Podcasts about lenin

Today on the show we're talking about indigenous artists. Some have been on our radar for years, others are newer faves. But all of them remind us that indigenity is past, present and future. Discussing music by Mare Advertencia, Lido Pimienta, La MafiAndina, Armacústica, LENIN, Natalia LaFourcade and Ruben Blades Order our new book, MUE´VELO here: bit.ly/433NaH0 Check out our book events: radiomenea.com/events

Has the altar of Satan, discovered in the city of Pergamon, shaped the darkest events of the past two centuries? This is a deep dive with bestselling author Jonathan Cahn into his thrilling new book “The Altar of Pergamon: The Mystery of the Dark Angel and the Future of the World. Also, who was the strange male voice that told Lindsey Clancy to kill her children and herself? Is this psychosis or demonic possession, and might she be “not guilty by reason of demonic possession”? (2:14) Lindsay Clancy's Two Side(6:28) Are Psychiatrists Reliable?(11:05) Possession, Psychosis, or Murder(20:29) Guest Intro: Jonathan Kahn(21:06) Writing The Harbinger's Origins(29:15) The Throne of Satan(33:52) Digging Up the Altar(39:09) Hitler Born, Altar Assembled(42:36) Nazi Rise, Altar Unveiled(47:55) The Holocaust's Hidden Etymology(51:28) Karl Marx's Satanic Turn(54:16) Stalin, Lenin, and Altar(1:00:44) Cuban Missile Crisis, Pergamon(1:07:26) Obama and the Altar(1:11:07) Antichrist and Temple Mount If you’re tired of broken healthcare you need to choose the right pharmacy. Check them out at allfamilypharmacy.com/dinesh and use code DINESH10 to save 10% off your next order. Leave the old “buy and hold” crypto strategy behind at https://DineshCrypto.com ! Purchase crypto with military grade encryption and American customer service. Hundreds of crypto holders have saved MILLIONS thanks to BlockTrustIRA’s Animus AI. Visit https://DineshCrypto.com and receive up to $2,500 in FREE bonus crypto! America has nearly 39 trillion dollars in debt! Are you protected from this pending disaster? Go to http://DineshGold.com and get up to 10% in bonus gold or silver. I’m on substack! Check out what I have to say here: https://dineshdsouza.substack.com/ For free and unbiased Medicare help, dial (706) 262-4774 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter, or go to https://askchapter.org/dinesh" Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan’s contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don’t directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options. Dinesh D'Souza is an author and filmmaker. A graduate of Dartmouth College, he was a senior domestic policy analyst in the Reagan administration. He also served as a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of many bestselling books, including "Illiberal Education," "What's So Great About Christianity," "America: Imagine a World Without Her," "The Roots of Obama's Rage," "Death of a Nation," and "United States of Socialism." His documentary films "2016: Obama's America," "America," "Hillary's America," "Death of a Nation," and "Trump Card" are among the highest-grossing political documentaries of all time. He and his wife Debbie are also executive producers of the acclaimed feature film "Infidel." — Want to connect with Dinesh D'Souza online for more hard-hitting analysis of current events in America? Here’s how: Get Dinesh unfiltered, uncensored and unchained on Locals: https://dinesh.locals.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dsouzadinesh Twitter: https://twitter.com/dineshdsouza Rumble: https://rumble.com/dineshdsouza Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dineshjdsouzaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we step back from the specific history of Congo to examine the broader theoretical framework of neocolonialism – and how the decline of formal empire prepared the ground for the neoliberal revolution.Drawing on thinkers from Marx and Lenin to J.A. Hobson and Rosa Luxemburg, we explore the purpose of empire from the perspective of capital: the pursuit of cheap resources, cheap labour, and captive markets. Britain's transformation from a middling European kingdom to a global superpower was built on the extraction of wealth from its colonies – from the opium trade with China to the slave‑based sugar and cotton economies to the systematic deindustrialisation of India.But what happens when empire becomes unsustainable? In India, the British lost control of the Indian Army in 1946, and with it, their ability to monopolise armed force. By the 1950s and 60s, most of Britain's African colonies were gone. Yet the flow of wealth from the Global South to the City of London did not stop. It continued through neocolonialism – debt, the Bretton Woods institutions, corporate infiltration, and support for pliant regimes.And then came neoliberalism. As the returns from empire declined, capitalist elites in the Global North turned inward, cannibalising their own societies through privatisation, the erosion of welfare states, and the breaking of organised labour. The neoliberal revolution was, in part, a response to the crisis of empire – a way to maintain elite wealth and power when the old imperial structures could no longer deliver.We also consider the explicitly colonial and eugenic thinking of some neoliberal architects, and the destructive consequences of imposing market logic on societies with no history of it. From the mass unemployment of Thatcher's Britain to the ongoing exploitation of Africa, the arc of capital bends towards extraction – and the people always pay the price.Topics covered:Marxist and liberal theories of imperialism (Hobson, Lenin, Luxemburg)Britain's transition from formal empire to neocolonialismThe loss of control over the Indian Army in 1946The Bretton Woods institutions and the weaponisation of debtNeoliberalism as a response to the decline of empireThe cannibalisation of Western welfare statesThe role of organised labour and the defeat of the minersThe eugenic and colonial thinking of neoliberal theoristsIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

(01:00)  Boven een Gronings graanveld torent deze dagen een enorm beeld van Lenin. Dat is daarheen versleept voor De Graanrepubliek, een toneelvertaling van het beroemde boek van Frank Westerman over de arbeidersgeschiedenis van de regio. Na het toneelstuk zal het beeld elders in de gemeente Oldambt neergezet worden, maar juist daar is nu discussie over ontstaan. Want moet je dat wel willen, zo'n immens beeld in de gemeente van deze Sovjetleider? We praten over dit beeld en het toneelstuk met regisseur Tom de Ket. (13:17) Oude woorden nieuwe wereld - de serie van OVT over historische boeken die ons het heden beter doen begrijpen. Welke echo's uit het verleden schudden ons wakker, geven houvast of bieden troost? Deze week praten we met onderzoeksjournalist Thomas Muntz over The public and it's problems (1927) van John Dewey. (55:07) Deze zomer duiken we in een wereld van muziek die meer deed dan alleen vermaken. In onze rubriek Historische Protestsongs hoor je de verhalen achter de liedjes die wereldwijd aanzette tot denken, actie of verzet. In deze aflevering een lied uit Noord-Macedonië: Kales bre andjo - Esma Redžepova. Dat lied gaan we bespreken met journalist en schrijver en historicus Arja Mari. (01:07:46) We gaan met Frank Vermeulen, oud-correspondent in Indonesië en zoon van een Indonesië-veteraan, in gesprek over zijn nieuwe boek “Masdoelhak en Adriana. Of de toegedekte moorden van de Indonesië-oorlog.” Hij werkte jarenlang door de archieven om een van de duizenden moorden uit die oorlog tot op de bodem uit te zoeken: die op de hoge Indonesische ambtenaar Masdoelhak Nasoetion.  Normaal gesproken sluiten wij de podcast af met een van onze documentaires. Doordat wij deze zomer in ons radioprogramma bijzonder goeie historische documentaires van andere programma's en omroepen uitzenden, voegen we deze niet aan onze podcast toe. Mocht je de documentaire van deze week 'De Guy van Oma' willen terugluisteren kan dat hier (https://www.nporadio1.nl/podcasts/docs/130764/250-de-guy-van-oma).    Meer info:  https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-16-augustus-2026  (https://www.vpro.nl/ovt/artikelen/ovt-16-augustus-2026)

Daniel Tutt and returning guest C. Derick Varn join Steve to discuss their new book, The People Are Not One: Socialist Strategy After Left Populism, whose title states its thesis outright. When the left speaks of a unified people confronting a corrupt elite, it conceals the real stratifications inside the working class and borrows a Manichean framework that functions identically on the right. Their argument: since 2008, from Occupy through Syriza, Podemos, Corbyn, and Sanders, left populism has served to extinguish the class antagonism at the center of socialism, operating as a new Popular Front in which liberalism holds the upper hand.The conversation lands directly on this show's own history. Varn is blunt about his long-running argument with MMT advocates: he never disputed the nature of the currency, he disputed the analysis of power. They are not going to let you have a Job Guarantee, because it removes their ability to discipline workers. Steve agrees, describing his own path out of economism and the trap of thinking a basket of policies and a few more progressives in office adds up to a threat to capital.On class consciousness, Varn is careful with a term he calls one of the most abused in socialist history. The reason to organize around the working class is not its victimhood. It is that the working class already possesses, collectively, the skills to reproduce society. The differences within the working class are resolvable. The difference between the working class and those who live off its labor is not.They close on electoralism. Varn's formulation: electoralism is a tactic, not a principle. Democracy is the principle. Tutt points to Lenin's actual position, that ballots are justified only alongside extra-parliamentary means and on terms of strict class independence. The Popular Front let liberalism lead. The United Front did not.If you've followed this show from Ep 218 - Beware! the Counter-Revolution with C. Derick Varn, through Ep 318 - The Death of the Left? with Simon Winlow & Steve Hall, Ep 371 - You Can't Vote Away Colonialism with Fadhel Kaboub, and Ep 388 - From Theory to Praxis: Lenin's Revolutionary Formula with Breht O'Shea, this episode is the strategic argument those conversations kept circling. Daniel Tutt is the author of Psychoanalysis and the Politics of the Family and How to Read Like a Parasite. His writing has been featured in Jacobin, Current Affairs, Philosophy Now and Aeon Magazine. He is the host of the Emancipations podcast and study group collective. Find him on Twitter @TuttReal or his Substack: https://danieltutt.substack.com/aboutC. Derick Varn is an author, poet, and educator, and host of the podcast Varn Vlog, where he publishes podcasts and series on the great thinkers, and interviews authors and academics. He is the author of Apocalyptics and Liberation and All That Bright Etc. He has been a union rep for the past six years. Find him on Twitter @TheRealVarnVlog or his podcast https://varnvlog.buzzsprout.com/

In part two of our deep dive into China (and part four of our socialist organization series), we break down how Mao attempted to dialectically sublate a national front and a united front. We explore the structural inclusion of the "patriotic national bourgeoisie" into the block of four classes (symbolized by the stars on the Chinese flag) and contrast it with classical Soviet developmental theory and orthodox Marxism.We also dive into:- The historical debate between Chen Duxiu, Li Dazhao, Lenin, and Trotsky.- Why modern "Hoxhaists" and Left Communists consider New Democracy to be revisionist.- The evolution of class structures under Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin's "Three Represents" doctrine (allowing billionaires into the Party).- The reality of modern China's development: Is it a transitioning socialist project, or an hyper-competent form of state capitalism and developmental liberalism?Don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell for Episode 5, where we pivot to National Frontism and National Bolshevism.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 

 “He's not a trustworthy witness to his own story. Everything is ten times bigger and better than it really was — except when he was accused of crimes, in which case he can't really remember anymore.” — Joby Warrick on Carlos the Jackal Yesterday, WOLA's Adam Isacson and John Walsh described how the US government has appropriated the term “narco-terrorism” to justify their Latin American killing spree. Today, we talk the real thing. Pulitzer Prize-winning Joby Warrick has a new book out about the rise and fall of Carlos the Jackal, who he calls the “original super-terrorist.” So who was Carlos the Jackal? Originally he was named by his Venezuelan Marxist father Ilich in homage to Lenin. Then he renamed himself Carlos, borrowing from a fake passport the French police happened to find in 1975. While The Jackal came from the London Guardian after reporters spotted Frederick Forsyth's best-seller on the bookshelf of his London safe house. Ilich (i.e. Carlos) loved it. Anything for attention. Especially from the capitalist media. His career, as a proxy Palestinian terrorist, was equally audacious. His solo debut, at 24, was the attempted London assassination of Marks & Spencer chairman Joseph Sieff. Two years later, Carlos waltzed into OPEC headquarters in Vienna and kidnapped most of the world's oil ministers, a terrorist heist that, Warrick reveals, was financed by Muammar Gaddafi. Then all of Carlos' yesterdays — and there are many, as Warrick discovers when he interviews him in his French jail. He spent twenty years on the run, mostly barely camouflaged in faded Eastern European hotels. The Mossad didn't even consider him worth assassinating. By the eighties he had become a gun for hire who'd stopped attacking Israelis. And at 75, in his convent-turned-prison outside Paris, the world's original super-terrorist cooks his own meals, repeats old leftist slogans, and misremembers everything except his innocence. In spite of his pathetic fate, Carlos matters because, as Warrick notes, the Jackal model is back in fashion. Russia and Iran now hire petty crooks on Telegram for a few hundred dollars to firebomb synagogues or assassinate dissidents. Gaza's tragic hopelessness echoes the post-1967 conditions that bred the first wave of Palestinian terror. Social media is now infested with wannabe violent influencers. The day of the Jackal, then, is not only our history but also our future. Five Takeaways •       Interview with the Jackal. Warrick negotiated for over a year — with Carlos, then with a French government determined he not be glorified, since his gravest crimes were against French citizens — for roughly ninety minutes in March 2025, no recorder, no camera, notebook only. The prison is a converted sixteenth-century convent outside Paris where the Nazis once tortured members of the Resistance; inside it, Carlos remains the big man on campus — guards call him Carlos, not Ilich, and he keeps a large cell, cooks his own meals, and browses the internet. At 75 he is natty, polyglot, charming — and stooped, forgetful, repeating himself into what Warrick calls a fog of old memories. As a witness he is worthless: everything ten times bigger and better than it was, except the crimes, which he suddenly cannot recall.•       Ilich, Carlos, Jackal: An Accidental Brand. His ardent-Marxist father named his three sons Vladimir, Ilich, and Lenin, after the founder of the Soviet Union. “Carlos” came from a fake passport — Carlos Martinez — that French police happened to seize in 1975; the pudgy dark-glasses photo the world memorized was a passport fake he remains embarrassed by. “The Jackal” was coined by the British tabloids after reporters prowling his London safe house spotted Forsyth's The Day of the Jackal on the bookshelf. He embraced all of it: a true believer whose slogans still pour out in prison, welded to a massive ego that always placed Carlos at the center of the revolution. Had Instagram existed, Warrick agrees, he'd have used it — the pre-digital influencer, with the world's press as his platform.•       From Five Bullets to Kidnapping OPEC. His 1970 baptism of fire in the Black September fighting hardened him past the point of return; his solo test, at 24, was the attempted assassination of Marks & Spencer chairman Joseph Sieff — an old gun, five bullets, a jam, and a bullet deflected by the victim's teeth (“good old Milk Marketing Board,” Sieff told the BBC from his hospital bed). The masterpiece came in December 1975: a 26-year-old walks into OPEC's Vienna headquarters mid-conference, takes the world's oil ministers hostage, extracts a plane and a ransom, and flies them to North Africa — the most audacious terrorist act Warrick can name. The book's scoop settles who sponsored it: not Saddam Hussein, as biographers and a 2010 docudrama claimed, but Muammar Gaddafi — the autocrat pioneering the criminal proxy with no return address.•       Twenty Years, No Capture — and a Mossad Pass. The world's most wanted man spent two decades in comfort: Budapest his favorite hideout (good meals, nice hotels — Carlos insisted on top-flight everything), the Hungarians, East Germans, and Romanians almost proud to host their superstar guest, Assad's Syria always available. The run ended only when the Bloc fell and the Arab states tired of him; the French and Americans finally tracked him to Khartoum in 1994. The great deflation is the Mossad: they never bothered with him. His mentor Wadi Haddad — the true operational genius — they hunted and killed; Carlos, by then a mercenary who'd stopped attacking Israelis, simply fell down the priority list. The world's most fearsome terrorist wasn't worth Israel's effort.•       The Return of Violent Chaos. Warrick's closing argument, and the reason this history is news: the Gaddafi model has been rediscovered. Russia and Iran now hire criminals — recruited on Telegram, paid a few hundred dollars in crypto — to throw grenades into synagogues, set fires, and assassinate dissidents: hundreds of incidents already, most under the radar, none traceable to Moscow or Tehran. The modern Carlos works for whoever pays; ideology has left the business entirely. Gaza's hopelessness, meanwhile, mirrors the post-1967 despair that launched the first international terror wave — and we are not prepared. As for America's own extrajudicial turn, from drone war to boat strikes: “There's no precedent... it is a grave change for us as Americans. Very troubling to me.” About the Guest Joby Warrick is a two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and veteran national security correspondent for The Washington Post. His books include The Triple Agent, Red Line, and Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS, winner of the 2016 Pulitzer Prize for General Nonfiction. The Jackal: The Rise and Fall of Carlos, the World's First Super-Terrorist (Scribner, August 18, 2026), built on newly declassified archives, secret police files, and a rare interview with Carlos himself, is out next week.

Lenin Movie

¿Y si la crisis ecológica actual tuviera que ver con nuestra relación con la naturaleza? Es lo que afirma el antropólogo francés Philippe Descola, conocido por haber trabajado varios años en la Amazonía ecuatoriana. En conversación exclusiva con RFI, Descola estima que la crisis ambiental resulta en gran parte de la visión occidental de la naturaleza. ¿Cómo habitar la tierra de forma más armoniosa? ¿Debe el mundo occidental reconectarse con la naturaleza para acabar con la crisis ecológica y climática y ambiental? A estas preguntas apremiantes en tiempos de cambio climático y de crisis de la biodiversidad, el antropólogo de la naturaleza, filósofo y profesor emérito del Collège de France, el Colegio de Francia, Philippe Descola (París, 1949), propone varias respuestas inspiradoras para la ecología política. En entrevista exclusiva con Radio Francia Internacional, el filósofo abordó también las resistencias ecologistas actuales, sus años de vida con el pueblo achuar en Ecuador así como la dominación masculina en numerosas sociedades. RFI: Su libro ‘Más allá de naturaleza y cultura', en el que usted teoriza y compara las diferentes formas que tienen los seres humanos de relacionarse con el medioambiente y los seres vivos, es una referencia. Últimamente ha publicado dos libros de entrevistas en los que afirma que para resolver la crisis ecológica Occidente tendría que alejarse de esta visión que usted llama ‘naturalista' que plantea que los seres humanos somos superiores o distintos de lo vivo. ¿Es esta visión binaria entre, por una parte, los humanos y, por otra parte, los no humanos, responsable de la triple crisis ecológica que vivimos actualmente, el cambio climático, la contaminación y la pérdida de biodiversidad? Philippe Descola: En gran parte, sí. Mi proposición es que desde el siglo XVII, cuando se estableció la odontología que llamo naturalista, es decir, esa idea de que los humanos son excepcionales entre los elementos del mundo porque tienen facultades cognitivas y morales especiales, esta idea vino enfatizándose a lo largo de los siglos XVIII y XIX. Entonces, ¿qué pasó? Los no humanos se convirtieron en cosas que podían ser el objeto de una mercantilización. Entonces, fue eso una condición que, creo, fue fundamental para la emergencia del capitalismo industrial en el siglo XIX. Y entonces no se puede separar la ontología naturalista de este movimiento que llevó a considerar ríos, animales y plantas como cosas para explotar y no como interlocutores. Escuche el audio completo de la entrevista: RFI: Su último libro se titula ‘Nous sommes les hôtes de la Terre'*. En francés, la palabra ‘hôtes', tiene dos sentidos, puede significar ‘huéspedes' o ‘anfitriones'. ¿Los seres humanos, los huéspedes de la tierra o los anfitriones de la Tierra? Philippe Descola: La palabra se refiere a la palabra “huésped”. Esta proposición sale de mi discusión de todos esos procesos recientes en los cuales medios de vida han sido convertidos en sujetos políticos a través de la atribución de una personalidad jurídica. Estamos como humanos acogidos en este medio de vida y somos huéspedes. Entonces es una buena manera de concebir que no somos los dueños y poseedores de la naturaleza según la famosa fórmula de Descartes, sino que somos huéspedes, es decir, que es nuestra pertenencia medio de vida que fundamenta nuestra existencia social y no el hecho de apropiarse este mundo. RFI: Efectivamente es una pequeña revolución jurídica que se está viviendo en muchos países, desde Nueva Zelanda, pasando por Colombia, Ecuador e incluso en Francia o España donde ríos o lagunas están recibiendo una personalidad jurídica. Se les otorga derechos jurídicos para defenderlos mejor. ¿Cómo analiza usted esta evolución en el mundo occidental? Philippe Descola: En Nueva Zelanda, en Colombia, con el río Atrato, por ejemplo, el medio de vida llega a ser dueño de sí mismo, llega a ser un sujeto político. Un sujeto político obviamente representado por humanos, porque el río Atrato no habla por sí mismo, sino a través de los portavoces que se escogen para representarlo. La otra posibilidad es el ejemplo que nos dan las comunidades indígenas en todo el mundo y en particular en esa parte del mundo que conozco un poco mejor, que es América Latina, donde estas comunidades, enfrentadas a la voracidad del capitalismo y en particular del capitalismo extractivista, idean nuevas formas de relacionarse en relación a un territorio que están basadas en parte en la concepción tradicional del territorio, no como un pedazo de tierra de uso exclusivo, sino como un lugar en donde se mezclan diferentes formas de apropiación de humanos y no humanos. Quiero enfatizar en este caso, que hay una diferencia entre reconocer una personalidad jurídica a un medio de vida y reconocer derechos a la naturaleza, como lo hicieron Ecuador y también Bolivia. Reconocer derechos a la naturaleza es reconocer derechos a una abstracción, porque la naturaleza, aun si se la llama Pachamama, es una abstracción, mientras que reconocer derechos a un medio de vida es reconocer derechos a un medio biofísico con sus habitantes, que es más fácil de delimitar y de definir con precisión. Y entonces lo que he podido constatar es que, tanto en Bolivia como en Ecuador, que conozco bastante bien por haber vivido varios años allá, este reconocimiento no ha tenido consecuencias mayores en términos de protección del medioambiente. No ha habido cambios fundamentales para las poblaciones indígenas en relación con el capitalismo extractivista.  RFI: Usted ha trabajado en Latinoamérica, y también se ha acercado a las resistencias políticas que ocurren en Europa, como en Francia, donde ha apoyado las “zonas a defender”, las “ZAD”, unos movimientos locales muy fuertes que han surgido contra megaproyectos de desarrollo como aeropuertos, autopistas o megaembalses. ¿Por qué representan estas resistencias, según usted, una posible respuesta a la crisis ecológica? Philippe Descola:  Me parecieron muy interesantes porque si uno compara esos procesos con lo que sucede con las poblaciones indígenas, los militantes de esas zonas a defender, de estos territorios alternativos, no fueron educados en comunidades indígenas. Entonces todas esas ideas de relación estrecha, íntima, armoniosa, con el medio ambiente, no las recibieron así a través de la educación, sino que inventaron formas específicas de relacionarse con un territorio, primero para defenderlo contra megaproyectos destructivos y después para habitar este territorio en una forma no destructiva y a través de una profunda identificación con los no humanos del territorio. Todos esos jóvenes y menos jóvenes han descubierto por sí mismos formas distintas de habitar un territorio en donde rechazan la propiedad privada, rechazan la explotación, la destrucción del medio ambiente y han desarrollado formas de trabajo en común, de producción no mercantil, de democracia participativa intensa. Y me parece que es una forma de ejemplaridad y una buena noticia para el futuro. RFI: También fue discípulo de Claude Lévi-Strauss. Y ha dicho en varias ocasiones que ha quedado impactado por sus años de trabajo etnográfico en Suramérica. Vivió tres años con el pueblo achuar en la Amazonía ecuatoriana. ¿Por qué esta experiencia fue un punto de inflexión en su trabajo de antropólogo, en su filosofía? Philippe Descola: Visité a los achuar para estudiar la forma en que ellos “socializan con la naturaleza”, así lo formulaba. Me di cuenta cuando empecé a entender y hablar un poco el idioma achuar, que este concepto de “naturaleza” no tenía ninguna vigencia para los achuar. Ellos concebían a las plantas, a los animales, a los espíritus como socios, como personas no humanas, como socios con los cuales se podía interactuar cotidianamente a través de plegarias mágicas que dirigían al alma de esos interlocutores, a través de las relaciones en los sueños y las visitas de los no humanos. Dándome cuenta de eso, cuando regresé para doctorado y me fijé de cierto modo un programa intelectual para toda mi carrera, que era entender las distintas formas en las cuales los humanos conciben continuidades y discontinuidades entre humanos y no humanos. Me di cuenta de que este modelo de la relación entre naturaleza y cultura era una cosa propiamente occidental. Con mucha ingenuidad, pensaba que era una cosa universal, porque yo me formé como filósofo y fui alumno de Claude Lévi-Strauss para quien la distinción entre naturaleza y cultura desempeña un papel importante. Cuando me di cuenta de que no era una cosa universal, empecé a estudiar - no directamente sino a través de la antropología comparativa -, todas las otras formas posibles que existen de interactuar entre humanos y no humanos que no sean a través de este modelo supuestamente universal que es la relación entre naturaleza y cultura. RFI: Usted cuenta que, después de su larga estancia en territorio achuar, a su regreso a Francia, se dio cuenta de la “violencia” del mundo occidental. ¿Cómo esta experiencia en Ecuador modificó su visión de nuestra sociedad occidental de consumo? Philippe Descola: Antes de viajar a Ecuador, había tenido una trayectoria de militante y entonces había leído a Marx, había leído a Lenin, había leído a Trotsky y yo sabía las cosas básicas de lo que es la explotación capitalista. Pero como persona nunca me encontré en una posición de ser explotado, de dominado. Venía de una familia de la burguesía parisina y nunca sufrí en mi persona, digamos, de la explotación capitalista directa. Después viví tres años con los Ashuar, con gente que no tenía trabajo asalariado ni moneda. En un mundo en el cual no había diferencias de estatuto económico político y después de haberme de cierto modo acostumbrado a esta forma de vivir, regresé a Francia y vi inmediatamente todo lo que había leído. Lo que Marx llama el fetichismo de la mercancía, es decir, el hecho de que de cierto modo los humanos se convierten en mercancías a través de sus interacciones e intercambios de mercancías. Y esto me cogió de una forma brutal, porque yo miraba a mi propia sociedad con los ojos de los Achuar, por haber compartido su vida. Su vida me parecía normal. No era una cosa para estudiar, sino una forma de vivir que yo había compartido. Y desde este momento, esta experiencia me enseñó una especie de revuelta que todavía no está pagada. RFI: Usted, que ha tenido el privilegio de poder estudiar y viajar en numerosas comunidades humanas en varios continentes, ha observado que, aunque varía la relación con la naturaleza, hay un elemento constante en las sociedades que ha podido observar: el patriarcado, la dominación masculina. ¿Cómo es posible esto? Philippe Descola : Hay varias explicaciones de la dominación masculina. No voy a entrar en los detalles de la teoría de la dominación masculina. Lo que comparto es la perspectiva de una antropóloga que fue muy importante en Francia, Françoise Héritier, y que desarrolló toda una serie de trabajos sobre esa temática. La dominación masculina es universal, pero no es ineluctable. Hay formas de combatirlo y obviamente eso es lo que se ha tratado de hacer a través de un centenar de años, digamos de movimientos feministas. La dominación masculina, entre los achuar se notaba a través del hecho de que los hombres eran los que manejaban la política exterior, es decir, todas las relaciones con el exterior de la casa, porque era una sociedad que no tenía una jerarquía política interna. No existían jefes. Cada dueño de casa era su propio dueño político, diríamos. Eso no significaba que las mujeres no tuvieran una gran capacidad de actuación dentro de la casa. Pero esa división, digamos, o por lo menos esa dominación de los hombres sobre ciertos sectores de la vida pública era obvia. Y eso es una cosa común. No podemos saber exactamente cómo era en el Paleolítico europeo, que ha sido muy estudiado tanto a través de la arqueología como en las imágenes en las cuevas. Pero se supone que existía también este tipo de dominación. Insisto: la dominación masculina existe, pero hay maneras de luchar contra eso. Y podemos tal vez vislumbrar un tiempo, el de mis nietas, por ejemplo, en el cual habrá, si no completamente desaparecido, en gran parte eliminado ese problema de la dominación masculina. RFI: En varios países del mundo, dirigentes neoconservadores, climatoescépticos que defienden el extractivismo y las energías fósiles han llegado al poder. En Estados Unidos, en Colombia, en Argentina, por ejemplo. Europa vive un retroceso en materia de normas de protección ambientales. A pesar de ello, usted se dice optimista. ¿Por qué? Philippe Descola: A mí me gusta la fórmula clásica de Gramsci: “El optimismo de la voluntad y el pesimismo de la lucidez”. Soy optimista en el sentido de que la violencia de este “backlash” (ndr: retroceso) me parece una reacción a la toma de conciencia por parte de los representantes, los más obscurantistas digamos, del capitalismo, de que hay una lucha y que esa lucha tal vez la están perdiendo. Por eso esa reacción que parece excesiva en muchos aspectos. Es una señal de que posiblemente las cosas están cambiando porque el enemigo despliega toda su fuerza para contrarrestar un movimiento que posiblemente sabe que no se va a parar. *'Nous sommes les hôtes de la Terre', Editions Arthaud, abril de 2026, 160 p.

Subscribe now for an ad-free experience. Danny and Derek speak with artist and writer Molly Crabapple about her book on the history of the Jewish Labor Bund, Here Where We Live Is Our Country. They discuss Molly's personal connection to the story, the Pale of Settlement and Jewish emancipation, the founding of the Bund in 1897, the Bund's armed self-defense against pogroms, its fraught relationship with Lenin and the Bolsheviks, the Bund's rivalry with Zionism, the flourishing of Bundist culture in interwar Poland, and the lessons of the Bund's story for the Jewish left today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Danny and Derek speak with artist and writer Molly Crabapple about her book on the history of the Jewish Labor Bund, Here Where We Live Is Our Country. They discuss Molly's personal connection to the story, the Pale of Settlement and Jewish emancipation, the founding of the Bund in 1897, the Bund's armed self-defense against pogroms, its fraught relationship with Lenin and the Bolsheviks, the Bund's rivalry with Zionism, the flourishing of Bundist culture in interwar Poland, and the lessons of the Bund's story for the Jewish left today.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

¿James Bond existió en la vida real? Aunque el famoso espía británico es un personaje de ficción creado por Ian Fleming, su origen podría estar inspirado en figuras que desafiaron la realidad.En este episodio exploramos la vida de dos dobles agentes que marcaron la historia del espionaje: Juan Pujol García, “Garbo”, el hombre que engañó a Hitler con una red ficticia de informantes durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial, y Sidney Reilly, el llamado “Ace of Spies”, maestro del disfraz y las intrigas, que llegó a tener once pasaportes y cuya misión más arriesgada fue atentar contra Lenin.Un recorrido por las sombras de la historia que nos revela cómo la realidad, muchas veces, puede superar a la ficción.Conviértete en un supporter de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/interesante-historia--5241488/support.

James Lindsay led the 2018 Grievance Studies Affair, a hoax so effective it got a chapter of Mein Kampf rewritten as feminist theory accepted into a peer-reviewed journal. Since then he's built New Discourses around defining the woke formula of critical theory plus Leninist tactics, and how the formula appears on the left and the right. In this conversation, Lindsay traces "woke" back through Lenin's vanguard model and a 1937 Nazi corporate law that literally invented the word "stakeholder," then applies the same framework to Tucker Carlson, breaking down why he meets every box on the definition. James connects totalitarian ideology to clinical narcissism, explains why government incentive structures guarantee corruption regardless of who's in charge, and shares firsthand accounts from parents whose teenage sons are being radicalized into neo-Nazi forums. The conversation closes on JD Vance and his documented ties to post-liberal, Catholic integralist thinkers. Lindsay's  books: The Marxification of Education  Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything About Race, Gender, and Identity - and Why This Harms Everybody Race Marxism Timestamps: 03:07 Who is James Lindsay: anti-totalitarian researcher 04:18 The Grievance Studies Affair, explained 07:08 Cynical Theories and writing from a left-wing perspective on purpose 10:42 Defining "woke" begins 12:06 Critical theory's roots, back to Marx 13:53 The two components of woke: critical theory + Leninist behavior 19:20 Woke left vs. woke right, and the "Animal Farm" stakeholder model 25:33 The Nazi Shareholder Act of 1937 — the real birth of "stakeholder" 29:54 Do people actually understand this system? 31:17 Why everyone should listen to people who escaped communism 32:08 Totalitarianism as institutionalized narcissism 35:25 Why government incentive structures guarantee corruption 40:15 Bill Gates and the "Messiah complex" 43:01 Marx's Communist Manifesto, reread through narcissism 45:16 What happened to Tucker Carlson? 46:09 The case for why Tucker Carlson is "woke right" 50:15 Tucker's 2019 shift and Elizabeth Warren's Accountable Capitalism Act 53:06 How much of Tucker's audience is bots? 54:00 How much real power does Tucker actually have? 58:13 Hitler's "My Secret Book" and the targeting of youth 59:59 Parents' stories: kids radicalized into neo-Nazi forums 1:03:48 Where does JD Vance fall in the "woke right"? 1:05:53 Patrick Deneen's Regime Change and replacing the Constitution 1:06:16 Catholic integralism and Vance's economic worldview 1:08:42 The Iran MOU controversy and the operation against Vance

Matt Slayer sits down with Canadian comedian Simon King for a fast, filthy, and surprisingly thoughtful ride through comedy, chaos, politics, and the weird machinery of modern life. What starts with jokes about OF, The Hub, comedy specials, AI-written eulogies, and s***ide hotline telethons quickly turns into a sharp, darkly funny conversation about what it means to be a working comic in a world run by algorithms, bots, and questionable incentives. Simon talks about touring in the U.S. as a Canadian, the strange instability of modern America, border anxiety, and why Canada's relationship with the States has shifted from neighborly familiarity to genuine concern. He and Matt dig into the realities of comedy today: crowd work clips, viral fame, bought followers, club economics, content pressure, and why Simon prefers “artisan small batch” audiences who actually know what they came to see. Along the way, Matt and Simon riff on stolen art, Lenin's body, mutton, corporate gigs, Saudi money, guns, masculinity, generational change, and whether humanity has any shot at making it another hundred years. It's an episode full of grim punchlines, honest self-reflection, and the kind of unruly tangents that make And Now We Drink feel less like an interview and more like eavesdropping on two funny people trying to make sense of a burning world. Cover your shame in our wares. New Merch! anwd.net/merch The Patreon is full of exclusive content and directly supports the show. patreon.com/mattslayer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Matt Slayer sits down with Canadian comedian Simon King for a fast, filthy, and surprisingly thoughtful ride through comedy, chaos, politics, and the weird machinery of modern life. What starts with jokes about OF, The Hub, comedy specials, AI-written eulogies, and s***ide hotline telethons quickly turns into a sharp, darkly funny conversation about what it means to be a working comic in a world run by algorithms, bots, and questionable incentives. Simon talks about touring in the U.S. as a Canadian, the strange instability of modern America, border anxiety, and why Canada's relationship with the States has shifted from neighborly familiarity to genuine concern. He and Matt dig into the realities of comedy today: crowd work clips, viral fame, bought followers, club economics, content pressure, and why Simon prefers “artisan small batch” audiences who actually know what they came to see. Along the way, Matt and Simon riff on stolen art, Lenin's body, mutton, corporate gigs, Saudi money, guns, masculinity, generational change, and whether humanity has any shot at making it another hundred years. It's an episode full of grim punchlines, honest self-reflection, and the kind of unruly tangents that make And Now We Drink feel less like an interview and more like eavesdropping on two funny people trying to make sense of a burning world. Cover your shame in our wares. New Merch! anwd.net/merch The Patreon is full of exclusive content and directly supports the show. patreon.com/mattslayer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Matt Slayer sits down with Canadian comedian Simon King for a fast, filthy, and surprisingly thoughtful ride through comedy, chaos, politics, and the weird machinery of modern life. What starts with jokes about OF, The Hub, comedy specials, AI-written eulogies, and s***ide hotline telethons quickly turns into a sharp, darkly funny conversation about what it means to be a working comic in a world run by algorithms, bots, and questionable incentives. Simon talks about touring in the U.S. as a Canadian, the strange instability of modern America, border anxiety, and why Canada's relationship with the States has shifted from neighborly familiarity to genuine concern. He and Matt dig into the realities of comedy today: crowd work clips, viral fame, bought followers, club economics, content pressure, and why Simon prefers “artisan small batch” audiences who actually know what they came to see. Along the way, Matt and Simon riff on stolen art, Lenin's body, mutton, corporate gigs, Saudi money, guns, masculinity, generational change, and whether humanity has any shot at making it another hundred years. It's an episode full of grim punchlines, honest self-reflection, and the kind of unruly tangents that make And Now We Drink feel less like an interview and more like eavesdropping on two funny people trying to make sense of a burning world. Cover your shame in our wares. New Merch! anwd.net/merch The Patreon is full of exclusive content and directly supports the show. patreon.com/mattslayer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Russian Revolution was the greatest event in history. Lenin, Trotsky, and the rest of the Bolsheviks led the working class to take power and hold it for the first time in history. October was living proof that the oppressed do not need their oppressors; that a better world is possible. It inspired a worldwide revolutionary wave in its wake, and remains a beacon of hope to the oppressed today.No party has sunk deeper roots among ordinary people than the Bolsheviks, and no victory has ever been more decisive or transformative than the one the Bolsheviks led them to achieve.This is why the ruling class will never forget the Bolsheviks, and it's why we must seek to study them. The Russian Revolution of 1917 still contains the most urgent lessons for revolutionaries today.In this presentation from the Western Canadian Marxist Summer School, Joel Bergman explains the lessons communists can draw from this inspiring event, in order to change the world today.

LISTEN TO THE FULL EPISODE HERE!Alright, welcome back to Žižek & So On. This is another PATREON EPISODE in our ongoing series on the systematic aspects of Žižek's thought & we're taking a look at Adrian Johnston's critique of Slavoj Žižek.Can you have a materialism without matter? Does a genuine dialectical materialism need a detour through theology and the mystical "Night of the World"? What happens when you try to ground the emergence of subjectivity in the bizarre realities of quantum physics?Along the way we get into the transcendental ontological parallax, Lenin's Materialism and Empiriocriticism, the crisis of the disappearing electron, Penrose's microtubules, and why kicking away the theological ladder might be harder than it looks.Up next we move from the quantum void to the delegation of enjoyment with Robert Pfaller on Interpassivity.To follow along with all the episodes in this series and to get access to all our interviews, patreon episodes, and SHORT SESSIONS support us here!See you in Paris or the Urgrund, Ž&…

Tolstoi tvo un giró móistico que lo llevó a querer cambiar la sociedad. 

New Discourses Bullets, Ep. 174 The Democratic Socialists of America are making a bid to take over the Democratic Party, echoing the grim historical chapter during which Lenin's Bolsheviks abolished the more moderate Mensheviks from the future of Russian politics. They, like their historical predecessors, from whom they take inspiration, are Communists, and they have a party platform. In this episode of New Discourses Bullets, host James Lindsay reads quickly through the entire DSA party platform (https://program.dsausa.org/) so that people can hear for themselves just how crazy it is. Join him for an eye-opening read, and check out his longer exploration of this platform on the New Discourses Podcast. 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 #dsa

“The statesman is an educator who leads through language — who gives a people the language they need to think about themselves.” — Steven B. Smith on what makes a statesman Was Odysseus a statesman? The Yale political philosopher Steven B. Smith — who, by the way, can't beg, steal or borrow a ticket to Christopher Nolan's cinematic epic — offers a cautious yes. While Odysseus wasn't exactly a founder of states, he was, to borrow one of Homer's favorite words, “polytropos” — which translates as many-sided, a master of the political adaptability that Machiavelli demanded of his Prince. In his forthcoming On Statesmanship, Smith distinguishes the true statesman from the mere leader. All 195 states in the world have leaders, he says, almost none are blessed with statesmen. A genuine statesman, he explains, is an educator who leads his fellow citizens through language. So Lincoln's Gettysburg Address gave Americans new words to think about themselves. Just like de Gaulle's “certain idea of France” and Churchill's uncompromisingly defiant language in 1940. For statesmen, timing is everything. “Fortune is a woman,” Machiavelli advised his Prince, so she should be mastered adventurously. Many are called, few are chosen. But then they are unchosen. That same unbowed Churchill spent a decade in the political wilderness before 1940, then got booted out of office at the end of the war. Hegel called such figures world-historical individuals — used by history, then cruelly discarded. Ironically, it's “great” men of history like Odysseus and Churchill who are most vulnerable to its female fortune. On Statesmanship is equally clear about who doesn't qualify for this exclusive club. Smith argues that Lenin, Hitler, and Napoleon might have founded states, but weren't statesmen because they had no respect for the rule of law. Nor is the club purely Western, white, or male. Mandela, Havel, Gandhi, and MLK all qualify as “statesmen without states.” Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew makes the cut as a constitutionalist if not a democrat. Fortune might be a woman, but Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi mastered fate with more adventure than their male colleagues. Political leadership these days, Smith says, is monopolized by either technocrats or demagogues. In fact, Smith can only name one true contemporary statesman — Volodymyr Zelensky who, he says, is “doing a stirring imitation of Winston Churchill.” Otherwise the world is drifting into Thucydides' trap where the strong do what they like and the weak suffer what they must. Thus our longing for many-sided leaders like Odysseus. Which is why Nolan's blockbuster is such a hit that Steven Smith has yet to see it. One small footnote to this conversation. Afterwards, Smith sent me a note expressing a correction of how he described Obama: “Reflecting back on the conversation, I was embarrassed about what I said about Obama lacking ‘civil courage.' That is not exactly what I meant. Probably a better formulation would be to say that he lacked what Plato called ‘thymos,' a kind of public-spirited anger. His rationality and ‘coolness' — in many ways admirable traits — gave the impression that he was too aloof from the rough-and-tumble of politics. Anger and indignation when judiciously employed, as my former student Amia Srinivasan has argued, remain formidable tools in the statesman's tool kit.” Five Takeaways •       A Leader Is Not a Statesman. There are 195 states in the world and every one has a leader; almost none has a statesman. The concept is an ideal of what leadership aspires to be, running from Plato's Politikos and the philosopher-king to the present. The statesman has the usual leadership virtues — foresight, courage, determination, a willingness to say unpopular things — but Smith's central claim is different: the statesman is an educator who leads through language, giving a people the words they need to think about themselves. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address shaped how Americans understand their republic; de Gaulle led with “a certain idea of France”; Churchill and Disraeli wrote the British self-image.•       Timing — and the Tragedy. Statesmanship is a matter of the ripe moment, and the moment is cruel. Churchill spent the 1930s in the political wilderness, changed parties, presided over Gallipoli — and yet when 1940 came, he was there, prepared; the instant peace was established, the voters discarded him. Lenin resolved the Marxists' endless debate about whether Russia was “ripe” by deciding that ripeness was a matter of willpower. Hegel called such figures world-historical individuals — Caesar, Napoleon, Alexander — whom history uses for its purposes and then throws away. Even without Hegel's grand narrative, Smith notes, statesmen are routinely and cruelly discarded by their own people. There is a tragedy built into the art.•       Who's Out — and Who's In. Lenin, Hitler, and Napoleon founded states, but founders of tyrannies are not statesmen: for Smith the modern statesman is inseparable from constitutionalism — rule of law, balance of powers, the capacity to listen and accept less than the whole loaf. Nor is the club white, Western, or male. Mandela, Havel, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King appear as “statesmen without states,” shaping nations before or without holding office; Lee Kuan Yew qualifies as a constitutionalist if not a democrat; Thatcher — who famously told a wobbling American president to stiffen — and Indira Gandhi practice statecraft at the highest level. As for the word itself: Smith keeps “statesman.” “Statesperson,” he rules, is ugly.•       The Anti-Statesmen: Technocrat and Demagogue. Smith's chapter on anti-statesmen identifies the two failed models of modern leadership: the technocrat, a problem-solver-in-chief without a narrative, and the demagogue — a Greek word, and a breed democracies reliably produce — who rules through fear, intimidation, and humiliation. Trump, mentioned barely twice in the book, is filed under the latter, classically. Obama remains Smith's enigma: civic seriousness and dazzling rhetorical gifts — yet lacking, Smith suggests on reflection, what Plato called thymos, a kind of public-spirited anger. Obama's rationality and coolness, admirable in themselves, gave the impression of a man too aloof from the rough-and-tumble of politics; anger and indignation, judiciously employed — as Smith's former student Amia Srinivasan has argued — remain formidable tools in the statesman's tool kit. The Democrats, Smith argues, are trapped between both failed models, and need what Lincoln, FDR, JFK, and Reagan had: an affirmative story of America to embed themselves in.•       One Statesman Standing. Asked to name a contemporary statesman, Smith offers exactly one — “and I say God bless him”: Volodymyr Zelensky, doing a stirring imitation of Winston Churchill, showing guts and magnanimity in a horrible moment for his people. Otherwise: seven British prime ministers in a decade, and a paucity everywhere else. Statesmen, Smith warns, cannot simply be willed into existence. And the alternative is already visible — the world of Thucydides, where the strong do what they like and the weak suffer what they must, carved into spheres of influence by Iran, Russia, and China. That is what a w...

Liderler serisinin yeni videosunda Ömer Gemalmaz Lev Troçki'yi anlattı. Rus Devrimi'nin en parlak zihinlerinden biri, Kızıl Ordu'nun kurucusu, Lenin'in en yakın yol arkadaşı… Ama aynı zamanda Stalin'le giriştiği ölümcül iktidar mücadelesinde kaybeden kişi.Bu videoda Troçki'nin hayatına yakından bakıyoruz:Çarlık Rusyası'ndaki gençlik yılları,1905 ve 1917 devrimlerindeki rolü,Petrograd Sovyeti ve Kızıl Ordu'nun başındaki başarıları,Lenin sonrası Stalin'le giriştiği iktidar mücadelesi,Yaptığı büyük hatalar ve başarıları..Troçkizm nedir, Stalin'den farkı neydi, neden Sovyetler'den tasfiye edildi? Hepsi bu videoda.00:00 Giriş00:32 Çocukluğu ve gençliği04:30 1905 devrimi07:14 Sürgün yılları08:18 1917 devrimi14:45 Devrim sonrası görevleri18:00 Kızıl ordu ve iç savaş19:30 Stalin ile iktidar mücadelesi30:40 Türkiye sürgünü32:32 Stalin'e muhalefeti34:02 Stalin'in büyük tasfiyesi36:00 Türkiye'den gidişi37:07 Meksika yılları ve öldürülmesi38:50 Kapanış

Listen to #Pulse95Radio in the UAE by tuning in on your radio (95.00 FM) or online on our website: www.pulse95radio.net ************************ Follow us on Social. www.instagram.com/pulse95radio www.facebook.com/pulse95radio

Episode 399 of RevolutionZ continues the "Ideology Sequence," this time criticizing Leninism based largely on last episode's presentation of Bolshevik practice. Why do revolutions that promise liberation so often end up with new bosses? Leninist strategy is a living set of assumptions about leadership, discipline, “efficiency,” compromise, and more and about how to think about and apply each. The question driving the whole sequence is simple to ask and hard to face: should the left still advocate Marxism Leninism, or do we need to collectively transcend it?Marxism Leninism claims to provide a suitable and for some even an alone suitable framework for analysis, adopting a long term goal, and creating and utilizing a disciplined party to win. But will centralized decision making, information hoarded at the top, members directed instead of developed, and leaders who slowly confuse their own survival with the revolution's future, deliver what it claims to seek? The episode leans on sharp critics like Rosa Luxembourg, plus insights from Bookchin and others, plus Lenin's own words to argue that freedom is not a luxury to add later. Creativity, learning, and real socialist democracy depend on movement relations now and not just proposed social relations later.This episode also addresses tactics and their hidden internal costs, including the way reforms, parliamentary work, and practical compromises can reshape cadre and culture. And we tackle a big claim embedded in Lenin's praise for factory discipline and Taylorism: Leninism's view that capitalist organization is neutral if the right people hold state power. The episode argues instead that capitalism and authoritarianism are contagious, and unless we change all significant everyday power and system preserving relations not only in the economy and at work, but also in daily life in homes, schools, health, and the polity, we risk rebuilding the very dynamics we say we oppose.Does this approach raise your hackles or resonate positively for you? Either way, shouldn't you consider it?  I hope you will do so and that you will comment your views of it. Mainly, does it affect your answer to the question: should the left still advocate Marxism Leninism, or do we need to collectively transcend it?Support the show

This week we're releasing an episode from Scotland‘s Political Economy podcast. Host William Thomson invited Steve to join him to compare and reflect on their favorite interviews and the thinkers who most shaped their worldviews – from Clara Mattei and Fadhel Kaboub to Bill Mitchell, Jason Hickel, and Marxist-Leninist thinkers. They explore the limits of MMT without class analysis, the capture of academic and political institutions by oligarchic interests, and the importance of historical materialism, Gramsci, and Lenin in understanding how power truly operates.The episode looks at the evolution of the two independent podcasters, their intellectual awakenings, and their shared conviction that the fight is not for better policy within capitalism, but for a fundamental transformation of the system itself. And for listeners to Macro N Cheese, it provides insight into Steve' seven-year journey, taking the podcast from a strict MMT focus to a broader political economic analysis rooted in class struggle, revolutionary theory, and a critical view of electoral politics.William Thomson is a political economist focused on the political economy of Scotland. His work considers how the economy actually operates, how decisions are made, and how power, institutions, and policy shape outcomes across Scotland.Support his work at patreon.com/Scotlandspoliticaleconomy@Williamgallus on X

Akhil Akkineni sits down with RAW Talks with VK for a conversation marked by rare candour and quiet introspection, from the success of Lenin to the setbacks of Agent, he opens up about failure, resilience, method acting, family, relationships, cricket, and the evolving landscape of Telugu cinema. In this episode, we discuss:- Akhil Akkineni's journey through success, failure, and life after Agent movie- The making of Lenin, method acting, and his approach to performance- Growing up as Nagarjuna's son and carrying the Akkineni family legacy- Untold stories about ANR, Nagarjuna, and three generations of Akkineni in Telugu cinema- Cricket, discipline, mental strength, and handling public scrutiny- Marriage, relationships, family values, and staying grounded in the film industry- Telugu cinema's changing audience expectations and modern storytelling- Injuries, personal growth, fan culture, and dealing with social media trolling- Annapurna Studios, AI in filmmaking, and the future of TollywoodIf this conversation moved you, consider liking, sharing, and subscribing to RAW Talks with VK, for more unfiltered conversations with the personalities shaping Tollywood, business, sports, and beyond. And we'd love to know: what was the one moment that stayed with you? Drop it in the comments below.

"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

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

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

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 

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.

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.

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)

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.