment of our ‘Tools for Conviviality' courses, philosophers Michel and Daniel Gardner, otherwise known as O.G. Rose, will discuss Ivan Illich in light of their own ideas and thoughts of great philosophers. The title of their course says it all in the most tantalising way. “Look at The Birds of The Air - How We Must Unplan Our Lives”! Bio: A finalist for the UNO Press Lab Prize and Pushcart Nominee, O.G. Rose's creative works appear at The Write Launch, Allegory Ridge, Ponder Review, Iowa Review online, The William and Mary Review, Assure Press, Toho Journal online, O:JA&L, West Trade Review, Broken Pencil, Burningword, and Poydras Review. While at the University of Virginia, O.G. Rose worked collaboratively with other artists at Eunoia, a creative community Rose helped develop. Rose now lives on a farm with three children, manages a venue named Mead Lake Lodge, and teaches piano using visuals from the DLG Pattern Method. Their published books include The Conflict of Mind (2021), Thoughts (2022), and Belonging Again: Part 1 (2023). Artist link: https://www.og-rose.com --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/podcast-c709ee4/message

This conversation is in advance of Bonnitta Roy's THE CONVIVIAL LIFE - CONVERSATIONS WITH IVAN ILLICH & FRIENDS, which begins on Sunday, September 10th and runs every Sunday until October 1. It will include prerecorded lectures, live Zoom sessions and campfire community sessions. For more information and to join us in the learning and conviviality, please check out the links below: https://parallax-media.eu/courses/the-convivial-life-conversations-with-ivan-illich-friends Bonnitta Roy is a visioneer, insight guide and horse whisperer. Her work is deeply embodied and grounded, and over the last several years, she's shown us how to trust the intelligence of life again. She is founder of Alderlore Insight Center and curates wickedly provocative and seriously surprising conversations at The Pop-UP School.David Cayley is a Toronto-based Canadian writer and broadcaster who is known for documenting the philosophy of prominent thinkers of the 20th century - Ivan Illich, Northrop Frye, George Grant, and Rene Girard. His work has been broadcast on CBC Radio One's programme Ideas. He is the author of man books, including the recent biography Ivan Illich: An Intellectual Journey. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/podcast-c709ee4/message

Connor and Carl continue to explore the origins of feminism with Ivan Illich's Gender (1983), Mary Harrington's Feminism Against Progress (2023), & Abigail Favale's The Genesis of Gender (2022); and discuss how the Industrial and Sexual Revolutions set the sexes at odds, and how that frayed social fabric might be rewoven.

On this episode, my guest is Nick Hunt, the author of three travel books about journeys by foot, including Outlandish: Walking Europe's Unlikely Landscapes. His articles have appeared in The Guardian, Emergence, The Irish Times, New Internationalist, Resurgence & Ecologist and other publications. He works as an editor and co-director for the Dark Mountain Project. His latest book is an alternate history novel, Red Smoking Mirror.Show NotesAwe and the Great SecretOn Focus, Sight and SubjectivityThe Almost Lost Art of WalkingPilgrimage and the Half Way PointWhat if Left of Old-School Hospitality in our Times?When Borders Matter LessHospitality and PainThe Costs of InterculturalityAsking Permission: On Not Being WelcomeFriendship, Hospitality, and ExchangeHomeworkNick Hunt's Official WebsiteRed Smoking MirrorEssay: Bulls and ScarsTranscript[00:00:00] Chris Christou: Welcome Nick to the End of Tourism podcast. Thank you so very much for joining us today. [00:00:05] Nick Hunt: Very nice to be here, Chris. [00:00:07] Chris Christou: I have a feeling we're in for a very special conversation together. To begin, I'm wondering if you could offer us a glimpse into your world today, where you find yourself, and how the times seem to be rolling out in front of you, where you are.[00:00:22] Nick Hunt: Wow, that's a good, that's a good question. Geographically, I'm in Bristol, in the southwest of England, which is the city I grew up in and then moved away from and have come back to in the last five or so years. The city that I sat out the pandemic, which was quite a tough one for various reasons here and sort of for me personally and my family.But the last year really has just felt like everyone's opening out again and it feels... it's kind of good and bad. There was something about that time, I don't want to plunge straight into COVID because I'm sure everyone's sick of hearing about it, but the way it, it froze the world and froze people's personal lives and it froze all the good stuff, but it also froze a lot of the more difficult questions.So, I think in terms of kind of my wider work, which is often, focused around climate change, extinction, the state of the planet in general, the pandemic was, was oddly, you didn't have to think about the other problems for a while, even though they were still there. It dominated the airspace so much that everything else just kind of stopped.And now I find that in amongst all the joy of kind of friends emerging again and being able to travel, being able to meet people, being able to do stuff, there's also this looming feeling of like, the other problems are also waking up and we're looking at them again. [00:01:56] Chris Christou: Yeah. We have come back time to time in the last year or two in certain interviews of the pod and, and reflected a little bit on those times and considered that there was, among other things, it was a time where there was the possibility of real change. And I speak more to the places that have become tourist destinations, especially over touristed and when those people could finally leave their homes and there was nobody there that there was this sense of Okay, things could really be different [00:02:32] Nick Hunt: Yeah.As well. Yeah. I know there, there was a kind of hope wasn't there that, "oh, we can change, we can, we can act in, in a huge, unprecedented way." Maybe that will transfer to the environmental problems that we face. But sadly that didn't happen. Or it didn't happen yet. [00:02:53] Chris Christou: Well, time will tell. So Nick, I often ask my guests to begin with a bit of background on how their own travels have influenced their work, but since so much of your writing seems to revolve around your travels, I've decided to make that the major focus of our time together. And so I'd like to begin with your essay Bulls and Scars, which appears in issue number 14 of Dark Mountain entitled TERRA, and which was republished in The Best British Travel Writing of the 21st Century.[00:03:24] Nick Hunt: A hyperbolic, a hyperbolic title, I have to say. [00:03:29] Chris Christou: And in that exquisite essay on the theme of wanderlust, you write, and I quote, "always this sense, when traveling, will I find it here? Will the great secret reveal itself? Is it around the next corner? There is never anything around the next corner except the next corner, but sometimes I catch fragments of it.This fleeting thing I am looking for. That mountainside, that's a part of it there. The way the light falls on that wall. That old man sitting under a mulberry tree with his dog sleeping at his feet. That's a part of the secret too. If I could fit these pieces together, I would be completed. Waking on these sacks of rice, I nearly see the shape of it. The outlines of the secret loom, extraordinary and almost whole. I can almost touch it. I think. Yes, this is it. I am here. I have arrived, but I have not arrived. I am traveling too fast. The moment has already gone, the truck rolls onwards through the night, and the secret slides away.This great secret, Nick, that spurs so much of our wanderlust. I'm curious, where do you imagine it comes from personally, historically, or otherwise? [00:04:59] Nick Hunt: Wow. Wow. Thank you for reading that so beautifully. That was an attempt to express something that I think I've always, I've always felt, and I imagine everybody feels to some extent that sense of, I guess you could describe it as "awe," but this sense that I, I first experienced this when I was a kid.I was about maybe six, five or six years old, maybe seven. I can't remember. Used to spend a lot of time in North Wales where my grandparents lived and my mum would take me up there and she loved walking. So we'd go for walks and we were coming back from a walk at the end of a day. So it was mountains. It was up in Snowdonia.And I have a very vivid memory of a sunset and a sheep and a lamb and the sky being red and gold in sense that now I would describe it as awe, you know, the sublime or something like that. I had no, no words for it. I just knew it was very important that I, I stayed there for a bit and, and absorbed it.So I refused to walk on. And my mom, I'll always be grateful for this. She didn't attempt to kind of pull my hand and drag me back to the car cuz she probably had things to do. But she walked on actually and out of sight and left me just to kind of be there because she knew that this was an important thing.And for me, that's the start of, of the great secret. I think this sense of wanting to be inside the world. I've just been reading some Ursula LeGuin and there's a short story in her always coming home. I think it's called A Hole in the Air. And it's got this kind of conceit of a man stepping outside the world and he kind of goes to a parallel version of his world and it's the one in which some version of us lives.And it's the kind of, you know, sort of fucked up war-like version where everything's kind of terrible and polluted, dangerous and violent and he can't understand it. But this idea of he's gone outside the world and he can't find his way back in. And I think this is a theme in a lot of indigenous people.This idea of kind of being inside something and other cultures being outside. I think a lot, all of my writing and traveling really has been about wanting to get inside and kind of understand something. I don't know. I mean, I dunno what the secret is because it's a secret and what I was writing about in that essay was, I think in my twenties particularly, I kind of imagined that I could find this if I kept moving.The quicker the better because you're covering more ground and more chance of finding something that you're looking for, of knowing what's around the next corner, what's over the next hill. You know, even today I find it very difficult to kind of turn back on a walk before I've got to the top of a hill or some point where I can see what's coming next.It feels like something uncompleted and then I'm sure, as I imagine you did, you know, you were describing to me earlier about traveling throughout your twenties and always kind of looking for this thing and then realizing, what am I actually, you know, what am I doing? What am I actually looking for?Mm-hmm. So I still love traveling, obviously, but I don't feel this kind youthful urge just to keep moving, keep moving, keep moving, see more things, you know, experience more. And then I think you learn when you get a bit older that maybe that's not the way to find whatever it is that you are kind of restless for.Maybe that's when you turn inside a little bit more. And certainly my travels now are kind of shorter and slower than they were before, but I find that there's a better quality of focus in the landscapes or places that before I would've kind of dismissed and rushed through are now endlessly fascinating.And allowing more time to kind of stay in a place has its own value. [00:09:19] Chris Christou: Well, blessings to your mother. What's her name if I can ask? Her name's Caroline. It's the same name as my wife. So it's a source of endless entertainment for my friends. Well, thank you, Caroline, for, for that moment, for allowing it to happen.I think for better or worse, so many of us are robbed of those opportunities as children. And thinking recently about I'll have certain flashbacks to childhood and that awe and that awe-inspiring imagination that seems limitless perhaps for a young child and is slowly waned or weaned as we get older.So thank you to your mother for that. I'm sure part of the reason that we're having this conversation today. And you touched a little bit on this notion of expectation and you used the word focus as well, and I'm apt to consider more and more the the question of sight and how it dominates so much of our sense perception and our sense relationships as we move through our lives and as we move across the world.And so I'd like to bring up another little excerpt from Bulls and Scars, which I just have to say I loved so much. And in the essay you write, quote, "I know nothing about anything. It's a relief to admit this now and let myself be led. All I see is the surface of things. The elaborate hairstyle of a man, shaved to the crown and plastered down in a clay hardened bun, a woman's goat skin skirt, fringed with cowrie shelves and not the complex layers of meaning that lie beneath. I understand nothing of the ways in which these things fit together, how they collide or overlap. There are symbols I cannot read, lines I do not see."End quote. And so this, this reminded me. I have walking through a few textile shops here in Oaxaca some years ago with a friend of mine and he noted how tourists tend towards these textile styles, colors and designs, but specifically the ones that tend to fit their own aesthetics and how this can eventually alter what the local weavers produce and often in service to foreign tastes.And he said to me, he said, "most of the time we just don't know what we're looking at." And so it's not just our inability to see as a disciplined and locally formed skill that seems to betray us, but also our unwillingness to know just that that makes us tourists or foreigners in a place. My question to you is, how do you imagine we might subvert these culturally conjured ways of seeing, assuming that's even necessary? [00:12:24] Nick Hunt: Well, that's a question that comes up an awful lot as a travel writer. And it's one I've become more aware of over these three books I've written, which form a very loose trilogy about, they're all about walking in different parts of Europe.And I've only become more aware of that that challenge of the traveler. There's another line in that essay that something like " they say that traveling opens doors, but sometimes people take their doors with them." You know, it's not necessarily true, but any means that seeing the world kind of widens your perspective. A lot of people just, you know, their eyes don't change no matter where they go. And so, I know that when I'm doing these journeys, I'm going completely subjectively with my own prejudices, my own mood of the day which completely determines how I see a place and how I meet people and what I bring away from it.And also what I, what I give. And I think this is, this is kind of an unavoidable thing really. It's one of the paradoxes maybe at the heart of the kind of travel writing I do, and there's different types of travel writers. Some people are much more conscientious about when they talk to people, it's, you know, it's more like an interview.They'll record it. They'll only kind of quote exactly what they were told. But even that, there's a kind of layer of storytelling, obviously, because they are telling a story, they're telling a narrative, they're cutting certain things out of the frame, and they're including others. They're exaggerating or amplifying certain details that fit the narrative that they're following.I think an answer to your question, I, I'm not sure yet, but I'm hopefully becoming more, more aware. And I think one thing is not hiding it, is not pretending that a place as I see it, that I, by any means, can see the truth, you know, the kind of internal truth of this place. There's awareness that my view is my view and I think the best thing we can do is just not try and hide that to include it as part of the story we tell. Hmm. And I, I noticed for my first book, I did this long walk across Europe that took about seven and a half months. And there were many days when I didn't really want to be doing it.I was tired, sick, didn't want to be this kind of traveling stranger, always looking like the weirdo walking down the street with a big bag and kind of unshaved sunburnt face. And so I noticed that some villages I walked into, I would come away thinking, my God, those people were awful.They were really unfriendly. No one looked at me, no one smiled. I just felt this kind of hostility. And then I'd think, well, the common factor in this is always me. And I must have been walking into that village looking shifty, not really wanting to communicate with anyone, not making any contact, not explaining who I was.And of course they were just reflecting back what I was giving them. So I think, just kind of centering your own mood and the baggage you take with you is very important. [00:15:46] Chris Christou: Yeah. Well, I'd like to focus a little bit more deeply on that book and then those travels that you wrote about anyways, in Walking the Woods and the Water.And just a little bit of a background for our listeners. The book's description is as follows. "In 1933, Patrick Leigh Fermor set out in a pair of hobnail boots to chance and charm his way across Europe. Quote, like a tramp, a pilgrim, or a wandering scholar. From the hook of Holland to Istanbul. 78 years later, I (you) followed in his footsteps.The book recounts a seven month walk through Holland, Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, and Turkey on a quest to discover what remains of hospitality, kindness to strangers, freedom, wildness, adventure, and the deeper occurrence of myth and story that still flow beneath Europe's surface.Now before diving a little bit more deeply into these questions of hospitality and xenophobia or xenophilia, I'd like to ask about this pilgrimage and the others you've undertaken, especially, this possibility that seems to be so much an endangered species in our times, which is our willingness or capacity to proceed on foot as opposed to in vehicles.And so I'm curious how your choice to walk these paths affected your perception, how you experienced each new place, language, culture, and people emerging in front of you. Another way of asking the question would be, what is missed by our urge to travel in vehicles?[00:17:36] Nick Hunt: Well, that first walk, which set off the other ones, I later did. It could only have been a walk because the whole idea was to follow the footsteps of Patrick Leigh Fermor, who was a very celebrated travel writer who set out in 1933 with no ambition or kind of purpose other than he just wanted to walk to Istanbul.And it was his own kind of obsessive thing that he wanted to do. And I was deeply influenced by his book. And I was quite young and always thought I wanted to kind of try. I I was just curious to see the Europe that he saw was, you know, the last of a world that disappeared very shortly afterwards because he saw Germany as this unknown guy called Adolf Hitler, who was just emerging on the scene. He walked through these landscapes that were really feudal in character, you know, with counts living in castles and peasants working in the fields. And he, so he saw the last of this old Europe that was kind of wiped out by, well first the second World War, then communism in Eastern Europe and capitalism, in Western Europe and then everywhere.So it's just had so many very traumatic changes and I just wanted to know if there was any of what he saw left, if there was any of that slightly fairytale magic that he glimpsed. So I had to walk because it, it just wouldn't have worked doing it by any other form of transport. And I mean, initially, even though I'd made up my mind, I was going to go by foot and I knew I wasn't in a hurry. It was amazing how frustrating walking was in the first couple of weeks. It felt almost like the whole culture is, you know, geared around getting away, got to go as quickly as possible.In Holland actually I wasn't walking in remote mountains, I was walkingthrough southern industrial states and cities in which a walker feels, you feel like an outcast in places you shouldn't really be. So, it took a couple of weeks for my mind to really adjust and actually understand that slowness was the whole purpose. And then it became the pleasure.And by halfway through Germany, I hadn't gone on any other form of transport for maybe six weeks, and I stayed with someone who, he said, "I'm going to a New Year's Eve party in the next town." It was New Year's Eve. The next town was on my route. He said, "you know, I'm driving so I might as well take you there."So I said, "great," cuz it'd been a bit weird to kind of go to this town and then come back again. It was on my way. So, I got in a car and the journey took maybe half an hour and I completely panicked, moving at that speed, I was shocked by how much of the world was taken away from me, actually, because by then I'd learned to love spotting these places, you know, taking routes along, along rivers and through bits of woodland.I was able to see them coming and all of these things were flashing past me. We crossed the Rhine, which was this great river that I'd been following for weeks. And it was like a stream, you know, it was a puddle. It was kind of gone under the bridge in two seconds. Wow. And it really felt like I had this, this kind of guilt, to be honest.It was this feeling of what was in that day that I lost, you know, what didn't I see? Who didn't I meet? I've just been sitting in the passenger seat of a car, and I have no sense of direction. The thing about walking is you're completely located at all times. You walk into the center of a city and you've had to have walked through the suburbs.You've seen the outskirts, and it helps, you know, well that's north. Like, you know, I came from that direction. That's south. That's where I'm going. If you take a train or get in a car, unless you're really paying attention, you are kind of catapulted into the middle of this city without any concept of what direction you're going in next.And I didn't realize how disorienting that is because we're so used to it. We do it all the time. And this was only a kind of shadow of what was to come at the very end of my journey, cuz I got to Istanbul after seven and a half months. I was in a very weird place that I've only kind of realized since all that time walking.And I stayed a couple of weeks in Turkey and then I flew home again, partly cuz I had a very patient and tolerant and forgiving girlfriend who I couldn't kind of stretch it out any, any longer. And initially I think I'd been planning to come back on like hitchhiking or buses and trains. But in the end I was like, "you know, whatever, I'll just spend a couple days more in Turkey, then I'll get on a plane."And I think it was something like three hours flying from Istanbul and three hours crossing a continent that you spent seven and a half months walking. And I was looking down and seeing the Carpathian mountains and the Alps and these kind of shapes of these rivers, some of which I recognized as places I'd walked through.And again, this sense of what am I missing, that would've been an extraordinary journey going through that landscape. Coming back. You mentioned pilgrimage earlier, and someone told me once, who was doing lots of work around pilgrimage that, you know, in the old days when people had to walk or take a horse, if you were rich, say you started in England, your destination was Constantinople or Jerusalem or Rome, that Jerusalem or Rome wasn't the end of your journey.That was the exact halfway point, because when you got there, you had to walk back again. And on the way out, you'd go with your questions and your openness about whatever this journey meant to you. And then on the way back, you would be slowly at the pace of walking, trying to incorporate what you'd learnt and what you'd experienced into your everyday life of your village, your family, your community, you know, your land.So by the time you got back, you'd had all of that time to process what happened. So I think with that walk, you know, I, I did half the pilgrimage thinking I'd done all of it, and then was plunged back into, actually went straight back to the life I'd been living before in, in London as if nothing had ever happened.And I think for the year after that walk, my soul hadn't caught up with my body by any means. Mm-hmm. I was kind of living this strange sort of half life that felt very familiar because I recognized everything, but I felt like a very different person, to be honest and it took a long time to actually process that.But I think if I'd, even if I'd come back by, you know, public transport of some sort it would've helped just soften the blow. [00:25:04] Chris Christou: What a context to put it in, softening the blow. Hmm. It reminds me of the etymology of travel as far as I've read is that it used to mean an arduous journey.And that the arduous was the key descriptor in that movement. It reminds me of, again, so many of my travels in my twenties that were just flash flashes of movement on flights and buses. And that I got back to Canada. And the first thing was, okay, well I'm outta money, so I need to get back to work and I need to make as much money as possible.And there just wasn't enough time. And there wasn't perhaps time, period, in order to integrate what rolled out in front of me over those trips. And I'm reminded of a story that David Abram tells in his book Becoming Animal about jet lag. And perhaps a hypothesis that he has around jet lag and that we kind of flippantly use the excuse or context of time zones to explain this relative sense of being in two places at once.To what extent he discussed this, I don't remember very well, but just this understanding of when we had moved over vast distances on foot in the past, that we would've inevitably been open and apt to the emerging geographies languages, foods even cultures as we arrive in new places, and that those things would've rolled out very slowly in front of us, perhaps in the context of language heavily.But in terms of geography, I imagine very slowly, and that there would've been a kind of manner of integration, perhaps, for lack of a better word in which our bodies, our sensing bodies, would've had the ability to confront and contend with those things little by little as we moved. And it also reminds me of this book Rebecca Solnit's R iver of Shadows, where she talks about Edward Muybridge and the invention of the steam engine and the train and train travel.And how similarly to when people first got a glimpse of the big screen cinema that there was a lot of bodily issues. People sometimes would get very nauseous or pass out or have to leave the theater because their bodies weren't used to what was in front of them.And in, on the train, there were similar instances where for the first time at least, you know, as we can imagine historically people could not see the foreground looking out the train window. They could only see the background because the foreground was just flashing by so quickly.Wow, that's interesting. Interesting. And that we've become so used to this. And it's a really beautiful metaphor to, to wonder about what has it done to a people that can no longer see what's right there in front of them in terms of not just the politics, in their place, but the, their home itself, their neighbors, the geography, et cetera.And so I'm yet to read that book in mention, but I'm really looking forward to it because it's given me a lot of inspiration to consider a kind of pilgrimage to the places where my old ones are from there in, in southeastern Europe and also in Southwestern England.[00:28:44] Nick Hunt: Hmm.Yeah. That is a, so I'm still thinking about that metaphor of the train. Yeah. You don't think of that People wouldn't have had that experience of seeing the foreground disappear. And just looking at the distance, that's deeply strange and inhuman experience, isn't it? Hmm.[00:29:07] Chris Christou: Certainly. And, you know, speaking of these, these long pilgrimages and travels, my grandparents made their way from, as I mentioned, southwestern England later Eastern Africa and, and southeastern Europe to Canada in the fifties and sixties. And the peasant side of my family from what today is northern Greece, Southern Macedonia, brought a lot of their old time hospitality with them.And it's something that has always been this beautiful clue and key to these investigations around travel and exile. And so, you know, In terms of this old time hospitality, in preparing for this interview, I was reminded of a story that Ivan Illich once spoke of, or at least once, wrote about of a Jesuit monk living in China who took up a pilgrimage from Peking to Rome just before World War II, perhaps not unlike Patrick Leigh Fermor. Mm-hmm. And Illich recalled the story in his book, Rivers North of the Future as follows. He wrote, quote, "at first it was quite easy, he said (the Jesuit said,) in China, he only had to identify himself as a pilgrim, someone whose walk was oriented to a sacred place and he was given food, a handout, and a place to sleep.This changed a little bit when he entered the territory of Orthodox Christianity. There, they told him to go to the parish house where a place was free or to the priest's house. Then he got to Poland, the first Catholic country, and he found that the Polish Catholics generously gave him money to put himself up in a cheap hotel.And so the Jesuit was recalling the types of local hospitality he received along his path, which we could say diminished the further he went. Now, I'd love it if you could speak perhaps about the kinds of hospitality or, or perhaps the lack there of you experienced on your pilgrimage from the northwest of Europe to the southeast of Europe.And what, if anything, surprised you? [00:31:26] Nick Hunt: Well, that was one of my main interests really, was to see if the extraordinary hospitality that my predecessor had experienced in the 1930s where he'd been accommodated everywhere from, peasants' barns to the castles of Hungarian aristocrats and everything in between. I wanted to see if that generosity still existed. And talking about different ways of offering hospitality when he did his walk, one of the fairly reliable backstops he had was going to a police officer and saying "I'm a student. I'm a traveling student." That was the kind of equivalent to the pilgrim ticket in his day in a lot of parts of Europe. "I'm a student and I'm going from one place to the next," and he would be given a bed in the local police station. You know, they'd open up a cell, sleep there for the night, and then he'd leave in the morning. And I think it sometimes traditionally included like a mug of beer and some bread or soup or something, but even by his time in the thirties, it was a fairly well established thing to ask, I dunno how many people were doing it, but he certainly met in Germany, a student who was on the road going to university and the way he was going was walking for days or weeks.That wasn't there when I did my work. I don't think I ever asked a policeman, but in a couple of German towns, I went to the town hall. You know, the sort of local authority in Germany. They have a lot of authority and power in the community. And I asked a sort of bemused receptionist if I could claim this kind of ancient tradition of hospitality and spend the night in a police station, and they had no idea what I was talking about.Wow. And I think someone in a kind of large village said, "well, that's a nice idea, but I can't do that because we've got a tourist industry and all the guest house owners, you know, they wouldn't be happy if we started offering accommodation for free. It would put them out of business." Wow. And I didn't pay for accommodation much, but I did end up shelling out, you know, 30, 40 euros and sleeping in a, B&B.But having said that, the hospitality has taken on different forms. I started this journey in winter, which was the, when Patrick Leigh Fermor started, in December. So, I kind of wanted to start on the same date to have a similar experience, but it did mean walking through the coldest part of Europe, you know, Germany and Austria in deep snow and arriving in Bulgaria and Turkey when it was mid-summer.So I went from very cold to very hot. And partly for this reason, I was nervous about the beginning, not knowing what this experience was gonna be like. So, I used the couch surfing website, which I think Airbnb these days has probably kind of undercut a lot of it, but it was a free, very informal thing where people would provide a bed or a mattress or a place on the floor, a sofa for people passing through.And I was in the south of Germany before I ran out of couch surfing stops. But I also supplemented that with sleeping out. I slept in some ruined castles on the way. Hmm. I slept in these wooden hunting towers that no hunters were in. It wasn't the season. But they were freezing, but they were dry, you know, and they gave shelter.But I found that the language of hospitality shifted the further I went. In Holland, Germany, and Austria, people were perfectly, perfectly hospitable and perfectly nice and would put me up. But they'd say, when do you have to leave? You know, which is a perfectly reasonable question and normally it was first saying the next morning.And I noticed when I got to Eastern Europe, the question had shifted from when do you want to leave to how long can you stay? And that's when there was always in Hungary and then in Romania in particular and Bulgaria, people were kind of finding excuses to keep me longer. There would be, you know, it's my granddad's birthday, we're gonna bake him a cake and have a party, or we're going on a picnic, or we're going to the mountains, or we're going to our grandmother's house in the countryside. You should see that.And so my stays did get longer, the further southeast I got, partly cuz it was summer and everybody's in a good mood and they're doing things outdoors and they're traveling a bit more. But yeah, I mean the hospitality did shift and I got passed along as Patrick Leigh Fermor had done. So someone would say, you're going this way.They look at my map, you're going through this town. I've got a cousin, or I know a school teacher. Maybe you can sleep in the school and give a talk to the students the next day. So, all of these things happened and I kind of got accommodated in a greater variety of places, a nunnery where I was fed until I'd hardly move, by these nuns, just plain, homemade food and rakia and wine. And I stayed at a short stay in a psychiatric hospital in France, Sylvania. Talking of the changes that have happened to Europe, when Patrick Leigh Fermor stayed there it was a country house owned by a Hungarian count. His assets had since been liquidated, you know, his family dispossessed in this huge building given to the Romanian State to use as a hospital, and it was still being run that way.But the family had kind of made contact, again, having kept their heads down under communism, but realized they had no use for a huge mansion with extensive grounds. There was no way they could fill it or maintain it. And so it was continued to be used as a hospital, but they had a room where they were able to stay when they passed through.So I spent a few nights there. So everything slowed down was my experience, the further southeast I got. And going back actually to one of your first questions about, why walk? And what do you notice from walking? One of the things you really notice is the incremental changes by which, culture changes as well as landscape.You see the crossovers. You see that people in this part of Holland are a bit like this people in this part of Germany over the border. You know, borders kind of matter less because you see one culture merging into another. Languages and accents changing. And sometimes those changes are quite abrupt, but often they're all quite organic and the food changes, the beer changes, the wine changes, the local cheese or delicacies change.And so that was one of the great pleasures of it was just kind of understanding these many different cultures in Europe as part of a continuum rather than these kind of separate entities that just happen to be next door to each other. [00:38:50] Chris Christou: Right. That's so often constructed in the western imagination through borders, through state borders.[00:38:58] Nick Hunt: Just talking of borders, they've only become harder, well for everyone in the places I walk through. And I do wonder what it would be like making this journey today after Brexit. I wouldn't be able to do it just quite simply. It's no longer possible for a British person to spend more than three months in the EU, as a visitor, as a tourist.So I think I could have walked to possibly Salzburg or possibly Vienna, and then had to come back and wait three months before continuing the journey. So I was lucky, you know, I was lucky to do it in the time I did. Mm-hmm. [00:39:38] Chris Christou: Mm-hmm. I'm very much reminded through these stories and your reflections of this essay that Ivan Illich wrote towards the end of his life called "Hospitality and Pain."And you know, I highly, highly recommend it for anyone who's curious about how hospitality has changed, has been commodified and co-opted over the centuries, over the millennia. You know, he talks very briefly, but very in depth about how the church essentially took over that role for local people, that in the Abrahamic worldview that there was generally a rule that you could and should be offering three days and nights of sanctuary to the stranger for anyone who'd come passing by and in part because in the Christian world in another religious worldviews that the stranger could very well be a God in disguise, the divine coming to your doorstep. We're talking of course, about the fourth and fifth centuries.About how the church ended up saying, no, no, no, don't worry, don't worry. We got this. You, you guys, the people in the village, you don't have to do this anymore. They can come to the church and we'll give them hospitality. And of course, you know, there's the hidden cost, which is the, the attempt at conversion, I'm sure.Yeah. But that later on the church instituted hospitals, that word that comes directly from hospitality as these places where people could stay, hospitals and later hostels and hotels and in Spanish, hospedaje and that by Patrick Lee firm's time we're talking about police stations.Right. and then, you know, in your time to some degree asylums. It also reminded me of that kind of rule, for lack of a better word of the willingness or duty of people to offer three days and nights to the stranger.And that when the stranger came upon the doorstep of a local person, that the local person could not ask them what they were doing there until they had eaten and often until they had slept a full night. But it's interesting, I mean, I, I don't know how far deep we can go with this, but the rule of this notion, as you were kind of saying, how the relative degree of hospitality shifted from [00:42:01] Nick Hunt: when do you have to leave to how long how long can you stay? [00:42:05] Chris Christou: Right. Right. That Within that kind of three day structure or rule that there was also this, this notion that it wasn't just in instituted or implemented or suggested as a way of putting limits on allowing a sense of agency or autonomy for the people who are hosting, but also limiting their hospitality.Kind of putting this, this notion on the table that you might want to offer a hundred days of hospitality, but you're not allowed. Right. And what and where that would come from and why that there would be this necessity within the culture or cultures to actually limit someone's want to serve the stranger.[00:42:54] Nick Hunt: Yeah, that's very interesting. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I wonder where that came from. I mean, three is always a bit of a magic number, isn't it? Mm-hmm. But yeah, it sounds like that maybe comes from an impulse from both sides somehow. [00:43:09] Chris Christou: Mm-hmm. Nick, I'd like to come back to this question of learning and learning with the other of, of interculturality and tourism. And I'd like to return to your essay, Bulls and Scars, momentarily with this excerpt. And it absolutely deserves the title of being one of the best travel writing pieces of the 21st century. And so in that essay you write, "if we stay within our horizons surrounded by people who are the same as us, it precludes all hope. We shut off any possibility of having our automatic beliefs, whether good or bad, right or wrong, smashed so their rubble can make new shapes. We will never be forced to understand that there are different ways to be human, different ways to be ourselves, and we desperately need that knowledge, even if we don't know it yet."Hmm. And now I don't disagree at all. I think we are desperately in need of deeper understandings of what it means to be human and what it means to be human together. The argument will continue to arise, however, at what cost? How might we measure the extent of our presence in foreign places and among foreign people, assuming that such a thing is even possible.[00:44:32] Nick Hunt: Yeah, that's a question that's at the heart of that essay, which I don't think we've said is set in the South Omo Valley in Ethiopia. And part of it is about this phenomenon of tribal safaris, you know, which is as gross as it sounds, and it's rich western people driving in fleets of four by fours to indigenous tribal villages and, you know, taking pictures and watching a dance and then going to the next village.And the examples of this that I saw when I was there, I said, when I said in the essay, you couldn't invent a better parody of tourists. It was almost unbelievable. It was all of the obnoxious stereotypes about the very worst kind of tourists behaving in the very worst possible way, seemingly just no self reflection whatsoever, which was disheartening.And that's an extreme example and it's easy to parody because it was so extreme. But I guess what maybe you're asking more is what about the other people? What about those of us who do famously think of ourselves as as travelers rather than tourists? There's always that distinction I certainly made when I was doing it in my twenties.So I'm not a tourist, I'm a traveler. It's like a rich westerner saying that they're an "expat" rather than an immigrant when they go and live in a foreign country that's normally cheaper than where they came from. Yeah, that's a question again, like the great secret, I don't think I answer in that essay.What I did discover was that, it was much more nuanced than I thought it was originally. Certainly on a surface, looking at the scenes that I saw, what I saw as people who were completely out of their depth, out of their world, out of their landscape, looking like idiots and being mocked fairly openly by these tribal people who they were, in my view, exploiting. They didn't look like they were better off in a lot of ways, even though they had the, thousand dollars cameras and all the expensive clothes and the vehicles and the money and obviously had a certain amount of power cuz they were the ones shelling out money and kind of getting what they wanted.But it wasn't as clear cut as I thought. And I know that's only a kind of anecdote. It's not anything like a study of how people going to remote communities, the damage they do and the impact they have. I've got another another example maybe, or something that I've been working on more recently, which comes from a journey that I haven't not written anything about it yet.But in March of this year, I was in Columbia and Northern Columbia. The first time for a long time that I've, gone so far. All of my work has been sort of around Europe, been taking trains. I mean, I got on a plane and left my soul behind in lots of ways, got to Columbia and there were various reasons for my going, but one of the interests I had was I had a contact who'd worked with the Kogi people who live in the Sierra Nevada des Santa Marta Mountains on the Caribbean coast.An extraordinary place, an extraordinary people who have really been isolated at their own instigation, since the Spanish came, and survived the conquest with a culture and religion and economy, really more or less intact, just by quietly retreating up the mountain and not really making a lot of fuss for hundreds of years, so effectively that until the 1960s, outsiders didn't really know they were there. And since then there has been contact made from what I learned really by the Kogi rather than the other way around. Or they realized that they couldn't remain up there isolated forever.Maybe now because people were starting to encroach upon the land and settle and cut down forests. And there was obviously decades of warfare and conflict and drug trafficking and a very dangerous world they saw outside the mountains. And this journey was very paradoxical and strange and difficult because they do not want people to visit them.You know, they're very clear about that. They made a couple of documentary films or collaborated in a couple of documentary films in the late nineties and sort of early two thousands where they sent this message to the world about telling the younger brothers as they call us, where they're going wrong, where we are going wrong, all the damage we're doing.And then after that film, it was really, that's it. "We don't wanna communicate with you anymore. We've said what we have to say, leave us alone." You know, "we're fine. We'll get on with it." But they, the contact I had I arranged to meet a sort of spokesman for this community, for this tribe in Santa Marta.Kind of like an, a sort of indigenous embassy in a way. And he was a real intermediary between these two worlds. He was dressed in traditional clothes, lived in the mountains but came down to work in this city and was as conversant with that tribal and spiritual life as he was with a smartphone and a laptop.So he was really this kind of very interesting bridge character who was maintaining a balance, which really must have been very difficult between these two entirely different worldviews and systems. And in a series of conversations with him and with his brother, who also acts as a spokesman, I was able to talk to them about the culture and about the life that was up there, or the knowledge they wanted to share with me.And when it came time for me to ask without really thinking that it would work, could I have permission to go into the Sierra any further because I know that, you know, academics and anthropologists have been welcomed there in the past. And it was, it was actually great. It was a wonderful relief to be told politely, but firmly, no.Hmm. No. Mm. You know, it's been nice meeting you. If you wanted to go further into the mountains. You could write a, a detailed proposal, and I thought this was very interesting. They said you'd need to explain what knowledge you are seeking to gain, what you're going to do with that knowledge and who you will share that knowledge with.Like, what do you want to know? And then we would consider that, the elders, the priests, the mammos would consider that up in the mountains. And you might get an answer, but it might take weeks. It could take months because everything's very, very slow, you know? and you probably wouldn't be their priority.Right. And so I didn't get to the Sierra, and I'm writing a piece now about not getting to the place where you kind of dream of going, because, to be completely honest, and I know how, how kind of naive and possibly colonial, I sound by saying this, but I think it's important to recognize part of that idea of finding the great secret.Of course, I wanted to go to this place where a few Westerners had been and meet people who are presented or present themselves as having deep, ecological, ancestral spiritual knowledge, that they know how to live in better harmony with the earth. You know, whether that's true or not, that in itself is a simplified, probably naive view, but that's the kind of main story of these people.Why wouldn't I want to meet them? You know, just the thought that not 50 miles away from this bustling, polluted city, there's a mountain range. It's one of the most biodiverse places on the planet that has people who have kept knowledge against all odds, have kept knowledge for 500 years and have not been conquered and have not been wiped out, and have not given in.You know, obviously I wanted to go there, but it was wonderful to know that I couldn't because I'm not welcome. Mm. And so I'm in the middle of writing a piece that's a, it's a kind of non-travel piece. It's an anti travel piece or a piece examining, critically examining that, that on edge within myself to know what's around the next corner.To look over the horizon to get to the top of the mountain, you know, and, and, and explore and discover all of that stuff. But recognizing that, it is teasing out which parts of that are a genuine and healthy human curiosity. And a genuine love of experiencing new things and meeting new people and learning new things and what's more of a colonial, "I want to discover this place, record what I find and take knowledge out."And that was one thing that I found very interestingly. They spoke very explicitly about seeking knowledge as a form of extraction. For hundreds of years they've had westerners extracting the obvious stuff, the coal, the gold, the oil, the timber, all the material goods. While indigenous knowledge was discounted as completely useless.And now people are going there looking for this knowledge. And so for very understandable reasons, these people are highly suspicious of these people turning up, wanting to know things. What will you do with the knowledge? Why do you want this knowledge? And they spoke about knowledge being removed in the past, unscrupulously taken from its proper owners, which is a form of theft.So, yeah, talking about is appropriate to be talking about this on the end of tourism podcast. Cause yeah, it's very much a journey that wasn't a journey not hacking away through the jungle with the machete, not getting the top of the mountain, you know, not seeing the things that no one else has seen.Wow. And that being a good thing. [00:54:59] Chris Christou: Yeah. It brings me back to that question of why would either within a culture or from some kind of authoritative part of it, why would a people place limits to protect themselves in regards to those three days of allowing people to stay?Right. And not for longer. Yes. [00:55:20] Nick Hunt: Yeah, that's very true. Mm-hmm. Because people change, the people that come do change things. They change your world in ways big and small, good and bad. [00:55:31] Chris Christou: You know, I had a maybe not a similar experience, but I was actually in the Sierra Nevadas maybe 12 years ago now, and doing a backpacking trip with an ex-girlfriend there.And the Columbian government had opened a certain part of the Sierra Nevadas for ecotourism just a few years earlier. And I'm sure it's still very much open and available in those terms. And it was more or less a a six day hike. And because this is an area as well where there were previous civilizations living there, so ruins as well.And so that that trip is a guided trek. So you would go with a local guide who is not just certified as a tour guide, but also a part of the government program. And you would hike three days and hike back three days. And there was one lunch where there was a Kogi man and his son also dressed in traditional clothing. And for our listeners, from what I understand anyways, there are certain degrees of inclusion in Kogi society. So the higher up the mountain you go, the more exclusive it is in terms of foreigners are not allowed in, in certain places.And then the lower down the mountain and you go, there are some places where there are Kogi settlements, but they are now intermingling with for example, these tourists groups. And so that lunch was an opportunity for this Kogi man to explain a little bit about his culture, the history there and of course the geography.And as we were arriving to that little lunch outpost his son was there maybe 10, 15 feet away, a few meters away. And we kind of locked eyes and I had these, very western plastic sunglasses on my head. And the Kogi boy, again, dressed in traditional clothing, he couldn't speak any English and couldn't speak any Spanish from what I could tell.And so his manner of communicating was with his hands. And he subtly but somewhat relentlessly was pointing at my sunglasses. And I didn't know what to do, of course. And he wanted my sunglasses. And there's this, this moment, and in that moment so much can come to pass.But of course afterwards there was so much reflection to be taken in regards to, if I gave him my sunglasses, what would be the consequence of that, that simple action rolling out over the course of time in that place. And does it even matter that I didn't give him my sunglasses, that I just showed up there and had this shiny object that, that perhaps also had its consequence rolling out over the course of this young man's life because, I was one of 10 or 12 people that day in that moment to pass by.But there were countless other groups. I mean, the outposts that we slept in held like a hundred people at a time. Oh, wow. And so we would, we would pass people who were coming down from the mountain and that same trek or trip and you know, so there was probably, I would say close to a hundred people per day passing there.Right. And what that consequence would look like rolling out over the course of, of his life. [00:59:11] Nick Hunt: Yeah. You could almost follow the story of a pair of plastic sunglasses as they drop into a community and have sort of unknown consequences or, or not. But you don't know, do you? Yeah. Yeah. I'm, it was fascinating knowing that you've been to the same, that same area as well. Appreciated that. What's, what's your, what's your last question? Hmm. [00:59:34] Chris Christou: Well, it has to do with with the end of tourism, surprisingly.And so one last time, coming back to your essay, Bulls and Scars, you write, " a friend of mine refuses to travel to countries poor than his own. Not because he is scared of robbery or disease, but because the inequality implicit in every human exchange induces a squirming, awkwardness and corrosive sense of guilt.For him, the power disparity overshadows everything. Every conversation, every handshake, every smile and gesture. He would rather not travel than be in that situation." And you say, "I have always argued against this view because the see all human interactions as a function of economics means accepting capitalism in its totality, denying that people are driven by forces other than power and greed, excluding the possibility of there being anything else.The grotesque display of these photographic trophy hunters makes me think of him now." Now I've received a good amount of writing and messages from people speaking of their consternation and guilt in terms of "do I travel, do I not travel? What are the consequences?" Et cetera. In one of the first episodes of the podcast with Stephen Jenkinson, he declared that we have to find a way of being in the world that isn't guilt delivered or escapist, which I think bears an affinity to what you've written.Hmm. Finally, you wrote that your friend's perspective excludes "the possibility of there being anything else." Now I relentlessly return on the pod to the understanding that we live in a time in which our imaginations, our capacity to dream the world anew, is constantly under attack, if not ignored altogether.My question, this last question for you, Nick, is what does the possibility of anything else look like for you?[01:01:44] Nick Hunt: I think in a way I come back to that idea of being told we can't give you free accommodation here because, what about the tourist industry? And I think that it's become, you know, everything has become monetized and I get the, you know, the fact that that money does rule the world in lots of ways.And I'd be a huge hypocrite if I'd said that money wasn't deeply important to me. As much as I like to think it, much as I want to wish it away, it's obviously something that dictates a very large amount of what I do with my life, what I do with my time. But that everything else, well, it's some, it's friendship and hospitality and openness I think.It's learning and it's genuine exchange, not exchange, not of money and goods and services, but an actual human interaction for the pleasure and the curiosity of it. Those sound like very simple answers and I guess they are, but that is what I feel gets excluded when everything is just seen as a byproduct of economics.And that friend who, you know, I talked about then, I understand. I've had the experience as I'm sure you have of the kind of meeting someone often in a culture or community that is a lot poorer, who is kind, friendly, hospitable, helpful, and this nagging feeling of like, When does the money question come?Mm-hmm. And sometimes it doesn't, but often it does. And sometimes it's fine that it does. But it's difficult to kind of place yourself in this, I think, because it does instantly bring up all this kind of very useless western guilt that, you know, Steven Jenkinson talked about. It's not good to go through the world feeling guilty and suspicious of people, you know. 'When am I gonna be asked for money?' Is a terrible way of interacting with anyone to have that at the back of your, your mind.And I've been in situations where I've said can I give you some money? And people have been quite offended or thought it was ridiculous or laughed at me. So, it's very hard to get right. But like I say, it's a bad way of being in the world, thinking that the worst of people in that they're always, there's always some economic motive for exchange.And it does seem to be a kind of victory of capitalism in that we do think that all the time, you know, but what does this cost? What's the price? What's the price of this friendliness that I'm receiving? The interesting thing about it, I think, it is quite corrosive on both sites because things are neither offered nor received freely.If there's always this question of what's this worth economically. But I like that framing. What was it that Steven Jenkinson said? It was guilt on one side and what was the other side of the pole? [01:05:07] Chris Christou: Yeah. Neither guilt delivered or escapist. [01:05:11] Nick Hunt: Yeah. That's really interesting. Guilt and escapism. Because that is the other side, isn't it?Is that often traveling is this escape? And I think we can both relate to it. We both experience that as a very simple, it can be a very simple form of therapy or it seems simple that you just keep going and keep traveling and you run away from things. And also that isn't a helpful way of being in the world either, although it feels great, at the time for parts of your life when you do that.But what is the space between guilt and escapism? I think it really, the main thing for me, and again, this is a kind of, it sounds like a, just a terrible cliche, but I guess there's a often things do is I do think if you go and if you travel. And also if you stay at home with as open a mind as you can it does seem to kind of shape the way the world works.It shapes the way people interact with you, the way you interact with people. And just always keeping in mind the possibility that that things encounters, exchanges, will turn out for the best rather than the worst. Mm-hmm. You develop a slight sixth sense I think when traveling where you often have to make very quick decisions about people.You know, do I trust this person? Do I not trust this person? And you're not aware you're doing it, but obviously you can get it wrong. But not allowing that to always become this kind of suspicion of "what does this person want from me?" Hmm. I feel like I've just delivered a lot of sort of platitudes and cliches at the end of this talk.Just be nice, be, be open. Try to be respectful. Do no harm, also don't be wracked with guilt every exchange, because who wants to meet you if you are walking around, ringing your hands and kind of punching yourself in the face. Another important part of being a traveler is being a good traveler.Being somebody who people want coming to their community, village, town, city and benefit from that exchange as well. It's not just about you bringing something back. There's the art of being a good guest, which Patrick Leigh Fermor, to come back to him, was a master at. He would speak three or four different languages, know classical Greek poetry, be able to talk about any subject.Dance on the table, you know, drink all night. He was that kind of guest. He was the guest that people wanted to have around and have fun with mostly, or that's the way he presented himself, certainly. In the same way, you can be a good, same way, you can be a good host, you can be a good guest, and you can be a good traveler in terms of what you, what you bring, what you give.[01:08:20] Chris Christou: Mm-hmm. Yeah. I think what it comes down to is that relationship and that hospitality that has for, at least for people in Europe and, and the UK and and Western people, descendants, culturally, is that when we look at, for example, what Illich kind of whispered towards, how these traditions have been robbed of us.And when you talk about other cliches and platitudes and this and that, that, we feel the need to not let them fall by the wayside, in part because we're so impoverished by the lack of them in our times. And so, I think, that's where we might be able to find something of an answer, is in that relationship of hospitality that, still exists in the world, thankfully in little corners.And, and those corners can also be found in the places that we live in.[01:09:21] Nick Hunt: I think it exists that desire for hospitality because it's a very deep human need. When I was a kid, I, I was always, for some reason I would hate receiving presents.There was something about the weight of expectation and I would always find it very difficult to receive presents and would rather not be given a lot of stuff to do with various complex family dynamics. But it really helped when someone said, you know, when someone gives you a present, it's not just for you, it's also for them. You know, they're doing it cuz they want to and to have a present refused is not a nice thing to do.It, it, that doesn't feel good for the person doing it. Their need is kind of being thrown back at them. And I think it's like that with hospitality as well. We kind of often frame it as the person receiving the hospitality has all the good stuff and the host is just kind of giving, giving, giving, but actually the host is, is getting a lot back. And that's often why they do it. It's like those people wanting, people to stay for three days is not just an act of kindness and selflessness. It's also, it feeds them and benefits them and improves their life. I think that's a really important thing to remember with the concept of hospitality and hosting.[01:10:49] Chris Christou: May we all be able to be fed in that way. Thank you so much, Nick, on behalf of our listeners for joining us today and I feel like we've started to unpack so much and there's so much more to consider and to wrestle with. But perhaps there'll be another opportunity someday.[01:11:06] Nick Hunt: Yeah, I hope so. Thank you, Chris. It was great speaking to you. [01:11:12] Chris Christou: Likewise, Nick. Before we finish off, I'd just like to ask, you know, on behalf of our listeners as well how might people be able to read and, and purchase your writing and your books? How might they be able to find you and follow you online?[01:11:26] Nick Hunt: So if you just look up my, my name Nick Hunt. My book should, should come up. I have a website. Nick hunt scrutiny.com. I have a, a book, a novel actually out in July next month, 6th of July called "Red Smoking Mirror."So that's the thing that I will be kind of focusing on for the next bit of time. You can also find me as Chris and I met each other through the Dark Mountain Project, which is a loose network of writers and artists and thinkers who are concerned with the times we're in and how to be human in times of crisis and collapse and change.So you can find me through any of those routes. Hmm. [01:12:17] Chris Christou: Beautiful. Well, I'll make sure that all those links are on the homework section on the end of tourism podcast when it launches. And this episode will be released after the release of your new, your book, your first novel. So, listeners will be able to find it then as well.[01:12:34] Nick Hunt: It will be in local shops. Independent bookshops are the best. [01:12:40] Chris Christou: Once again, thank you, Nick, for your time. [01:12:42] Nick Hunt: Thank you. Get full access to ⌘ Chris Christou ⌘ at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe

David Caley and Medical Nemesis join Donald to talk about Ivan Illich.Medical Nemesis wonders why Ivan Illich's book Medical Nemesis has not taken hold in any part of our culture and how to make practical use of this knowledge. @‌Medical_Nemesis / https://medicalnemesis.substack.comDavid Cayley is a Toronto-based Canadian writer and broadcaster, who is known for documenting the philosophy of prominent thinkers of the 20th century - Ivan Illich, Northrop Frye, George Grant, and Rene Girard. His biography of Ivan Illich is available from Penn State University Press: https://www.psupress.org/books/titles/978-0-271-08812-9.html

Theologian and community gardener Sam Ewell reflects on his years as a missionary and a neighbour, and how a radical priest called Ivan Illich led him back to the soil. After the interview, Nomad hosts David Blower and Anna Robinson ponder how the life and teaching of Illich might help shape their evolving faith.  Interview starts at 10m 50s Show Notes → The creation of Nomad's thoughtful, wonderfully ad-free content is entirely funded by our equally thoughtful, wonderful listeners. Supporting us gives access to Nomad's online communities through the Beloved Listener Lounge, Enneagram Lounge and Nomad Book Club - as well as bonus content like Nomad Contemplations, Nomad Devotionals and Nomad Revisited. If you'd like to join our lovely supporters head to our Patreon Page to donate and you may even be rewarded with a pen or Beloved Listener mug! If you're hoping to connect with others who are more local, you can also take a look at our Listener Map or join our Nomad Gathering Facebook page. Additionally, we share listener's stories on our blog, all with the hope of facilitating understanding, connection and supportive relationships.

Andrew and Mia discuss the radical potential of conviviality, its history, and work of theologian Ivan Illich on the subjectSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Matthew Loftus and Medical Nemesis join occasional first-time host Donald to talk about medicine and Ivan Illich. Medical Nemesis wonders why Ivan Illich's book Medical Nemesis has not taken hold in any part of our culture and how to make practical use of this knowledge. @‌Medical_Nemesis / https://medicalnemesis.substack.com Matthew Loftus @‌matthew_loftus lives in Kenya with his family, where he teaches and practices Family Medicine. You can learn more about his work and writing at https://matthewandmaggie.org/write

n°296 / 7 mai 2023.Connaissez-vous notre site ? www.lenouvelespritpublic.frUne émission de Philippe Meyer, enregistrée au studio l'Arrière-boutique le 14 avril 2023.Avec cette semaine :Patrick Chastenet, professeur en sciences politiques et spécialiste de l'écologie politique.Isabelle de Gaulmyn, rédactrice en chef du quotidien La Croix.Béatrice Giblin, directrice de la revue Hérodote et fondatrice de l'Institut Français de Géopolitique.Lucile Schmid, vice-présidente de La Fabrique écologique et membre du comité de rédaction de la revue Esprit.ÉCOLOGIE ET POLITIQUEPatrick Chastenet, vous êtes professeur émérite en sciences politiques à l'Université de Bordeaux et membre du Centre Montesquieu de recherches Politiques. Spécialiste des idées politiques, vous vous êtes notamment intéressé aux thèmes ressortissants de l'écologie politique, de la pensée personnaliste, de la communication politique et de la propagande, ainsi que des mouvements libertaires. Vous collaborez à divers périodiques et présidez l'Association internationale Jacques Ellul, intellectuel que vous avez connu personnellement, qui est devenu votre ami et dont vous êtes devenu l'un des principaux spécialistes dans le monde.En février 2023, vous publiez aux éditions « L'échappée » votre dernier ouvrage, Les racines libertaires de l'écologie politique, dans lequel vous analysez la pensée de grandes figures de l'écologie politique : Élisée Reclus, Jacques Ellul, Bernard Charbonneau, Ivan Illich et Murray Bookchin. Il s'agit, selon vous, des véritables fondateurs de l'écologie politique, qui ont en commun de penser l'écologie tout en préservant la liberté. A l'issue de cette investigation historique, il apparaît que la doctrine écologiste a tissé des liens étroits avec les pensées anarchiste et catholique, plusieurs des auteurs évoqués étant liés au christianisme.Votre ouvrage soulève des questions d'une grande actualité, alors que les formes que doit prendre la lutte écologique sont au cœur des préoccupations nationales. Après le rassemblement organisé par les opposants aux bassines agricoles à Sainte-Soline, la polémique reste vive sur l'usage de la violence par les forces de l'ordre, comme sur les actions radicales des militants écologistes, ou encore la dissolution du mouvement écologiste « Soulèvement de la terre » engagée par le ministre de l'Intérieur. Périodiquement, la nécessité urgente d'une action contre le changement climatique est rappelée à l'opinion publique. Le 20 mars, le GIEC publiait la synthèse de son sixième rapport d'évaluation. Elle fait état d'une intensification « sans précédent » de ce changement climatique et appelle les politiques à une action rapide et coordonnée. La loi Climat et résilience d'août 2021 a déçu beaucoup des militants car elle n'a repris que 15 des 149 propositions de la Convention citoyenne sur le climat. Une partie des activistes y a vu une confirmation de l'impuissance de l'État.Marie Tondelier, récemment élue à la tête du parti Europe Écologie – Les Verts (EELV), a lancé au début du mois de février les « états généraux de l'écologie ». Ce processus de démocratie participative, qui, en 150 jours, ambitionne de repenser les bases du parti afin de lui permettre de rassembler un million de sympathisants d'ici 2027, contre 11.000 adhérents à ce jour. La nouvelle secrétaire nationale du parti EELV défend pour sa part l'idée d'une « écologie populaire », source d'émancipation pour tous et en particulier pour les plus précaires. Plus généralement, les préoccupations environnementales ont été reprises par l'ensemble du spectre politique et opposent de multiples courants de pensée divisés entre un environnementalisme réformiste, confiant dans le progrès technique, et une écologie plus radicale et décroissante. De son côté, l'extrême droite tente de conjuguer la préservation de la biodiversité avec la défense de l'identité. Au-delà de ces mouvements ou de ces partis, de votre point de vue, de quoi devrait-on parler quand on parle d'écologie ?Vous pouvez consulter notre politique de confidentialité sur https://art19.com/privacy ainsi que la notice de confidentialité de la Californie sur https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Continuing our multi-part exploration of AI and its implication for These Capitalised Times we are living through and with, we look at the metaphysics of technology this week. What are the implications of Artificial Intelligence for The performing of magic? Living in a magical universe? What is an animist understanding not just of 'intelligence' but 'artifice'? What -if any- is the difference between a tool and a magical tool? This week we explore: The work of Ivan Illich. A metaphysics of tools. What it means to operate in the ruins. Steiner's description of Ahriman and what it means for our moment. Show Notes Donate to the Missing Witches fundraiser for the Native Women's Shelter. Towards a Definition of Magic. At Work in The Ruins. Unlocking the Secrets of Prophecy - For Sorcerers, Astrologers and Magicians. Are Humans The AI Of The Mineral Realm? w/ Matías De Stefano.

In this special episode, guest host Daniel Hadas interviews Medical Nemesis on covid, Illich, industrialized medicine and thought, and more. https://twitter.com/DanielHadas2 https://twitter.com/Medical_Nemesis https://medicalnemesis.substack.com/

A love of learning!! Isn't that what every home-educating family is hoping they're able to instill in their children? Absolutely!!  Yet, many find that the act of doing school is actually hurting their relationships while having the opposite impact on their children. On this episode, David and Leslie will talk about what often hinders that love of learning and how we can overcome it in a way that will actually strengthen the relationships you care most about. In Leslie's new book, Heart School: How Amazing Parents Become Excellent Home Educators, she talks a little bit about how many are afraid that homeschooling will actually hurt their relationships with their children. In chapter 8 of that book, she encourages families, especially ones that are coming out of a different educational environment, that they may want to employ a deschooling strategy for a time. Deschooling is a term that Ivan Illich coined. He wrote a book in 1971 called Deschooling Society, where he was very critical of the institutional approach to education, which gives children a very narrow understanding of things and doesn't give details of both sides to consider. He noted that for many, "the right or appreciation of learning is curtailed by the obligation to attend school.” Topics Covered In This Episode: What "status quo" education looks like today. How education is defined and approached in today's environment. What a parent's goal for the education of their children should be. How deschooling can help parents achieve their goals while ushering in a way of approaching home education that brings freedom and confidence. How Deschooling can be a great tool for strengthening relationships at any point in your homeschool journey. How our previous discussion about wisdom comes into play in a discussion about Deschooling. (See episode 170 to learn about the Wisdom of Putting things Together.) Additional Resources Mentioned in This Episode: Heart School: How Amazing Parents Become Excellent Home Educators. The Heart School Master Class. Teach Them Diligently Homeschool Events.  Have you ever been to a Teach Them Diligently event? If not, it's hard to even encapsulate what you're missing out on! Fellowship, fun, encouragement, equipping, laughter, growth, education, and so much more await you there. What really sets Teach Them Diligently apart is a laser focus on lifting up Christ and the Kingdom importance of our work in our homes every single day. It's amazing what happens when a great variety of people come together with one goal-- to glorify Jesus within their homes and to teach their children diligently to love God and people and to prepare them to walk boldly through whatever door God opens for them in the days ahead. Featuring some of the best speakers in the homeschool arena along with thousands of resources to flip through, Teach Them Diligently events are the perfect cap of your homeschool year to encourage your heart, help you refocus on what's truly important, and then to get you ready for the year ahead. Get more details and secure your tickets: https://teachthemdiligently.net/homeschool-convention-locations/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.