Podcasts about lenin

"From each according to their ability, to each according to their need." Steve's guest, Breht O'Shea of Rev Left Radio and Red Menace podcast, believes that dedicating one's life to fighting for this vision, even without knowing the outcome, is more meaningful than pursuing capital's vision of wealth and status. Steve invited Breht to help tackle one of the most misunderstood and weaponized texts in Marxist theory: Vladimir Lenin's Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder, a book sometimes misused as a cudgel to pressure leftists into voting for the Democratic Party. To set the record straight, Breht places the 1920 pamphlet in its proper historical context. It was written after the successful Bolshevik Revolution to advise European socialist movements on how to avoid fatal mistakes. Together, Breht and Steve break down Lenin's dual critique: the ultra-left "infantile" error of purity-spiraled sectarianism, and the right-wing "opportunist" error of liquidating the revolutionary movement into bourgeois liberal politics. Lenin's strategic genius lies in maintaining firm revolutionary principles while remaining tactically flexible. The discussion extends beyond the text to cover the necessity of organization and discipline (democratic centralism), the constant threat of counter-revolution, the failure of social democracy, and how fascism functions as capitalism's immune response to left-wing threats. Breht O'Shea is the host of Rev Left Radio, the co-host of the Red Menace podcast, and author of the upcoming book "Letters to a Young Revolutionary" published by Iskra Books.  Check out Real Progressives website HERE Check out Macro n' Cheese podcast HERE Subscribe to their Substack HERE Sub to their YouTube page HERE

Episode 398 of RevolutionZ discusses how a revolution that topples a targeted regime can nonetheless fail to meet its grass roots aims even while celebrating victory. It continues a sequence of episodes aimed to assess Marxism Leninism as an ideology that might or might not usefully guide contemporary revolutionary practice. Having presented Classical Marxism and Leninism in the prior two episodes, this time we look hard at Bolshevik practice in Russia not as an academic exercise, but as a stress test for Marxism-Leninist revolutionary strategy, and for what working-class power is supposed to mean in real workplaces and communities. We start with a simple problem: if the goal is liberation, what counts as “winning”? Using voices from Volin, Bakunin, Luxemburg, Goldman, Castoriadis, and of course Lenin and Trotsky among others, we track how the 1917 upheaval surged from below and how the Bolsheviks, in the words of their own chroniclers, scrambled to catch up. Then we see how the trajectory  intentionally, self consciously bent until Soviets and factory committees that expressed mass initiative became subordinated, workers' control was absorbed into centralized state machinery, and even leftist dissent was treated as sabotage rather than feedback. From militarization of labor and one-man management to the destruction of internal factions, and again in the words of Lenin and Trotsky, the pattern became steadily clearer: discipline replaced solidarity, bureaucracy replaced self-management, and “party dictatorship” was justified as the only path to socialism. The episode finally culminates with the Makhnovist challenge and the Kronstadt rebellion of 1921, where demands for free Soviets, free speech for left currents, and an end to party privilege were met with force and a tightening of repression. At the close of the Sixties many who participated cared about the Russian Revolution, socialism, anarchism, worker self-management, and particularly the recurring problem of revolutions reproducing hierarchy. Responding to those concerns I wrote What Is To Be Undone, the book which this episode's chapter was excepted from. Some will hear this episode and feel it is too critical. Some others will feel it is too gentle. Is it one, the other, or neither? I hope it will appear as an article shortly to facilitate in depth reactions. People will also feel such emotions, perhaps even more so, about the next two episodes that will assess Leninism and then Classical Marxism in light of this episode's account of Marxist Leninist practice. I hope advocates of the Marxist Leninist ideology will engage with the material, leave comments, and perhaps even write articles in reply. Support the show

Rogers for America with Lt. Steve Rogers – It is no secret that socialists and communists have taken control of the Democratic Party. The party of FDR and JFK no longer exist. It is now the party of Lenin and Stalin. Increasing numbers of socialists and communists are seeking offices at every level of government. The most dangerous are running for the U.S. Congress...

The Russian Revolution's final result was never a foregone conclusion. Lenin made several crucial mistakes early on that might have resulted in his demise. We see that today. Free Trial Western Civ 2.0

Mediernes dækning af Ukraine-krigen og folkemordet i Gaza har gjort det tydeligere end nogensinde før, at de ikke er neutrale eller objektive institutioner. Tusindvis af arbejdere og unge har gennemskuet, at medierne spreder propaganda for at forsvare de rige og magtfuldes interesser, og at den såkaldt “frie presse” er i lommen på kapitalisterne. Men hvordan kan vi få medier, der faktisk er ærlige og demokratiske? I dette afsnit dykker Andreas Nørgård ned i det spørgsmål, med afsæt i Lenin og bolsjevikkernes brug af pressen efter Den Russiske Revolution i 1917. Oplægget er optaget til Revolution Festival i 2025. Tilmeld dig World School of Communism, og få adgang til revolutionære ideer gennem oplæg du ikke kan få noget andet sted: https://schoolofcommunism.com/ Vil du spille en aktiv rolle i at bygge et internationalt parti, baseret på kompromisløs kamp mod kapitalisme og imperialisme?

In this episode of VarnVlog, we are joined by Brandon Lightly to discuss the complex and often misunderstood history of Maoism. We dive deep into the theoretical underpinnings of the "mass line" and "new democracy," exploring how these concepts served as an internal critique of Marxism and a departure from Soviet-style bureaucracy.Key Topics Covered:Defining the Mass Line: Is it just populism, or a sophisticated leadership feedback loop?The Historical Origins: From the Hunan Report to the Long March and the second United Front.Theoretical Innovations: Mao's 1961 critique of Joseph Stalin and the rejection of the "Great Man" theory of history.Fragmentation: Why there are so many different Maoist tendencies (MLM, MIM, Third Worldism).Praxis: The rectification movement and the relationship between urban intellectuals and the rural peasantry.Journal ArticlesDirlik, A. (1970). The ideological foundations of the Chinese Revolution. Journal of Contemporary History, 5(3), 39–54.Dittmer, L. (1977). Line struggle: Notes on its organizational context and theoretical development. Modern China, 3(3), 303–312.Fogel, J. A. (1980). Ai Siqi, establishment intellectual by Joshua A. Fogel. Modern China, 6(1), 23–47.Hammond, E. R. (1978). Marxism and the mass line [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.Korolev, A. (2017). De-ideologized mass line, regime responsiveness, and state-society relations. China Review, 17(2), 7–36.Lyman, S. V. (1970). The Chinese Communist Party in the United Front, 1937–1945 [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.Mazur, M. G. (1995). The United Front of the 1940s: A social and cultural perspective. Modern China, 21(4), 431–456.Selden, M. (1971). The Yenan Way in revolutionary China. The China Quarterly, (45), 263–294.Steiner, H. A. (1951). Current mass line tactics in Communist China. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 277(1), 422–436.Teiwes, F. C. (1978). The origins of rectification: Inner-party purgation in the 1930s. The China Quarterly, (74), 181–201.Tokuda, N. (1971). The mass line during the Yenan period. The China Quarterly, (47), 1–18.Townsend, J. R. (1967). Political participation in Communist China. University of California Press.Womack, B. (1980). The phase of de-Maoization in China. China Report, 16(1), 7–21.Womack, B. (1991). Mao Zedong and the sinification of Marxism. The China Quarterly, (126), 1–15.Young, G. (1980). On New Democracy and the transition to socialism. Modern China, 6(1), 3–22.Books & Primary SourcesCoble, P. M. (2023). The collapse of Nationalist China: How Chiang Kai-shek lost China's civil war. Cambridge University Press.Elbaum, M. (2018). Revolution in the air: Sixties radicals turn to Lenin, Mao and Che. Verso Books.Hirata, K. (2024). Making Mao's steelworks: Industrial Manchuria and the transnational origins of Chinese socialism. Cambridge University Press.Karl, R. E. (2010). Mao Zedong and China in the twentieth-century world: A concise history. Duke University Press.Li, H. (2024). Fighting on the cultural front: U.S.-China relations in the Cold War. Columbia University Press.Lin, C. (2019). Mass line. In C. Sorace, I. Franceschini, & N. Loubere (Eds.), Afterlives of Chinese Communism: Political concepts from Mao to Xi (p. 122). ANU Press.Lovell, J. (2019). Maoism: A global history. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.Lowe, D. M. (1966). The function of "China" in Marx, Lenin, and Mao. University of California Press.Mao, Z. (1940). On New Democracy. Marxists Internet Archive.Mao, Z. (1977). A critique of Soviet economics. Monthly Review Press.Moufawad-Paul, J. (2016). Continuity and rupture: Philosophy in the Maoist terrain. Zero Books.Schram, S. R. (Ed.). (2005). Mao's road to power: Revolutionary writings 1912–1949: Vol. VII. New Democracy, 1939–1941. M.E. Sharpe.Zheng, Q. (Ed.). (2020). An ideological history of the Communist Party of China (Vol. 2) (L. Sun & S. Bryant, Trans.). Royal Collins Publishing Group.Send us Fan Mail Musis by Bitterlake, Used with Permission, all rights to BitterlakeSupport the showCrew:Host: C. Derick VarnIntro and Outro Music by Bitter Lake.Intro Video Design: Jason MylesArt Design: Corn and C. Derick VarnLinks and Social Media:twitter: @varnvlogblue sky: @varnvlog.bsky.socialYou can find the additional streams on YoutubeCurrent Patreon at the Sponsor Tier: Jordan Sheldon, Mark J. Matthews, Lindsay Kimbrough, RedWolf, DRV, Kenneth McKee, JY Chan, Matthew Monahan, Parzival, Adriel Mixon, Buddy Roark, Daniel Petrovic,Julian, Drea, Free Beer 

The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Ep. 213 In the 1960s, a radical Islamic Salafist named Sayyid Qutb wrote a short little radical book called Milestones (https://amzn.to/4bn9hMX) in which he laid out a new vision for what the world usually calls "Islamism" today. That model wasn't just rooted in a backwards-looking radical fundamentalist vision of Islam called Jihadist Salafism as taken up by the Muslim Brotherhood; it was also based directly on Vladimir Lenin's radical model for creating and installing Communism through Bolshevism, particularly Lenin's 1902 booklet called What Is To Be Done? (https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/) The prescription is for an ideologically pure radical vanguard to take control and pull the ideology into global dominance, even against its own moderates. In this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, host James Lindsay continues his reading of Milestones in a fourth volume, outlining the nature of this vanguard approach as Qutb explains it in his third chapter and tying it definitively to other radical ideological movements, especially Lenin's Communism. Join him for a very enlightening reading. Join us for the Preserving Liberty Conference at Sea!: https://ndcruise.com Support New Discourses: https://newdiscourses.com/support Follow New Discourses on other platforms: https://newdiscourses.com/subscribe Follow James Lindsay: https://linktr.ee/conceptualjames © 2026 New Discourses. All rights reserved. #NewDiscourses #JamesLindsay #Islam

Grötiga terroristtankar, banbrytande filosofi och viktiga litterära författarskap. Allt rymdes hos Bo Cavefors förlag. Det får en av fundera över dagens intellektuella klimat, säger Tor Billgren. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radios app. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna. Först sänd 2018-06-14.”RAF: texter”, som publicerades på Bo Cavefors förlag i oktober 1977 måste vara en av bokhistoriens mest vältajmade utgivningar. Det är en 520-sidig antologi med texter av aktivister inom den västtyska terrorgruppen Röda Arméfraktionen, RAF.Cavefors berättar om publiceringen i Malmökonstnären Lena Mattssons filminstallation ”I betraktarens öga”, som visades på Moderna Museet i Malmö 2014. Förutom den svenska boken, gav han också ut en utgåva på tyska, eftersom inget tyskt förlag vågade göra det. För att böckerna inte skulle fastna i tullen, fabricerade han ett fejkomslag: ”Kärlek med förhinder” stod det på framsidan av ett stort antal av de tyska böckerna.Cavefors hade starka drivkrafter, både politiska och litterära. I Lena Mattssons intervjufilm kallar han sig ”kulturell onanist”.Det som gör boken så vältajmad, är att det var just i oktober 1977, som palestinska PFLP kapade ett Lufthansaplan med kravet att ett antal fängslade RAF-ledare skulle friges.I fem dagar irrade planet runt i Mellanöstern med fem besättningsmedlemmar och 86 passagerare som gisslan, sju av dem barn. Tidigt på morgonen den 17 oktober kunde planet slutligen landa i Mogadishu, Somalia. Det stormades av tysk specialpolis, och gisslan fritogs.Följande morgon hittades RAF:s fängslade ledare, Andreas Baader, Gudrun Ensslin och Jan-Carl Raspe döda i sina fängelseceller i vad som förmodligen var ett koordinerat självmord.I samma veva lägger alltså Bo Cavefors ”RAF: texter” på bokhandelsdiskarna.Det var förstås också en mycket kontroversiell utgivning. RAF hade vid det laget mördat 16 personer i sina olika aktioner, varav två i Stockholm under ockupationen av Västtyska ambassaden 1975.Och våren 1977 hade SÄPO slagit till mot en RAF-trogen terrorcell i Sverige som planerade att kidnappa före detta ministern Anna-Greta Leijon i utpressningssyfte. Så hösten 1977 visste alla vad RAF var. Bo Cavefors hade en särskild näsa för det som låg i tiden.Han startade sitt bokförlag 1959, men det är först 2018 som historien om förlaget berättas utförligt i bokform. Det är bokhistorikern Ragni Svensson som gör det i sin doktorsavhandling ”Cavefors – Förlagsprofil och mediala mytbilder i det svenska litteratursamhället 1959–1982”.Första året gav den då 27-årige förläggaren ut nio titlar från sitt föräldrahem i Limhamn, bland annat ”Sju algeriska studenters vittnesmål om tortyren i Frankrike” och tre böcker av den mycket kontroversielle poeten Ezra Pound.Stig Claesson sökte sig tidigt till förlaget, liksom en ung Lars Norén. Honom refuserade dock Cavefors, tre gånger på tre år.Förlaget fick snabbt en vänsterpolitisk profil. Ragni Svensson noterar att utgivningen kom att ”spegla eller rentav föregå den väg som den svenska vänsterrörelsen kom att ta framåt slutet av 1960-talet”.Cavefors gav ut Mao Tse-tung, Rosa Luxemburg, Antonio Gramsci, Marx, Stalin, Lenin och Nordkoreas diktator Kim Il Sung.Det kom tjogtals med titlar som ”En socialistisk kultursyn”, ”Marxismens politiska ekonomi” och ”Kulturrevolutionen vid Kinas universitet”.Han introducerade tänkare och filosofer som Roland Barthes och Michel Foucault. Peter Weiss knöts tidigt till förlaget, och 1975 gav Cavefors ut den nigerianske författaren Wole Soyinka, 11 år innan han fick Nobelpriset.Det är inte dåligt för vad som länge var ett enmansförlag. Men Cavefors hade starka drivkrafter, både politiska och litterära. I Lena Mattssons intervjufilm kallar han sig ”kulturell onanist”.Att läsa om Bo Cavefors skapar funderingar om intellektuell takhöjd och diskussionsklimat nu och då. Vill man få en överblick över vidden av utgivningen kan man ta till en annan bok från 2018: ”BOC – en bok om Bo Cavefors Bokförlag”, som innehåller en komplett bibliografi.De Caveforsböcker som jag själv har starkast kontakt med är Salvador Dalís självbiografi, som tidigt väckte mitt intresse för konst. En annan är William Burroughs ”Den nakna lunchen”, som Cavefors tog till Sverige 1978. Jag hittade den på en loppmarknad i Simrishamn 1996 och läste den på ett kvavt tåg samma sommar som jag skulle rycka in i Flottan. Boken var osprättad, så jag satt med min morakniv och skar. Sida efter sida sköljde bokens febriga och erotiska hallucinationer över mig.Förlaget gick under i det som kom att kallas Caveforsaffären; en stormig process som spelades upp kring 1980. Bo Cavefors hade vunnit en upphandling från Kulturrådet om att ge ut Strindbergs samlade verk i ny utgåva. Men mitt under förberedelsearbetet drogs beslutet tillbaka.Officiellt på grund av brister i upphandlingsförfarandet, men i den debatt som följde menade Cavefors försvarare inom kulturvärlden att det var hans kontroversiella utgivning som var det egentliga skälet. Han var för obekväm, för besvärlig.Snart kom också anklagelser om ekonomisk brottslighet. Han satt häktad i polishuset i Lund i nio dagar, men frikändes sedan på 10 av 11 åtalspunkter. Förlaget gick i konkurs och i början av 1981 såldes det enorma boklagret i en legendarisk utförsäljning. Det är förmodligen från denna som min osprättade Burroughsbok härstammar.Att läsa om Bo Cavefors skapar funderingar om intellektuell takhöjd och diskussionsklimat nu och då. Hade utgivningarna av till exempel Ezra Pound, Stalin och den svenske fascistledaren Per Engdahl, vars memoarer Cavefors gav ut 1979, kunnat stå emot dagens sociala medierdrev och polariserade åsiktsjournalistik?Hade ett etablerat förlag idag kunnat ge ut visdomsord från Islamiska Statens teologer, eller Anders Behring Breiviks manifest?Bo Cavefors har motiverat utgivningen av RAF-boken med att det rörde sig om ”viktiga dokument för den tiden”.Att publicera något måste inte betyda att man ställer sig bakom det. Det finns en historisk och vetenskaplig poäng med att tillgängliggöra material för den tänkande allmänheten, även av kontroversiell, oetisk och korkad natur.Kanske är den här nakenheten exhibitionism, precis som det kan vara exhibitionism att ge ut böcker.Efter tiden med förlaget har Bo Cavefors i hög grad fortsatt med sin kulturella onani. Han har skrivit böcker och gett ut tidskrifter, men också samarbetat med olika konstnärer. I Lena Mattssons installation som visades på Moderna i Malmö, ingår förutom intervjufilmen, bland annat också en liten projektion av en naken Cavefors från en pjäs som han satte upp i Malmö 2005.Den här nakenheten återkommer i flera konstnärliga samarbeten, till exempel med Martin Bladh på Fylkingen i Stockholm 2009, och med Leif Holmstrand. Boken ”Ett rum på tredje våningen” består av textflöde och bilder, där en åldrad Cavefors poserar i olika sexuella situationer, inte sällan insnärjd i Holmstrands virkade girlanger.Kanske är den här nakenheten exhibitionism, precis som det kan vara exhibitionism att ge ut böcker: att torgföra sina åsikter och posera med vad man tycker är viktigt.Kanske är nakenheten provokation, precis som det kan vara provokation att ge ut Stalin eller ett tjockt manifest med ”grötiga terroristtankar och livsfarlig våldsromantik”, som en av recensenterna beskrev RAF-boken.För 40–50 år sedan yttrade sig denna inskränkthet genom upprop om moralisk resning, idag genom krav på trygga rum och triggervarningar.Men det är ett ytligt sätt att se på saken. Jag ser snarare nakenheten som ett verktyg för att ifrågasätta kroppsideal och avslöja fördomar, precis som utmanande bokpubliceringar kan avslöja inskränkthet och en subjektiv och godtycklig syn på yttrandefrihet.För 40–50 år sedan yttrade sig denna inskränkthet genom upprop om moralisk resning, idag genom krav på trygga rum och triggervarningar.Ett samhälle behöver sina obekväma och besvärliga personer. Det är de som lockar den indignerade flocken att demonstrera var toleransens gränser går.Tor Billgren, frilansjournalist LitteraturRagni Svensson: Cavefors – förlagsprofil och mediala mytbilder i det svenska litteratursamhället 1959–1982. Ellerströms, 2018.Anna-Lina Brunell, Ragni Svensson, Jonas Ellerström, Bo Cavefors: BOC – en bok om Bo Cavefors förlag. Tragus förlag, 2018.Leif Holmstrand & Bo Cavefors: ”Ett rum på tredje våningen” (Holmstrand Böcker, 2015)Martin Bladh & Bo I. Cavefors: ”Qualis artifex perero” (Styx, 2013) FilmerLena Mattsson: ”In the eye of the beholder”Lena Mattsson: ”Den kulturelle onanisten”

Episode 397 of RevoluionZ takes a careful walk through classical Leninist strategy, presenting it as sympathetically as we can so that the real strengths and real weaknesses show themselves without caricature. The context is Marxism-Leninism as an ideology--Classical ideologies as a way to read social conditions, determine goals, choose strategy, and treat organization as a complex revolutionary weapon rather than a neutral container. We start with Lenin the strategist: theory guides him, but he fits his tactics to concrete conditions. That means as Lenin urges, learning to retreat when needed, combining legal and illegal work, and being willing to maneuver, compromise, and even participate in reactionary parliaments when it helps reach workers and expose the system's limits. We ask the uncomfortable question hidden inside his famous “zigzags” offense: who decides on what basis which compromises are smart and which ones corrode the project from the inside? From there we track how the vanguard party, democratic centralism, and “iron discipline” emerged, then moved through 1905, imperialism and World War I, and the 1917 crisis of peace, bread, land, and liberty. We look at what was advocated for after power is taken, consider the turn toward state capitalism as a transitional tactic, consider the tightening of centralized rule, the resolution of debates around worker democracy, and the export of the Bolshevik model through the Third International. All of this is considered using the actual words and choices of Lenin, Trotsky, and a few supporters and critics.If these questions feel relevant right now, that's the point. After resisting authoritarianism, what ideology and organizing methods can help us build something better than a return to business as usual? Last episode presented Classical Marxist theory. This episode presents Leninist strategy. Next episode will assess Bolshevik practice and then we will go back to strategy and finally to its roots in theory and finally consider a couple of alternatives. It is a long sequence and each episode is itself long but also accessible. Each is also offered a bit later as an article for further consideration. Then again choosing one's tools for a profound task is not a trivial task. These episodes are not tweets. I hope you will have time for them and thus for carefully thinking through the tasks we now face. Support the show

**We're listening to and discussing this episode on Tuesday, July 14 at 8pm ET/5pm PT, in our online gathering Macro ‘n Chill. We've invited Breht to join us, so bring your questions. Register here: https://us06web.zoom.us/meeting/register/PXkazv5WTWW7b7kMExA8uw"From each according to their ability, to each according to their need." Steve's guest, Breht O'Shea of Rev Left Radio and Red Menace podcast, believes that dedicating one's life to fighting for this vision, even without knowing the outcome, is more meaningful than pursuing capital's vision of wealth and status.Steve invited Breht to help tackle one of the most misunderstood and weaponized texts in Marxist theory: Vladimir Lenin's Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder, a book sometimes misused as a cudgel to pressure leftists into voting for the Democratic Party.To set the record straight, Breht places the 1920 pamphlet in its proper historical context. It was written after the successful Bolshevik Revolution to advise European socialist movements on how to avoid fatal mistakes.Together, Breht and Steve break down Lenin's dual critique: the ultra-left "infantile" error of purity-spiraled sectarianism, and the right-wing "opportunist" error of liquidating the revolutionary movement into bourgeois liberal politics. Lenin's strategic genius lies in maintaining firm revolutionary principles while remaining tactically flexible.The discussion extends beyond the text to cover the necessity of organization and discipline (democratic centralism), the constant threat of counter-revolution, the failure of social democracy, and how fascism functions as capitalism's immune response to left-wing threats.Breht O'Shea is the host of Rev Left Radio, the co-host of the Red Menace podcast, and author of the upcoming book “Letters to a Young Revolutionary” published by Iskra Books. Breht is also a longtime organizer in Omaha, Nebraska, a union electrician, and married father of three.

It is that time. The Russian Revolution would be a lot different without Vladimir Lenin (Lenin is not his real name by the way...) But Lenin strikes a deal with the Germans who hope that he can steer Russia out of the Great War and he hits Petrograd like a lightning bolt. Western Civ 2.0 

Astrophysicist Hugh Ross has investigated haunted houses, confronted witchcraft covens, and lectured Soviet scientists in rooms with 20-foot portraits of Lenin on the wall. He returns to Blurry Creatures for a members-only story-time episode and holds nothing back. Kitchen utensils floating in midair. An entire block of witch covens in Pasadena that police refused to enter. A translator in Cold War Russia whose uncle gave his life to Christ from secondhand lecture notes.Ross also dismantles the case for manned Mars missions using hard radiation data NASA does not like to talk about. He explains why the laws of physics exist specifically to make sin costly and why Revelation describes a new creation operating under entirely different rules. He weighs in on Genesis 6, the sons of God, and what Sasquatch would have to be if it stands over nine feet tall. This is Hugh Ross unplugged. This episode is just the beginning. Blurry Creatures members unlock a vault of 100+ members-only episodes you can't hear anywhere else, plus every main feed episode completely ad-free. You also get a vibrant community of fellow seekers, exclusive drops, and perks built for people who can't stop digging. Come see what happens when we keep the mics rolling. Join us at https://blurrycreatures.com/pages/members. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

David Thomson joins me to discuss his new book, A Sudden Flicker of Light. Although we both love movies, we've noticed that movies have distorted our way of seeing the world, changed our sense of reality, and most of all, turned politics into a fascist mass spectacle. After all, Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and Mussolini all loved movies. Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin love putting themselves on screen. Totalitarianism and the cinema have always been linked, and politics is less democratic, and more cinematic, than ever.Here's a link to the book: https://flyleafbooks.com/book/9781668205730

On today's episode, we discuss the massive Independence Day celebration in Washington, D.C., including a 45-minute fireworks display and a dramatic flyover by the new “ghost bat” stealth aircraft that the hosts describe with awe and pride. The Fearsome Foursome then pivot to breaking news closer to home, bringing on Ben to unpack why the Louisiana Attorney General was arrested and what that says about state and national politics. As the conversation deepens, they critique government spending, taxation, and social programs, highlighting a story about a friend receiving substantial disability payments and questioning the incentives created by such policies. From there, the hosts launch into a historical and ideological discussion of communism, referencing atrocities under Lenin and Stalin, contrasting them with fascism, and arguing that many schools downplay these histories to keep citizens dependent. Throughout the episode, they emphasize the importance of teaching uncomfortable historical truths, quoting Cicero's idea that ignorance of history keeps people childlike and calling on listeners to learn and share statistics about totalitarian regimes. Don't miss it!

Get ready for an absolute reality check on the massive double standards taking over politics!

Episode 396 of RevolutionZ presents Classical Marxism as Marxist Leninists typically utilize it. It is part of a sequence of episodes aimed at  helping to assess classical ideologies to determine whether activists should opt for one or reject them all and move on to something better. Marxism can feel like a master key: one theory that explains why society is stuck, who holds power, and how history finally breaks open. We put that promise on the table as we read classical Marxist theory including long eloquent and revealing quotations from Marx and Engels all at an intentionally modestly academic pace, because the details matter if we want an ideology that can guide effective day to day, month to month, and year to year strategy rather than only inspire slogans.We walk through the classic building blocks: scarcity and the 19th-century context that shaped Marx's project, dialectics as change driven by internal contradictions, and historical materialism's insistence that social life rests on production and reproduction. From there we trace how classical Marxism connects human nature to social relations, treats consciousness as rooted in practice, and argues that knowledge proves itself in action. We also name a tension between the narrower “classical” picture and the richer humanist strain in Marx that centers alienation and human potential.Then we apply the classical Marxist conceptual framework to capitalism: exploitation and surplus, the corporation and the state working in tandem, imperial expansion, and recurring crises of overproduction. Classical Marxism claims these pressures forge the working class into a revolutionary force, culminating in a transition through proletarian rule toward a classless communist society where freedom expands and alienation ends. That Marxist storyline is attractive, but we end this presentation where the real work starts: are Classical Marxism's concepts and claims accurate and complete enough to guide us through changing the world around us. What strategy and practice does this theory actually produce? How do we assess it all?What comes after Trump-era politics? After we erase the stain of his imprint, what follows? Do we continue on to  not only stop fascism but also fundamentally change current societies and history? If we should, and I hope we agree on that, do we have concepts, methods, and aims sufficient to guide that journey without imposing new failures and without allowing our baggage from having been twisted and fed for all our lives by living under capitalist, misogynist, racist. and authoritarian, conditions? Do we have at hand an ideology sufficient to that admittedly immense task? Next up will be to present Leninist strategy as propounded by, well, Lenin and Trotsky, and used by Leninist parties over and over and over, as yet another episode precursor to evaluating and resolving where to look for viable and worthy theory, strategy, tactics, and aims for current movements that seek to win a fundamentally better future.The label WITBU in this episode's title, refers to the book the content was excerpted from, What Is To Be Undone? This episode and those to follow in this "WITBU sequence" seek to discover whether what we need to undo is past deviations from Marxism Leninism, as some claim, or redoubled advocacy for for Marxism Leninism as some urge.Support the show

I know Jesus died, but everybody dies. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, all died and one day, unless Jesus comes first, you will die too. But the difference is that when they put Jesus in a grave, it couldn't hold Him, the power of the Holy Spirit came into His dead body, He broke open that grave, He came out, He's alive! What kind of Man is this? The grave cannot hold Him – the wind and the sea are obedient to Him – no demon spirit in hell can stand against Him – no human can resist Him! That's the kind of God that I have! The disciples in the boat marvelled at Jesus – they didn't realise they had this kind of Man in the boat! They were astonished, what kind of Man is this, He's got so much power – not just women and children but the wind and the waves – they obey Him! He is the Lord of Heaven and earth, the Jesus who still works miracles today – He is the Son of the Living God! And He's my Jesus!  What kind of Man is this Jesus? Wherever I go, He's in the boat! I'd rather be in a ‘storm' with Jesus, than living in calm and peace without Him. I want you to know this real Jesus in your life.

SUMMARY: This show asks the hard questions! Matt wants to relive moments with his kids when they were younger, Paul contemplates having an unending orgasm, and Jacob would eat a cooked worm. In Scoop Mail we consider the sense of unease that women feel when interacting with men, and we play a before-and-after Scoopardy.

Enter Charles A. Conant, theorist of “surplus capital.” Rothbard shows how Conant's claim that mature economies must export capital abroad linked banking reform to economic imperialism—a theory that traveled from pro-imperialists to Wilshire, Hobson, and Lenin.

Send us Fan MailBIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE:  The information in this episode comes from Red Flags Press.  Their main web site is very useful for research purposes, and I recommend it!We follow the idea of the “social parasite” through socialist writing and show how it shifts from moral accusation to an enforceable legal category once society claims ownership over individual labor. We argue that the transaction costs of monitoring effort and assigning “socially useful” work push real-world socialism toward surveillance, coercion, and punishment.• socialist critique of wage labor as work or starve• transaction costs as defining, monitoring, and enforcing property rights• the property rights switch from self-ownership to society owning labor• “from each according to their ability” as an obligation backed by force• socialist writers labeling middlemen and many professions as parasites• the party as the decision-maker when prices are suppressed• Joseph Brodsky's trial as a real anti-parasite enforcement example• why the parasite problem expands and becomes politically arbitrary• how similar labor-claim logic shows up in authoritarian socialism and fascism• why Scandinavian social democracy is capitalism, not classical socialismThe book of the week is Lenin's What Is to Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Moment, and I strongly recommend it.Links:Red Flags, "Why Socialism Says Slacking is Theft."Moments in Soviet History: The Trial of Joseph BrodskyLeo Huberman, The ABCs of Socialism."Soviet Era 'Parasites'" https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2016/05/20/soviet-era-parasites-return-to-todays-russian-a52934If you have questions or comments, or want to suggest a future topic, email the show at taitc.email@gmail.com !You can follow Mike Munger on Twitter at @mungowitz 

Zdravo. Tokrat začnemo z vprašanjem, kdaj prihaja nova svetleča prihodnost (višjih plač še ni), spotoma odkrijemo, kdo je današnji nesponzor, mi pa že tako ali tako naročamo zobe na Temuju, dokler je poštnina še ugodna. Po novem se ne smemo več tako fokusirati na denar (to sicer pravijo tisti, ki so za denar) in da je rešitev več dela. Vmes ustanovimo sindikat digitalnih delavcev in podkasterjev, ker so nam vzeli držala za pivo. Ko se končno spomnimo, da imamo v rokah Zadnjo priložnost, ugotovimo, da knjigo sicer beremo, o njej pa govorimo bolj malo. Tokrat smo še vedno pri četrtem poglavju in Billu Blacku. Zaključimo z razglednicami slovenskih mest in vprašanjem, ali ima Dravograd grad (ima, iz leta 1161) in zakaj se sploh tako imenuje. Sumimo, da je Befel prišel iz Beograda, kar bi bilo treba nujno raziskati. Parlamentarna komisija se že ustanavlja.

Lev Davídovich Bronstein (Yánovka, Ucrania, 26 de octubre/jul./ 7 de noviembre de 1879 -Ciudad de México, 21 de agosto de 1940), más conocido como León Trotski, fue un político y revolucionario soviético. Aunque inicialmente simpatizó con los mencheviques y tuvo disputas ideológicas y personales con el líder bolchevique, Vladímir Lenin, Trotski fue uno de los organizadores clave de la Revolución de Octubre, que permitió a los bolcheviques tomar el poder en noviembre de 1917 en Rusia. Durante la guerra civil, subsiguiente, desempeñó el cargo de comisario de asuntos militares. Negoció la retirada de Rusia de la Primera Guerra Mundial mediante la Paz de Brest-Litovsk. Tuvo a su cargo la creación del Ejército Rojo, que consolidaría definitivamente los logros revolucionarios, venciendo a un pobre apoyo de ejércitos extranjeros y a los ejércitos blancos durante la guerra civil rusa; apoyó al Terror Rojo​ y fue condecorado con la Orden de la Bandera Roja. Posteriormente, se enfrentó política e ideológicamente a Iósif Stalin, liderando la oposición de izquierda, lo que le causó el exilio y posterior asesinato. Tras su exilio de la Unión Soviética, fue el líder de un movimiento internacional de izquierda revolucionaria identificado con el nombre de trotskismo y caracterizado por la idea de la «revolución permanente». En 1938, fundó la Cuarta Internacional. Murió asesinado en México por Ramón Mercader, un agente español del NKVD soviética, por orden de Stalin

Joti Brar | 28 January 2024 What are some of the key lessons we need to take from Lenin and the Bolsheviks in the coming period of rising revolutionary struggle? Lenin was the great Marxist thinker who reinstated the revolutionary content into Marxism and updated it for the era of imperialism. His work remains as essential as ever to all those struggling for a better world. This article is a slightly extended version of a speech given by Joti Brar to a symposium that was held in Istanbul, Turkey, on 13 January to mark the centenary of Lenin's death. ---------------------------------------------- Subscribe! Donate! Join us in building a bright future for humanity! www.thecommunists.org www.lalkar.org www.redyouth.org Telegram: t.me/thecommunists Twitter: twitter.com/cpgbml Soundcloud: @proletarianradio Rumble: rumble.com/c/theCommunists Odysee: odysee.com/@proletariantv:2 Facebook: www.facebook.com/cpgbml Online Shop: https://shop.thecommunists.org/ Education Program: https://thecommunists.org/education-programme/ Each one teach one! www.londonworker.org/education-programme/ Join the struggle www.thecommunists.org/join/ Donate: www.thecommunists.org/donate/

NotiMundo al Día - Lenin Barreto - Correísmo impulsa nuevo juicio político contra Inés Manzano by FM Mundo 98.1

When I opened Facebook this morning, as I do every morning, I learned that Alexander Rabinowitch died at 91 years old. Rabinowitch was arguably one of the most important historians of the Russian Revolution. It's hard to state how much Rabinowitch's work influence our understanding of 1917. Before him, it was assumed that the Bolsheviks were a highly disciplined, unpopular political party that came to power through a coup. What Rabinowitch repeatedly showed in his four books on Revolution, the Bolsheviks had popular support, most importantly in factories in Petrograd and in other large cities and at the front. Lenin's slogans, particularly, "Peace, Land, Bread!" had mass support, and by October 1917, successfully rode a wave of revolution into power. And now that Alexander Rabinowitch has left us, I figured I'd dig out my old interview with him from 2017, clean it up, and re-release it to commemorate the life and work of this scholarly giant.Guest:Alexander Rabinowitch was a Professor Emeritus of History at Indiana University, where he taught from 1968 until 1999. He's the author of four books on the Russian Revolution: Prelude to Revolution: The Petrograd Bolsheviks and the July 1917 Uprising; The Bolsheviks Come To Power: The Revolution of 1917 in Petrograd; The Bolsheviks in Power: The First Year of Soviet Rule in Petrograd; and finally his fourth and last book which was just published in April, The Bolsheviks Survive: Petrograd 1919 published by the University of Pittsburgh Press. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Goaded in the hall of thunder by the horn-mad giant, the lumbering, clever tongued dude seeks audience with his other, an indignant man on a false throne. Chastised yet triumphant, the dude takes his prize. But alas, hell and all its demons now have for him a quest.  "It's all a god damn fake, man. It's like Lenin said: you look for the person who will benefit, and, uh, uh, you know..."

Um dos mais importantes economistas brasileiros. Marxista, que teve uma carreira brilhante na academia, como professor da USP e da PUC em São Paulo. Houve um período em que teve que ficar afastado, por conta da ditadura militar no Brasil. Ele sempre teve uma militância política junto com a carreira acadêmica, e também como intelectual. Uma figura muito inquieta, no sentido de que ele não se acomodava a um determinado tema. Este foi Paul Singer, personagem do documentário que faz parte de uma série de documentários de não ficção realizados pelo diretor Ugo Giorgetti. Este terceiro episódio sobre a série teve a colaboração por meio de entrevistas com o ex-aluno de Singer, Marcos Barreto, a jornalista e pesquisadora Paula Quental, autora de uma dissertação de mestrado sobre a trajetória política e intelectual de Singer, e Marcelo Justo, diretor executivo do Instituto Paul Singer.  Roteiro Liniane Brum: Paul Singer, uma utopia militante: esse episódio é o terceiro de uma série sobre os documentários e as peças de não ficção do diretor de cinema Ugo Giorgetti.  Meu nome é Liniane Brum, sou doutora em teoria e crítica literária pela Unicamp e realizei a pesquisa de pós-doutorado “Contra o apagamento – o cinema de não ficção de Ugo Giorgetti” também na Unicamp, no Labjor, com o apoio da Fapesp. [Trilha musical] Liniane: A partir do ano de 2020, Ugo Giorgetti assina três documentários biográficos. São produções realizadas sob encomenda, que têm em comum a apresentação de homens que se destacaram em suas áreas de atuação e como pessoas também. São filmes que não partem de uma inquietação artística ou de uma necessidade intelectual. Ainda assim, são autorais.  Estou falando dos filmes Paul Singer, uma utopia militante, produção de 2021, A invenção de Conrado Wessel, de 2024, e Alberto Dines – vínculos de liberdade, que saiu em 2026. Neste episódio vamos tratar de Paul Singer, uma utopia militante. Eu conversei com três pessoas sobre esse documentário. O economista, produtor do filme e ex-aluno de Singer, Marcos Barreto, que me ajudou a entender os bastidores da produção. A jornalista e pesquisadora Paula Quental, autora de uma dissertação de mestrado sobre a trajetória política e intelectual de Singer, e Marcelo Justo, diretor executivo do Instituto Paul Singer. [Vinheta Oxigênio] Liniane: Antes de mais nada, pedi a eles que apresentassem quem foi Paul Singer.   Paula Quental: Ele era de uma família judia, assimilada, como se diz, não era religiosa. Ele vinha da Áustria, a mãe percebeu para onde caminhava a coisa do nazismo. Ele conta, inclusive tá na dissertação, que ele descobriu que era judeu, aos seis anos de idade, quando a Áustria foi anexada por Hitler. Aí, chegaram os amiguinhos dele do colégio, com aquelas bandeirinhas nazistas, com a suástica, e ele queria sair junto (com os meninos) com aquela bandeirinha. Aí, a mãe dele vira para ele e diz: “mas, Paul, você é judeu”. Marcos Barreto: É um dos mais importantes economistas brasileiros, marxista e veio com sete anos fugindo do nazismo, com a mãe, o pai já havia falecido, ele veio com a mãe para São Paulo, e ele faz um curso técnico primeiro, ele começa a trabalhar como metalúrgico, só depois ele vai fazer faculdade. E vai fazer faculdade por conta de uma militância política dele, porque o sindicato, o movimento, achava, o mesmo movimento operário, que eles deveriam se qualificar as lideranças, e sugerem que ele vai fazer economia, e ele faz economia, ele se forma já com quase 30 anos, e ele depois tem uma carreira brilhante na academia, professor da USP, foi professor da PUC em São Paulo também, no período que teve que ficar afastado por conta da ditadura militar no Brasil. Ele sempre teve uma militância política junto com a carreira acadêmica, e também como intelectual, uma figura muito inquieta, no sentido de que ele não se acomodava a um determinado tema. Paula Quental: Quando ele entrou na USP, ele já tinha lido o Capital, Trotsky, Lenin, Rosa Luxemburgo, que é muito da tradição dele, ele se considerava um luxemburguista. Então, é uma história de alguém que foi mergulhando nos clássicos e foi desenvolvendo um trabalho muito original, porque ele acabou indo para uma vertente, digamos, herética do marxismo, não convencional, heterodoxa, porque ele criticava, por exemplo, a União Soviética, ele criticava o centralismo da economia, ele defendia que deveria vir da base, da economia solidária, das cooperativas. Então, ele era um crítico da Revolução de 17 de outubro, da Revolução Bolchevique. Marcos Barreto: Depois, já mais nos últimos 20 anos da vida dele, ele se dedica a um tema muito importante, que é a economia solidária, então ali ele encontra talvez o assunto dos quais ele estudou, que mais ele pôde misturar uma militância política com um saber acadêmico, e colocou em prática, ele foi secretário de economia solidária no governo Lula e Dilma, até o impeachment da Dilma, praticamente ele ficou em Brasília coordenando essa Secretaria.  Liniane: Esta apresentação foi feita pela Paula e pelo Marcos. E por aí a gente já consegue ver uma trajetória bem particular, que mistura prática militante e teoria, o que já o difere de muitos intelectuais. Faltou o destaque que o Marcelo Justo fez do nosso protagonista, que trago agora. Marcelo Justo: Tem um marco na vida do Singer, tanto pessoal quanto como militante, que é trabalhar em grupo. Ele se destaca como intelectual e parece que o intelectual é uma figura sozinha, isolada, mas ele só tem essa força que ele tem pela capacidade de estar em grupo e de se conectar o Singer é o que a gente chama mais contemporaneamente de um articulador de redes, ele está sempre mantendo redes de amigos e de militantes juntos, que caminham juntos. Liniane: Marcos, como surge a ideia de um filme sobre ele, ou seja, quem fala: “olha, agora tem que ser feito um documentário sobre o Paul Singer”. Marcos Barreto: Quando ele falece, um grupo de amigos, de pessoas que gostavam muito do professor, dizem, bom, a gente precisa fazer alguma coisa pra contar essa história dele, precisamos registrar isso de alguma forma, fazemos um livro, fazemos o que? Não, vamos fazer um filme e aí a gente faz então uma campanha de crowdfunding, pra conseguir o recurso pra fazer o filme. O primeiro passo foi esse: nós não tínhamos diretor, nós não sabíamos exatamente que filme seria, mas a gente resolve fazer algo que tem muito a ver com a economia solidária, uma grande vaquinha, em todos os 27 estados do Brasil, no Distrito Federal, há pessoas que contribuíram pra que o filme fosse feito. E aí ficamos, então, pensando que diretor pode fazer esse filme, ou diretora? Quebramos a cabeça até que eu sugeri que fosse o Ugo Giorgetti.  Liniane: Por que Ugo Giorgetti?  Marcos Barreto: Porque, entre várias coisas, o Paul Singer escolheu a cidade de São Paulo, quer dizer, ele veio criança, ele não escolheu propriamente, foi a mãe dele que veio, porque já haviam familiares em São Paulo. Mas ele acaba vindo pra São Paulo e adota a cidade como a cidade dele. Ele era um apaixonado por São Paulo, falava isso várias vezes, ele voltava às vezes pra Europa, ia fazer palestra, dizendo que não tem nada como São Paulo.  Liniane: Assistindo o documentário, a gente percebe que Ugo Giorgetti traduz o Singer múltiplo. Os entrevistados comentam o olhar do diretor sobre suas conexões com figuras importantes da política, do campo da educação e mesmo e seu papel na difusão de O Capital, de Marx no Brasil. Foi ele quem primeiro traduziu o livro para o português.  Paula Quental: Teve uma passagem no documentário do Ugo Giorgetti, em que ele entrevista o Paul Singer, porque ele fez ainda várias entrevistas com o Paul Singer, em que o Singer lembra da época que ele dividiu o secretariado da Erundina com Paulo Freire. E ele fala que aprendeu muito com o Freire, que se sente extremamente influenciado pelo Freire. E isso até me estimulou a escrever uma sessão na minha dissertação, chamada Dois Paulos, em que eu analiso justamente o aspecto pedagógico da obra do Paul Singer, que ele próprio se coloca como muito influenciado pelo Freire. Marcos Barreto: Com essa amplitude que tem a vida do professor, as pessoas podiam conhecer um lado, mas pouca gente conhecia o todo, e o filme permite esse registro. E do ponto de vista acadêmico, é um registro interessante também, mais uma vez, sem ser algo cansativo, extenuante, chato, ou mais maçante, vamos dizer assim, porque ele está ali, o registro da vida intelectual, de uma forma leve, de uma forma que você compreende e fala nossa, ele fez tudo isso, nossa, foi ele então que traduziu o Capital.  Liniane: No final dos anos 1950, professores da Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas da USP, dentre os quais José Arthur Gianotti, Fernando Henrique Cardoso e Ruth Cardoso, organizaram um grupo para fazer a leitura de O Capital. Paul Singer integra esse grupo com a missão de traduzir o livro diretamente do alemão. Não custa lembrar que se trata de uma obra canônica no campo das ciências humanas. E que naquele momento Paul Singer ainda não era o economista, intelectual destacado e homem público da alta burocracia governamental. Aqui, as falas de Marcelo, Marcos e depois a Paula. Marcelo Justo: Isso é um marco né? é um marco, acho que para o Singer, é um marco na esquerda brasileira também, porque é um primeiro momento falando pelos relatos deles, que vão se debruçar sobre a obra do Marx de uma forma sistemática, durante muitos anos, – que é interrompido com o golpe de 64, mas começa, se eu não me engano, em 58, 59 e aí vão para outros autores, não só Karl Marx, que aí vão pegar o Singer como um leitor, desde criança, do alemão. Então ele integra o grupo como quem vai ler, trazer a versão original do alemão, mas é que eles vão comparando também a tradução. Então tem a leitura em alemão, tem a leitura em francês, a leitura do que existia em português. Isso depois vai servir também como base para o Singer depois fazer a tradução, a primeira tradução original em alemão do Capital, aí já nos anos 80. A partir desse grupo sai a tese de doutorado do Fernando Henrique Cardoso, então acho que tem todos esses marcos. O professor Roberto Schwarz até hoje também se refere a esse momento, o professor Michael Löwy, que é conselheiro do nosso instituto, que foi muito amigo do Singer, também se refere até hoje como um marco na vida dele, esse momento de leitura do Capital. Marcos Barreto: E depois tem um segundo momento, que é muito rico também, quando ele é convidado por um grupo de jovens que diz assim: “poxa, a gente queria fazer uma leitura do Capital”. E aí veio a ideia de fazer uma leitura no Teatro de Arena. Então já pensou o que era isso? Você reunia no Teatro de Arena, já na ditadura militar – aí nós estamos falando de um Brasil já fechado do ponto de vista político – e esse grupo se reunia sábado de manhã para fazer a leitura do Capital com a coordenação do professor Paul Singer. Então isso é um marco também, e desta leitura ele também aproveitou, como bom acadêmico, e fez um livro sobre essa experiência. Paula Quental: Eu ouvi do Lincoln Seco, professor de História da USP, que ouviu do Florestan Fernandes, que ele é a pessoa que mais conheceu O Capital no Brasil. Ele editou uma edição da Abril Cultural do Capital, uma edição famosa do início dos anos 1980, que a editora Ubu agora reeditou. E ele lia no original, ele mergulhou, e desde uma externa idade. Liniane: Eu selecionei um trecho do documentário em que o próprio Paul  Singer fala sobre Marx. Ele integra o segmento intitulado por Ugo Giorgetti “Um autodidata na USP”. Ouve só: [Trecho do documentário] Paul Singer: Marx, em primeiro lugar, deu uma visão do capitalismo que ninguém havia dado antes, e que agora se mostra inteiramente verdadeira. Marx está sendo ressuscitado por não marxistas, exatamente como coincide, eu diria, de uma forma ultra surpreendente com este capitalismo extremamente em crises, crises que se repetem etc. porque ele entendeu, uma das coisas que tem Marx, a contribuição dele, é só dele, não é de outros, é que os economistas clássicos, tipo Ricardo, Adam Smith e tantos outros, que não eram reacionários, não, eles não eram de direita, mas eles jamais lembrariam em analisar a economia através de lutas de classes, isso é Marx.  [Efeito Sonoro] (Voz de Paul Singer bem baixinha) [Silêncio prolongado] [Trilha incidental] Liniane: Marcelo, o Instituto Paul Singer e o documentário nascem praticamente ao mesmo tempo e se dedicam à difusão do legado do professor. Em que medida essa coincidência influencia o trabalho da entidade? Marcelo Justo: O Instituto, ele começa em 2021, a organização dele. No final do ano é que ele se formaliza com o CNPJ, e em 2022 é lançado, tornado público o Instituto. Ele é uma iniciativa dos familiares do Paul Singer, basicamente eu e a Helena Singer, que é a minha esposa, filha dele. É uma associação sem fins lucrativos que tem como missão preservar e reinventar esse legado. Um legado que tem esse histórico de uma luta pela democracia, pela solidariedade, a luta contra todas as formas de injustiça e desigualdade. Marcelo Justo: O nosso principal desafio é a difusão, é a divulgação das ideias e obras do Singer. Então, um documentário como esse é muito importante, ajuda muito nisso em 50, 40 e poucos minutos, assim, você tem a trajetória inteira dele, da história de vida, as principais ideias e algumas das polêmicas enfrentadas na trajetória, na vida dele. Então, para a gente, é um material muito importante, muito rico para divulgar.  Liniane: É fato: documentário e Instituto convergem em objetivo e se fortalecem mutuamente. Porém, Marcos Barreto me explicou que o filme foi feito a partir de entrevistas realizadas em momentos diferentes. Na primeira, de 2015, Paul Singer é entrevistado pelo grupo que viria a produzir o documentário. A segunda é feita por Giorgetti, em 2018, antes do falecimento do professor. Já o Instituto, como Marcelo me contou, e formalizado em 2022. Marcos Barreto: O professor, no final da vida, já nos últimos anos, tinha alguns fatores de memória, algumas coisas que estavam começando a falhar. E a gente identificou isso, e a família, e a gente falou, bom, vamos gravar, vamos colocar o Paul Singer falando sobre a vida dele, sobre coisas que ele fez na vida que são marcantes, sobre passagens importantes, vamos quase que fazer uma entrevista com ele. E a gente fez duas sessões grandes com o professor, foi o Fernando Kleyman quem organizou isso, em Brasília. E ele então, por duas sessões de quase três, quatro horas, falou um monte, o que foi ótimo, porque quando a gente conseguiu resolver o dinheiro para fazer o filme, escolher o Ugo, etc, o professor havia já avançado na doença, já tinha dificuldade, o Ugo chegou a conversar com ele ainda em vida, o filme é lançado depois que o professor já faleceu. Liniane: O documentário foi divulgado na imprensa como uma produção que praticou a Economia Solidária. O que significaria essa afirmação, Marcelo? Marcelo Justo: Então, na economia solidária, democracia e autogestão são sinônimos, praticamente, nos escritos dele. Então, o que é isso? As pessoas se organizarem para produzir juntos, sem patrão e sem empregado. Todo mundo é cooperado.  Não é à toa que o documentário tem o nome da utopia militante, que esse é o título do livro dele, que ele se coloca a isso, né? A questão da utopia como uma militância. A militância dele é por essa utopia, que é uma utopia de construir um socialismo que seja democrático, que não seja a experiência do chamado socialismo real, que é uma ditadura de esquerda.  Liniane: Marcos também comentou sobre o termo utopia que está no título do documentário. E destacou, mais uma vez, a multiplicidade de papeis de Singer nos vários espaços em que atuou. Marcos Barreto: Esse título é tão forte e também resume tanto do que é o professor, porque justamente reúne essas duas facetas, que é uma pessoa que é um intelectual brilhante, professor titular da USP, com um militante que nunca deixou de ser militante. Ele foi estudar economia porque ele era um militante, e ele termina a vida como alguém que está pensando a economia solidária, que é algo prático, então ele não tava sendo um teórico da economia solidária, só que aí no meio desse percurso, já nessa última década da vida, nas últimas duas décadas, ele escreve esse livro, que é uma utopia militante, então ele assume ali o quê? Que ao mesmo tempo que ele está defendendo algo que é utópico, que é um desejo do que ele gostaria de ver acontecer, ele assume que aquilo só vai acontecer se tiver militância, ou seja, talvez aí, diferente do socialismo científico, que parte da ideia de que há uma evolução natural da história que vai ligar o socialismo, e que é algo que aliás o Singer não acreditava. Então o título, na verdade, quem escolheu foi o professor Paulo Singer, para o livro, e a gente quando viu, quando foi pensar no título do filme, a gente falou, putz, difícil achar um nome melhor do que Utopia Militante. Liniane: O documentário estreou no Festival Internacional É Tudo Verdade, em 2021, em um momento em que a letalidade do coronavírus alcançava um dos seus picos. Ele foi exibido de modo on-line, mediante a distribuição de duas mil senhas, que se esgotaram em poucos minutos. [Efeito sonoro] Liniane: “A trajetória política e intelectual de Paul Singer: da crítica marxista à Economia Solidária” é o título da dissertação de mestrado defendida por Paula Quental no Instituto de Estudos Brasileiros, o IEB, da USP, a Universidade de São Paulo, em 2024.  Marcelo Justo, que é doutor em geografia pela mesma universidade, organizou o livro “Urbanização e Desenvolvimento”, uma coletânea de textos de Paul Singer. O volume foi editado pela Autêntica em parceria com a Fundação Perseu Abramo.  Marcos Barreto é hoje Diretor Geral do Instituto Equipe Educação, Cultura e Cidadania e Vice-Diretor Geral da Fundação Escola de Sociologia e Política de São Paulo (FESPSP), e segue engajado com a divulgação do legado de Singer.  [Vinheta de encerramento Oxigênio] Esse trabalho de divulgação sobre a obra de não ficção do cineasta Ugo Giorgetti é realizado no âmbito do Programa Mídia Ciência, do Labjor, com supervisão da Simone Pallone.  As entrevistas, o roteiro e a narração desse episódio foram feitos por mim, Liniane Brum. A revisão do roteiro é da Simone Pallone. A edição é do Guilherme Lopes, estagiário da Coordenadoria de Centros e Núcleos Interdisciplinares da Unicamp, a Cocen. A vinheta do Oxigênio é do Elias Mendez.  As trilhas usadas no podcast são de  Blue Dot Sessions, tiradas do Free Music Archive. A gente vai deixar a ficha técnica do filme na descrição do episódio.  As reportagens referentes à divulgação da obra de não ficção de Ugo Giorgetti foram publicadas no dossiê “Ugo Giorgetti” da Revista ComCiência.  Este episódio conta com o suporte da Diretoria Executiva de Apoio e Permanência, da Unicamp e da Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, a FAPESP, por meio de bolsas, e também da Secretaria Executiva de Comunicação da Unicamp. Você encontra a gente no site oxigenio.comciencia.br, no Instagram e no Facebook, basta procurar por Oxigênio Podcast.  Se você gostou do conteúdo, deixe seu like e compartilhe com seus amigos.

In this episode Miles is joined by Lesley Chamberlain to discuss her newly-published monograph, 'Undoing the Moral Empire: Moral Philosophy in post-War Britain'. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/undoing-the-moral-empire-9781350457751/ After 1945, Britain wanted to be a new country. The authority of state and church were giving way, the Empire was dismantled, and it was no longer clear who was leading whom in matters of morals. Individuals were left to reinvent their ethical lives anew. The lives and works of the philosophers discussed in this book were caught up this sea-change. Bernard Williams, Philippa Foot, Iris Murdoch, Richard Wollheim, Charles Taylor and Alasdair MacIntyre were all characters in search of a moral England, with a particular vision of the good society. From communitarianism to swinging Sixties' individualism, and radical theories of art – which understood questions of ambiguity, error and forgiveness more than the state ever could – this is the story of their sometimes convergent but often discrepant ideas on ethical life in the second half of the twentieth century. Undoing the Moral Empire is a work of biography, social history and the history of ideas that masterfully reconstructs the shifting sentiments of the post-war era, reconfiguring enduringly relevant questions of freedom, virtue, and society. Lesley is an author, literary critics and translator whose work has focused on Rilke, Nietzsche, German philosophy, Conservative Modern Russia, Heidegger, Van Gogh, Lenin, Freud, travel writing, cuisine in Russia and Poland, journalism and fiction – twelve books in all. She's also the author of the forthcoming chapter on Murdoch and Russian Literature in the Oxford Handbook of Iris Murdoch. This new book marks a homecoming for Lesley. You can find out much more about her work at her website: http://lesleychamberlain.co.uk/

Katja Hoyer is a German-British historian who has made a career out of explaining Germany to the world—and, just as importantly, to Germans themselves. Born in East Germany in 1985 and now based in Britain, she has written acclaimed histories of the German Empire, the GDR, and most recently the Weimar Republic. Tyler and Katja discuss why communism made East Germans more loyal to the system while it bred dissidents in Poland and Hungary, how happy or unhappy life in the GDR actually was, Tyler's own bleak day-trip to East Berlin in 1984, the underrated literature of the GDR (Christa Wolf, Brigitte Reimann), whether Good Bye, Lenin! got the era right, why it's no coincidence that Richter and Polke came from the East, the strange coexistence of communist prudishness and Germany's nudist culture, what Merkel's East German background did and didn't give her as a chancellor, why East Germans remain dramatically underrepresented in leadership positions today, what makes Weimar the cultural and spiritual heart of Germany, why relatively few Jews ever settled there, how much the citizens of Weimar knew about Buchenwald, what actually killed the Weimar Constitution, how she'd rewrite the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler's citizenship problem, underrated German thinkers, the complacency behind Germany's current economic decline, which side of the Weißwurstäquator she'd choose to live on, and much more. Read a full transcript enhanced with helpful links, or watch the full video on the new dedicated Conversations with Tyler channel. Recorded March 30th, 2026. Other ways to connect Follow us on X and Instagram Follow Tyler on X Follow Katja on X Sign up for our newsletter Join our Discord Email us: cowenconvos@mercatus.gmu.edu Learn more about Conversations with Tyler and other Mercatus Center podcasts here. Timestamps: 00:00:00 - Intro 00:05:34 - East German Artistic Creations  00:10:55 - Angela Merkel's East German Background 00:14:08 - East German Underrepresentation Today 00:17:02 - East Germans vs. West Germans 00:20:32 - Goethe and Weimar's Cultural Heritage 00:27:09 - What Weimar Knew About Buchenwald 00:31:10 - Why the Weimar Constitution Failed 00:35:21 - Prussia, Bavaria, and Where Nazism Took Root 00:38:23 - Rewriting the Treaty of Versailles 00:39:59 - Historical Antisemitism in Germany 00:42:27 - Hitler's Citizenship problem 00:45:14 - Weimar's Best Cultural Creations 00:47:02 - The Most Underrated German Thinker 00:49:07 - Improving Weimar 00:52:58 - Germany's Economic Malaise 00:55:38 - Living in Britain as a German Historian 01:00:49 - Outro

The Dean's List with Host Dean Bowen – The Marxists education system worked through fear . . students were raised to be afraid . . teachers discouraged creative thought. She was not allowed to sing in school unless it was a song praising communism or Lenin. As a ten year old, she realized she would not achieve any dreams of her own...

The Nobel family (which are the namesake of the Nobel prize), had a rags-to-riches story bigger than the Rockefellers or Morgans. The Nobel patriarch Emanuel fled debtor’s prison in 1837. He then travelled east and built a foundation for the largest oil empire in Russian history. Three generations of Nobels invented the world's first oil tanker, stopped the Royal Navy cold with undersea mines during the Crimean War, and outmaneuvered both Rockefeller and the Rothschilds in the world's first great corporate oil war. Then the Bolsheviks arrived. Lenin nationalized everything overnight, Stalin personally targeted the family patriarch for arrest, and the man who quietly made the Nobel Prize a reality had to escape revolutionary Russia in a horse-drawn cart wearing a disguise, with forged papers and three borrowed children to complete the ruse. It is one of the great lost stories of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, overshadowing the very prizes that bear the family name. Today's guest is Douglas Brunt, author of The Lost Empire of Emanuel Nobel. We discuss how capitalism and Marxism grew up in the same Russian cities before their catastrophic collision, why Emanuel Nobel defied the King of Sweden to ensure his uncle Alfred's will was honored, and what it actually looked like when Lenin's pen stroke erased three generations of Nobel engineering genius in a single day. We explore this story of oil, revolution, and a dynasty that fueled the world and then vanished.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Summary. The intent of this episode is to strengthen, not weaken, our concern for the plight of the poor. But deeply rooted in our commitment to love the poor must be a commitment to helping the poor and doing so in the right, God-ordained way. This episode seeks to call us to care for the poor, to shun passivity, but to understand the biblical guidance God gives for HOW to help, and not harm, them.For Further Prayerful Thought.What rationalizations among Christians have you seen for allowing American consumerism to shape us too much to care significantly about sacrificing to help the poor?Which instances of compassion without biblical wisdom stood out to you.Why do you think that selling the dream of utopia to the masses by Lenin in the Soviet Union, Mao in China and other communist dictators worked to cause them to overthrow the government allowing them to seize dictatorial control?For the printed version of this message click here.For a summary of topics addressed by podcast series, click here.For FREE downloadable studies on men's issues click here.To make an online contribution to enable others to hear about the podcast: (Click link and scroll down to bottom left)

En agosto de 1914 los diputados socialdemócratas alemanes votaron en el Reichstag a favor de los créditos de guerra para financiar la entrada del imperio alemán en la primera guerra mundial. Aquel gesto acabó con la idea que tenían los marxistas de la época de que el proletariado, hermanado por encima de las fronteras nacionales, jamás se mataría en una guerra imperialista. La solidaridad de clase se evaporó en pocos días y los obreros se decantaron por su propio país. Esa traición enfureció a Lenin, exiliado en Suiza, que concluyó que la socialdemocracia se había aburguesado y que había que demoler el viejo edificio socialista para crear una organización de auténticos revolucionarios. En una serie de conferencias minoritarias que dio en Suiza defendió que era el momento de transformar la guerra en una revolución. Eso mismo fue lo que sucedió en Rusia en octubre de 1917 y Lenin se sintió reivindicado. Pero sabía que con Rusia no bastaría para consolidar esa revolución porque era un país agrario y pobre. Tenían que exportar la revolución a Europa occidental, especialmente a Alemania, para que sobreviviese. Eso dio lugar en marzo de 1919 a la Tercera Internacional o Comintern, concebida desde el principio como el estado mayor de la revolución mundial. Su modelo era el partido bolchevique, una máquina centralizada en la que cada partido nacional sería una sección sometida a una disciplina única. El segundo congreso de 1920 fijó 21 condiciones de admisión que partieron al movimiento obrero en dos familias enfrentadas, la de los socialdemócratas y la de los comunistas. Pero la revolución mundial no llegaba. El Ejército Rojo fue derrotado en Varsovia, los comunistas alemanes fracasaron y el capitalismo se estabilizó gracias, entre otras cosas, a que los partidos socialdemócratas llegaron al poder en Alemania, Francia y el Reino Unido. Tras la muerte de Lenin en 1924, Stalin fue eliminando a sus rivales e impuso a la Comintern su teoría del socialismo en un solo país. El ascenso de los nazis al poder obligó a Stalin a hacer algo. En el séptimo congreso, celebrado en 1935, adoptaron la estrategia del Frente Popular, una alianza amplia antifascista que ganó las elecciones en Francia y España en 1936. España pasó entonces a ocupar un lugar central a causa de su guerra civil. La Comintern se encargó de reclutar soldados de 50 países a los que encuadró en las Brigadas Internacionales. Los soviéticos, entretanto, enviaron consejeros y material militar, este último pagado con las reservas del Banco de España. Pero la Comintern ya estaba en crisis, sus principales líderes cayeron durante la gran purga de 1938 y Stalin no le encontraba mucho sentido a aquel organismo. El pacto germano-soviético de 1939 supuso una humillación para los comunistas europeos, forzados a predicar la neutralidad hasta que la invasión alemana de la URSS en 1941 reactivó la cruzada antifascista. En mayo de 1943 Stalin decidió disolver la Comintern como gesto diplomático hacia sus aliados occidentales. Años después la sustituiría por una agencia mucho más pequeña, la Cominform, que tuvo muy poca actividad y desapareció tras su muerte. No hicieron falta más organizaciones para coordinar la actividad de los partidos comunistas. La URSS era ya una potencia mundial y podía llegar sin problemas a donde quisiese, cuando quisiese. En El ContraSello 0:00 Introducción 3:55 La Comintern 1:13:58 Los agentes dobles (y triples) Bibliografía: - “Breve historia de la Unión Soviética” de Sheila Fitzpatrick - https://amzn.to/4enhrXA - “The Comintern” de Jeremy Agnew - https://amzn.to/49HVEav “The Comintern. A history of the Third International” de Duncan Dallas - https://amzn.to/3SmNzSA - “Comrades” de Robert Service - https://amzn.to/4ogZnly · Canal de Telegram: https://t.me/lacontracronica · “Contra el pesimismo”… https://amzn.to/4m1RX2R · “Hispanos. Breve historia de los pueblos de habla hispana”… https://amzn.to/428js1G · “La ContraHistoria del comunismo”… https://amzn.to/39QP2KE · “La ContraHistoria de España. Auge, caída y vuelta a empezar de un país en 28 episodios”… https://amzn.to/3kXcZ6i · “Contra la Revolución Francesa”… https://amzn.to/4aF0LpZ · “Lutero, Calvino y Trento, la Reforma que no fue”… https://amzn.to/3shKOlK Apoya La Contra en: · Patreon... https://www.patreon.com/diazvillanueva · iVoox... https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-contracronica_sq_f1267769_1.html · Paypal... https://www.paypal.me/diazvillanueva #FernandoDiazVillanueva #urss #unionsovietica Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

"For our demands most moderate are, We only want the earth." - James Connolly, 1907James Connolly is often portrayed as simply an Irish nationalist. This couldn't be further from the truth. The leader of the Easter rising, he was a revolutionary Marxist. His study of Marx and Engels guided his fight for an Irish socialist republic, independently bringing him to similar conclusions as Lenin and the Bolsheviks. From the question of national liberation, to international socialism, and the struggle for working class unity, Connolly's legacy offers invaluable lessons for revolutionaries today.In this presentation, Ben Curry (from the International Secretariat of the Revolutionary Communist International) explains the impact of Connolly's life and ideas. Connolly's unfinished work - for an Irish socialist republic, and a socialist world - is up to us to complete. Armed with his ideas, as well as those of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky, the working class will win.This presentation was recorded live in Toronto on May 19, 2026.Further reading:James Connolly and the Easter RisingIreland: Republicanism and Revolution Buy the book!Join the Revolutionary Communist Party

NotiMundo Estelar - Lenin Barreto, CAL admite a trámite juicio político contra Inés Manzano by FM Mundo 98.1

They tell you the modern surveillance state began in Moscow in 1917 — that Lenin invented it, that the KGB built the entire thing from scratch. That's too small of a story.The real surveillance state was built thirty-six years earlier, by a Russian son who watched his father die in the snow. He created an institution called the Okhrana — the Department for the Protection of Public Safety and Order — and operated it out of an ordinary-looking building on a canal in St. Petersburg called Fontanka 16. Over the next thirty-six years, his secret police invented every technique that would later define the Cheka, the NKVD, the KGB, the Stasi, and almost every modern intelligence service. Mail interception. Agent provocateurs. Police-controlled unions. Forged documents for narrative management. Double agents inside revolutionary movements who reported back to the state.This isn't conspiracy. It isn't ideology. It's architecture — and the architecture survives the regime that built it.In this video:→ Why Alexander III's response to his father's assassination created the prototype for every modern police state→ How the Okhrana intercepted the entire Russian mail system before wiretaps existed→ The agent provocateur invention — and the moment the state realized infiltration was more powerful than arrest→ Zubatovshchina: police-run unions, the original "controlled opposition" architecture→ The two greatest double agents in the history of political infiltration — Yevno Azef and Roman Malinovsky→ How the Bolsheviks studied the Okhrana files and built every Soviet intelligence service on the same blueprintSubscribe to Hidden Forces in History for civilizational autopsies of the empires, institutions, and patterns shaping the world we live in now.CHAPTERS:00:00 The Surveillance State Begins With a Bomb01:21 March 1881: Alexander III's Decision02:43 Fontanka 1603:35 Perlustration: The Mail Was the First Internet06:08 The Invention of the Agent Provocateur08:36 Zubatovshchina: When the Police Built the Unions10:38 Bloody Sunday: The System Creates the Revolution11:30 The Paris Office: From Surveillance to Narrative Management13:12 Azef and Malinovsky: The Provocateur System at Scale15:22 1917: The Bolsheviks Inherit the Blueprint17:19 Same Playbook, Different Century

Teatro Gran Pilar Alejandro Dolina, Patricio Barton, Gillespi Introducción • 0:08:48 Presentación en Pilar y próximas funciones en La Plata, Rosario y Avellaneda Segmento Inicial • 0:13:04 La venganza de los mozos • 0:19:11 Clientes difíciles, maltrato al mozo y pedidos absurdos • 0:23:11 Propinas, permanencia después del cierre y pequeñas venganzas del restaurante • 0:31:50 Maltrato a los mozos como criterio para juzgar a una persona Segmento Dispositivo • 0:50:46 Lenin, Krupskaya e Inesa Armand • 0:53:39 Dudas sobre el mito de la abstinencia de Lenin y repaso biográfico • 0:57:05 Encuentro con Inesa en París y vínculo amoroso con aceptación de Krupskaya • 1:04:45 Muerte de Inesa, deterioro de Lenin y ocultamiento soviético de la relación • 1:08:10 "Vivir sin tu amor" ♫ Segmento Humorístico • 1:12:09 Peligro en el patio de su casa • 1:13:16 Accidentes de patio: rejillas, caídas, sillas de plástico y electricidad • 1:16:57 Relato de Dolina atrapado por el pie en una rejilla y rescate del sodero • 1:28:31 Riesgos por viento, objetos sueltos, picaduras y plantas tóxicas Sordo Gancé / Trío Sin Nombre • 1:39:18 Presentación del Trío Sin Nombre • 1:40:39 "Friday I'm in Love" ♫ • 1:44:54 "La rueda mágica" ♫ • 1:48:47 "Al pie de tu ventana" ♫ • 1:50:21 "Ropa sucia" ♫ • 1:53:35 "Blue Moon" ♫ (Resumen generado automáticamente con IA, puede contener errores)

In The Death of Trotsky, Josh Ireland describes how the intellectual Trotsky and bureaucratic Stalin competed for power following Lenin's death. Stalin maneuvered patiently to isolate Trotsky, who missed Lenin's funeral while recovering from a mysterious and poorly timed illness. (2/16)1902

SCHEDULE THE JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW-5-25-2026.1789 NEW YORK.Guest Author Josh Ireland discusses his book The Death of Trotsky: The True Story of the Plot to Kill Stalin's Greatest Enemy. The Russian Revolution began with Bolshevik fanatics using violence to impose their will on the masses. Irelandexplains the emerging rivalry between Trotsky and Stalin amidst the brutal purge of original revolutionaries. (1/16)In The Death of Trotsky, Josh Ireland describes how the intellectual Trotsky and bureaucratic Stalin competed for power following Lenin's death. Stalin maneuvered patiently to isolate Trotsky, who missed Lenin's funeral while recovering from a mysterious and poorly timed illness. (2/16)Josh Ireland explains that Trotsky was expelled from the Politburo after labeling Stalin the "gravedigger of the revolution." He began a global exile, eventually finding sanctuary in Mexico at the invitation of muralist Diego Rivera. (3/16)Josh Ireland details how, in Mexico, Trotsky faced constant threats from Stalin's assassins. Despite the fortified walls of his compound, the NKVD relentlessly monitored his correspondence and successfully infiltrated his inner circle with undercover agents. (4/16)Josh Ireland recounts how the Mercader family, led by the radicalized Caridad, was recruited by the NKVD during the Spanish Civil War. Her son Ramon was trained as a ruthless agent capable of carrying out high-stakes assassinations. (5/16)Josh Ireland describes how Ramon Mercader seduced Sylvia Ageloff to penetrate Trotsky's inner circle under a false identity. Meanwhile, a chaotic machine-gun raid by Stalinist gunmen failed to kill Trotsky, leading to even tighter security measures. (6/16)Josh Ireland recounts how Ramon Mercader used a mountaineer's ice pick to fatally wound Trotsky inside his study. Captured by guards, Ramon maintained a web of lies to conceal his true role as a Soviet operative. (7/16)Josh Ireland explains that following Trotsky's death, Ramon served twenty years in a Mexican prison before returning to Moscow as a hero. Trotsky's wife, Natalia, lived a diminished final chapter after losing her entire family. (8/16)Guest Author Edward J. Larson discusses his book Declaring Independence: Why 1776 Matters. The unprovoked burning of Norfolk, Virginia, by the Royal Navy in January 1776 served as a catalyst for independence. This violence convinced many colonists that reconciliation with the British Crown was impossible. (9/16)In Declaring Independence, Edward J. Larson describes how Henry Knox executed a daring winter transport of heavy artillery from Fort Ticonderoga to Boston. This logistical feat allowed Washington to fortify Dorchester Heights, forcing the British to evacuate the city. (10/16)Edward J. Larson recounts how Washington attempted to defend New York against a massive British armada. The Howe brothers tried to negotiate a peace deal, but American commitment to independence remained firm despite the overwhelming force. (11/16)Edward J. Larson explains that George Mason drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights while Washington realized he must preserve his army through retreat. The revolution shifted toward establishing independent state governments based on popular sovereignty. (12/16)Edward J. Larson details how, during a grueling retreat through New Jersey, Thomas Paine's The American Crisisrevitalized colonial spirits. British and Hessian atrocities against civilians further alienated the population and strengthened the resolve for independence. (13/16)Edward J. Larson recounts how Abigail Adams urged her husband to "remember the ladies" during the debates over independence. Revolutionary ideals of equality began to raise significant questions regarding the status of women and enslaved people. (14/16)Edward J. Larson describes how Washington led a desperate Christmas crossing of the Delaware River to surprise the Hessians at Trenton. The subsequent victory at Princeton provided the moral triumph needed to sustain the struggling Continental Army. (15/16)Edward J. Larson explains that the formal signing of the Declaration of Independence marked a permanent break with monarchy. New state constitutions prioritized popular sovereignty, establishing the rule of law as the foundation of the Republic. (16/16)

Darrell Castle talks about President Trump’s recent summit with Premier Xi in China and points out the similarities with President Nixon’s summit in China in 1972. Transcription / Notes NIXON WENT TO CHINA TOO Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today's Castle Report. This is Friday the 22nd day of May in the year of our Lord 2026. President Trump just completed a three-day historic summit with Premier Xi in China. He is not the first President to visit China since President Nixon made that trip in 1972 when China was a far different nation than today as it was in the throes of suffering through the Maoist revolution. This is the Friday before Memorial Day when we pause to remember the fallen and for most it is the start of a 3-day weekend, but for Joan and I it is a different sort of anniversary to remember. Forty-nine years ago, on this date we saw each other for the first time because we were introduced on a blind date with mutual friends. So, we met forty-nine years ago on this date and we have been together ever since but our actual anniversary, the forty-nine will be in December. This Memorial Day falls 81 years after the end of World War ll, seventy-seven years after the end of the Korean War, and fifty-one years after the end of the Vietnam War. I guess the other wars, the desert wars, are still going on. Since we are into a little nostalgia this week and to prevent burying the lead it was 54 years ago that Nixon made his historic trip to China. It was historic because China and the US, although friends in World War ll had been bitter enemies for 23 years or since the Maoist revolution. The governing principle upon which the Chinese government has been based for all those years now 77 has been that capitalism would inevitably fail, and communism would ultimately triumph around the world. The triumph would come by way of revolution as it did in China but with the aid of countries where the Communist revolution had already occurred. That principle explains why the real enemy of the Western forces fighting in Korea and Vietnam was China and Russia, not North Korea and North Vietnam. When Nixon arrived in China in 1972 the Communist Revolution had been ongoing since 1949 or 23 years but China had not fared well under Communism. It was a desperately poor, agrarian society in which the people were making little or no progress. There was very little indoor plumbing, especially in rural areas, and very little access to electricity. GDP per capita was barely at subsistence levels. Unlike today, China was technologically backward with a massive military but unable to technically compete. Trade with China was at $95.9 million and Nixon sought to build a bridge across the hostility of that world. He famously declared it “the week that changed the world.” President Clinton had a different approach to China because he apparently believed that massive technology transfers and resulting economic success would ease tensions and result in a more peaceful world. In 2000 he gave the Chinese PNTR or Permanent Normal Trade Relations and supported Chinese membership in the WTO or World Trade Organization in 2001. Before Chinese entry into the WTO the US-China trade deficit was about $83 billion but by 2015 it was $367 billion. Chinese imports into the US also surged massively with an estimated replacement of US jobs at about 2.4 to 3.4 million. Communities built in the US around the manufacture of electronics, clothing, furniture, automobiles, and other products were devastated and became just the rust belt. Nixon visited a weak, agrarian society but the new economic policies turned it into an economic and military superpower. Now President Trump has visited this country which has been hostile to the United States for 77 years. Trump's approach to negotiating is to assume he has the strength in the relationship and to use it to his advantage. Tariffs, export controls, global alliances, and military power are all used in an effort to help benefit US farmers, manufacturers, energy workers, and many others. I predict that Trump's trip to China will prove similar to Nixon's in some ways. They both sought direct personal negotiation producing tangible economic benefits to both sides with protection from dangerous strategic competition. There is a knowledge or at least an assumption that President Clinton's belief that economic success alone would moderate strategic behavior did not work and guardrails have to be installed and adhered to. Nixon engaged an impoverished third-world China for the purpose of using it to counter the Soviets. Trump engaged a powerful superpower to prevent it from obtaining or maintaining dominance in key areas. He got a public commitment from Xi to stop supplying weapons to Iran and to not aid in Iranian nuclear efforts. I have some thoughts on Xi's statement about Iranian efforts to develop nuclear weapons. In my view his statement meant nothing or it was what in the law is referred to as legal fiction. He said that Iran should not have nuclear weapons and Iran should reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Well of course for the world's economies the Strait should be reopened; a no brainer. Both sides know that nukes are not the reason for the attack on Iran and not the real reason for the continuation of the war. Thomas Massie just found out in his Republican primary what the real reason is. If the Israel lobby or the friends of Israel wants you out of congress then you are out of congress. There aren't many surviving Republicans who are not totally sold out the Israel lobby. Rand Paul is an example and Thomas Massie was another. So almost no Republicans and about the same number of Democrats although some Democrats seem to survive without total subservience. If there are grounds for optimism coming from the summit they can be found in Xi's public speech or at least that's how I see them. The English version of Xi's speech comes to me via George Friedman and his Geopolitical Futures so quoting Mr. Xi. “Honorable President Donald J. Trump, ladies and gentlemen, friends, looking back at the cause of China-U.S. relations, whether or not we could have mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation is the key to whether the relationship can advance steadily. The world today is changing and turbulent. China-U.S. relations concern the well-being of over 1,7 billion people of both countries and affect the interests of the over 8 billion people of the world. Both sides should rise up to this historic responsibility and steer the giant ship of China-U.S. relations forward steadily and in the right direction.” To me that statement says this is a multi-polar world and if we are to progress together and for the good of the world's people you must recognize that. If you are willing to do that then 77 years of hostility can end at least open hostility can end. President Trump probably had the speech examined by his China people and he probably pointed out the thousands of Chinese spies who occupy every university of note, every corporation of note and even hold political office. Yes the mayor of Alameda, California has confessed to being a Chinese agent. There are hardly any members of Congress or the Senate who haven't slept with at least one Chinese spy. Mr. Xi let me ask you this if the Chinese are so smart and so technologically proficient why do you have to steal your technology and your scientific advances from us. I'm just guessing but I imagine all those things were discussed. In short, China needs the American market to save its economy. In recent years economists have noted that Chinese domestic consumption has fallen off a cliff, but production is soaring. Thar means that China cannot absorb nearly enough of its production and needs the American market to do that. America needs China and Russia to help it find a face-saving exit from its war against Iran. You both control Iran and we will endeavor to control Netanyahu. To carry my point a little further Xi mentioned the Thucydides Trap in which the ancient Greek Geopolitical Thinker pointed out that when a rising power collides with an old power war is always the result. Xi said he hopes that can be avoided for China and the U.S. If that is the case and both sides want to avoid war then talking is at least the first step and a necessary one. To that end they have scheduled another summit for Washington in September, I think. Finally, folks, it seems to me that China has everything to lose and nothing to gain by war with the United States. George Friedman pointed out the fact that he mentioned Thucydides but did not mention Lenin, or Marx, and to me that's pretty significant and could mean a turning away from 77 years of false assumptions. Why are these two men meeting and negotiating, well, I think necessity is the mother of invention and right now they need each other. At least that's the way I see it, Until next time folks, This is Darrell Castle, Thanks for listening.

In his latest book "The Lost Empire of Alfred Nobel", New York Times Bestselling Author Douglas Brunt tells the fascinating tale of the rise and fall of the world's  largest oil dynasty. Emanuel Nobel took the reigns of his family's massive Russian petroleum conglomerate  just as the Automotive Age began and the steam engine was giving way to internal combustion. Oil had become the lifeblood of human endeavor.Nobel eclipsed business rivals like the Rothschilds and John D. Rockefeller and earned the favor of the Tsar himself. Yet just as he seemed invincible, the winds of war and political change swept over Imperial Russia and threatening his family fortune and even his life.It's a sweeping tale in the far-flung reaches of the Russian Empire from Baku on the Caspian Sea to the streets of Saint Petersburg, swirling with a cast of characters including The Romanovs, Rasputin, Lenin, Stalin, Rudolf Diesel, and Winston Churchill.  "The Lost Empire of Emanuel Nobel" is available now at fine booksellers everywhere.BUY “The Lost Empire of Emanuel Nobel”VISIT Douglas Brunt's WebsiteSUPPORT THE PODCASTSUBSCRIBE to Horsepower Heritage on YouTubeFIND US ON THE WEBINSTAGRAM: @horsepowerheritageSupport the showHELP us grow the audience! SHARE the Podcast with your friends!

By the 1930s, filmmakers had access to a backlog of footage from nearly forty years of motion pictures, allowing them to create a new kind of film stitched together from the raw material of older films. At around the same time, the transition to synchronous sound added a transformative new element to the grammar of cinema: the voiceover narration. Together, the film inventory and offscreen commentary gave rise to the archival documentary, the motion picture genre that preserves and rewinds history. In How Film Became History: The Rise of the Archival Documentary in 1930s America (Columbia University Press, 2026), Dr. Thomas Doherty tells the story of the archival documentary, spotlighting the first films that set out deliberately to preserve history on screen. He shows how newsreels and documentaries challenged the era's restrictive censorship and how film began to engage with the great political issues of the day. Doherty considers a range of films—some well-known, others obscure—including J. Stuart Blackton's The Film Parade (1933), Laurence Stallings and Truman Talley's The First World War (1934), Cornelius Vanderbilt Jr.'s Hitler's Reign of Terror (1934), Max Eastman and Herbert Axelbank's Tsar to Lenin (1937), and the March of Time screen magazine. Tracing the creation of the archival documentary, How Film Became History illuminates how motion pictures have come to shape our vision of the past. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. 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

By the 1930s, filmmakers had access to a backlog of footage from nearly forty years of motion pictures, allowing them to create a new kind of film stitched together from the raw material of older films. At around the same time, the transition to synchronous sound added a transformative new element to the grammar of cinema: the voiceover narration. Together, the film inventory and offscreen commentary gave rise to the archival documentary, the motion picture genre that preserves and rewinds history. In How Film Became History: The Rise of the Archival Documentary in 1930s America (Columbia University Press, 2026), Dr. Thomas Doherty tells the story of the archival documentary, spotlighting the first films that set out deliberately to preserve history on screen. He shows how newsreels and documentaries challenged the era's restrictive censorship and how film began to engage with the great political issues of the day. Doherty considers a range of films—some well-known, others obscure—including J. Stuart Blackton's The Film Parade (1933), Laurence Stallings and Truman Talley's The First World War (1934), Cornelius Vanderbilt Jr.'s Hitler's Reign of Terror (1934), Max Eastman and Herbert Axelbank's Tsar to Lenin (1937), and the March of Time screen magazine. Tracing the creation of the archival documentary, How Film Became History illuminates how motion pictures have come to shape our vision of the past. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Megyn Kelly is joined by Doug Brunt, author of "The Lost Empire of Emanuel Nobel," to discuss the real story behind Brunt's new book, the history of the oil industry in Russia, the story of good vs. evil and the live of Emanuel Nobel, the real story of Rasputin, how the Bolsheviks rose to power, Nobel's accomplishments, the shocking story of the various members of the Nobel family, the rise of Stalin and Lenin, Communism in Russia, how Brunt is already working on his third book, Tom Brady's all-leather look as he made his catwalk debut during the Gucci fashion show, whether he's had plastic surgery, Stephen Colbert's inappropriate comments about guests he's found attractive, Meghan Markle giving a speech no one showed up to after her cringe mirror selfie with her daughter Lilibet, and more.    Get Doug Brunt's new book here - https://www.amazon.com/Lost-Empire-Emanuel-Nobel-Revolutionaries/dp/1668074745   The Wellness Company: Don't let a sudden illness derail your summer—secure your peace of mind and save $45 on a Medical Emergency Kit today by visiting https://UrgentCareKit.com/MKand using promo code MK. Relief Factor: Break up with pain—Relief Factor targets inflammation so you can move better and feel better; try the 3-Week QuickStart for just $19.95 at https://ReliefFactor.com or call 800-4-RELIEF. Herald Group: Learn more at https://GuardYourCard.com Birch Gold: Text MK to 989898 for a free info kit and to see if you qualify for up to $10,000 back through May 29.     Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKelly Twitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShow Instagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShow Facebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow  Find out more information at:https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Douglas Brunt: Negroni (1 ounce gin, 1 ounce sweet vermouth, 1 ounce Campari, garnish with orange rind and Luxardo cherry) Elliot Ackerman (best selling author, former special forces and intelligence officer) guest-hosts Dedicated, including bartending, to interview Doug about THE LOST EMPIRE OF EMANUEL NOBEL. They discuss the world's century-long quest to capture oil, Russia and Ukraine from the time of Nobel and Stalin that mirrors the present day, Rasputin and the Romanovs, the differences between fiction and nonfiction writing (Elliot and Doug have each published both), and how to make a good cocktail.  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Linktree: ⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/Analytic⁠⁠Join The Normandy For Ad-Free NME, Additional Bonus Audio And Visual Content For All Things Nme+! Join Here:⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://ow.ly/msoH50WCu0K⁠⁠In this segment of Notorious Mass Effect, Analytic Dreamz explores the career of Lenin Ramírez and the viral success of his party anthem “Polvo Rosita.”Born Jesús Lenin Cota Ramírez on January 24, 1989, in Culiacán, Lenin Ramírez began singing at age four and songwriting at sixteen. He rose through the ranks with El Comando de Sinaloa before launching his solo career in 2015 with Mi Conquista. His albums Siempre Firme and Mi Puño y Letra established him as a key voice in Regional Mexican music, blending traditional corridos, Sinaloan banda, and modern corridos tumbados influences. As a songwriter for acts like Los Plebes del Rancho and Revolver Cannabis, he helped shape the genre's evolution.Analytic Dreamz breaks down “Polvo Rosita,” released March 29, 2024 via DEL Records. The high-energy corrido-style party track celebrates spontaneous romance, nightlife, dancing, and club culture with its signature lyric referencing “cuatro botellas y un polvo rosita.” The song exploded through TikTok in 2025–2026, fueled by dance challenges, party videos, and Mexican nightlife content, becoming a staple in Regional Mexican playlists.The segment covers its strong streaming performance on Spotify Mexico, where it reached the Top 10, along with millions of cumulative streams, YouTube video impact, and its role as a digital-first hit driven by social media rather than traditional radio.Analytic Dreamz delivers in-depth analysis on Lenin Ramírez's journey from songwriter to streaming star and what “Polvo Rosita” reveals about the current state of corridos and party anthems in Regional Mexican music.Privacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

The House votes to reopen the DHS and Democrats didn't get anything they wanted. King Charles wraps up his visit to the United States as Trump removes tariffs on Scottish whiskey. Hasan Piker ironically wore a $4,000 Cartier ring while on a train reading about Lenin. A liberal judge orders Texas to approve EPIC City's 402-acre Islamic ​community in the Dallas area.Thank you for supporting our sponsors that make The Dana Show possible…Fresh Pressed Olive Oilhttps://DanaLovesOliveOil.comTry it now and get a full-size $49 bottle of Fresh Pressed Olive Oil for FREE just pay $1 shipping with no commitment—Claim yours today.Pocket HoseText DANA to 64000For a limited time, get two FREE gifts—a 360° rotating pocket pivot and thumb drive nozzle when you buy a new Pocket Hose Ballistic; just text DANA to 64000, message and data rates may apply.Byrnahttps://Byrna.com/DanaTrusted by law enforcement, security professionals, and everyday Americans—defend yourself and your family with Byrna.PreBornhttps://www.PreBorn.com/Dana or #250 AND SAY “BABY”Help Preborn Fund 1,000 ultrasounds by Mother's Day, and protect mothers and babies in crisis. Give securely today.Ghost Bedhttps://GhostBed.com/DANAGhostBed has the cooling luxury mattress you need for deep sleep. Use code DANA for the lowest prices of the season + an extra 10% off sitewide.HumanNhttps://Humann.com/DanaSupport your heart health with SuperBeets Heart Chews Zero Sugar now Buy 2 get 1 Free. Visit today to learn how to get a Free 30-day supply. Ask ChapterDial #250 and say “My Medicare” Chapter can help you take control of your Medicare. Relief Factorhttps://www.ReliefFactor.comDeclare your independence from pain with Relief Factor—start the 3-Week QuickStart for just $19.95. Jones Roadhttp://JonesRoadBeauty.comFor a limited time, receive a free Shimmer Face Oil with your first purchase using code DANA.Patriot Mobilehttp://PatriotMobile.com/DANAVisit online or call 972-PATRIOT and use promo code DANA for a free month of service.Subscribe today and stay in the loop on all things news with The Dana Show. Follow us here for more daily clips, updates, and commentary:YoutubeFacebookInstagramXMore InfoWebsite

After returning to Russia, Kropotkin was captured and imprisoned. But his life took many turns from there, and in 1902 he published his book book “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution.” Research: "Peter Alekseevich Kropotkin." Encyclopedia of World Biography Online, Gale, 1998. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/K1631003701/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=ed5ae018. Accessed 23 Mar. 2026. Adams, Matthew S. “Rejecting the American Model: Peter Kropotkin’s Radical Communism.” History of Political Thought , Spring 2014, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Spring 2014). https://www.jstor.org/stable/26227268 Avrich, Paul, Miller, Martin A. "Peter Alekseyevich Kropotkin". Encyclopedia Britannica, 4 Feb. 2026, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Peter-Alekseyevich-Kropotkin. Accessed 23 March 2026. Avrich, Paul. “Kropotkin in America.” International Review of Social History , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , April 1980 , pp. 1 – 34 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859000006192. Davis, Mike. “Kropotkin and Climate Change.” Transnational Institute of Social Ecology. 1/4/2018. https://trise.org/2018/01/04/kropotkin-and-climate-change/ Kinna, Ruth. “Kropotkin's Theory of Mutual Aid in Historical Context.” International Review of Social History , AUGUST 1995, Vol. 40, No. 2. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44583751 Kropotkin, P. “Fields, Factories, and Workshops: or Industry Combined with Agriculture and Brain Work with Manual Work.” G.P. Putnam’s Sons. New York and London. 1913. Kropotkin, P. “Memoirs of a Revolutionist.” London. Swan Sonnenschein & Co. 1906. Kropotkin, P. “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution.” New York. McClure Phillips & Co. 1902. Kropotkin, Peter Alexeievich. "Memoirs of a Revolutionist." Terrorism: Essential Primary Sources, edited by K. Lee Lerner and Brenda Wilmoth Lerner, Gale, 2006, pp. 11-13. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3456600019/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=f35f5dcf. Accessed 23 Mar. 2026. Kropotkin, Peter. “Anarchism.” Encyclopedia Britannica 11th 1911. Kropotkin, Peter. “The Conquest of Bread.” New York. Vanguard Press. 1926. Macauley, David. "Anarchism." Encyclopedia of Environmental Ethics and Philosophy, edited by J. Baird Callicott and Robert Frodeman, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2009, pp. 38-40. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3234100023/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=d3a1d4db. Accessed 23 Mar. 2026. Montpetit, Mathilde. “Peter Kropotkin’s Memoirs of a Revolutionist (1899).” The Public Domain Review. 1/13/2026. https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/kropotkin-memoirs/ Moron, Gary Saul. “Kropotkin’s dead goose.” The New Criterion February 2022. Prince P. A. Kropotkin. Nature 106, 735–736 (1921). https://doi.org/10.1038/106735a0 Quinn, Adam. “’Abolish the Monopolizing of the Earth’: Nature, Science, and the Environmental Politics of Transnational Anarchism.” Radical History Review. Issue 145 (January 2023). DOI 10.1215/01636545-10063606 Saytanov, Sergey V. “The Anarchist Who Stood Up to Lenin and the Bolshevik Coup of October 1917.” History News Network. July 19, 2015. https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/article/the-anarchist-who-stood-up-to-lenin-and-the-bolshe Vollaro, Daniel. “When Anarchists Speak of Thoreau.” The Thoreau Society Bulletin, Spring 2016, No. 293 (Spring 2016). Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44651625 Wills, Matthew. “Peter Kropotkin, the Prince of Mutual Aid.” JSTOR Daily. 2/4/2025. https://daily.jstor.org/peter-kropotkin-the-prince-of-mutual-aid/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Peter Kropotkin was incredibly influential in the development of anarchism in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Part one of this subject focuses on the formative moments in his early life that contributed to his becoming an anarchist communist. Research: "Peter Alekseevich Kropotkin." Encyclopedia of World Biography Online, Gale, 1998. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/K1631003701/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=ed5ae018. Accessed 23 Mar. 2026. Adams, Matthew S. “Rejecting the American Model: Peter Kropotkin’s Radical Communism.” History of Political Thought , Spring 2014, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Spring 2014). https://www.jstor.org/stable/26227268 Avrich, Paul, Miller, Martin A. "Peter Alekseyevich Kropotkin". Encyclopedia Britannica, 4 Feb. 2026, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Peter-Alekseyevich-Kropotkin. Accessed 23 March 2026. Avrich, Paul. “Kropotkin in America.” International Review of Social History , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , April 1980 , pp. 1 – 34 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859000006192. Davis, Mike. “Kropotkin and Climate Change.” Transnational Institute of Social Ecology. 1/4/2018. https://trise.org/2018/01/04/kropotkin-and-climate-change/ Kinna, Ruth. “Kropotkin's Theory of Mutual Aid in Historical Context.” International Review of Social History , AUGUST 1995, Vol. 40, No. 2. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44583751 Kropotkin, P. “Fields, Factories, and Workshops: or Industry Combined with Agriculture and Brain Work with Manual Work.” G.P. Putnam’s Sons. New York and London. 1913. Kropotkin, P. “Memoirs of a Revolutionist.” London. Swan Sonnenschein & Co. 1906. Kropotkin, P. “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution.” New York. McClure Phillips & Co. 1902. Kropotkin, Peter Alexeievich. "Memoirs of a Revolutionist." Terrorism: Essential Primary Sources, edited by K. Lee Lerner and Brenda Wilmoth Lerner, Gale, 2006, pp. 11-13. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3456600019/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=f35f5dcf. Accessed 23 Mar. 2026. Kropotkin, Peter. “Anarchism.” Encyclopedia Britannica 11th 1911. Kropotkin, Peter. “The Conquest of Bread.” New York. Vanguard Press. 1926. Macauley, David. "Anarchism." Encyclopedia of Environmental Ethics and Philosophy, edited by J. Baird Callicott and Robert Frodeman, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2009, pp. 38-40. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3234100023/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=d3a1d4db. Accessed 23 Mar. 2026. Montpetit, Mathilde. “Peter Kropotkin’s Memoirs of a Revolutionist (1899).” The Public Domain Review. 1/13/2026. https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/kropotkin-memoirs/ Moron, Gary Saul. “Kropotkin’s dead goose.” The New Criterion February 2022. Prince P. A. Kropotkin. Nature 106, 735–736 (1921). https://doi.org/10.1038/106735a0 Quinn, Adam. “’Abolish the Monopolizing of the Earth’: Nature, Science, and the Environmental Politics of Transnational Anarchism.” Radical History Review. Issue 145 (January 2023). DOI 10.1215/01636545-10063606 Saytanov, Sergey V. “The Anarchist Who Stood Up to Lenin and the Bolshevik Coup of October 1917.” History News Network. July 19, 2015. https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/article/the-anarchist-who-stood-up-to-lenin-and-the-bolshe Vollaro, Daniel. “When Anarchists Speak of Thoreau.” The Thoreau Society Bulletin, Spring 2016, No. 293 (Spring 2016). Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44651625 Wills, Matthew. “Peter Kropotkin, the Prince of Mutual Aid.” JSTOR Daily. 2/4/2025. https://daily.jstor.org/peter-kropotkin-the-prince-of-mutual-aid/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.