Podcasts about Northern Europe

Hydrogen storage might not be flashy, but it's foundational. In this episode of Hydrogen Innovators, we sit down with Kamden Maas, U.S. Sales Manager at Atlanta Cylinders, to unpack how Type I all-steel cylinders are helping projects move from pilot to deployment. Kamden explains why long-lived, stackable, high-pressure steel storage (700 bar U.S.; up to 1000 bar in the EU approvals) can cut costs versus composite alternatives, what third-party certifications (DOT/ASME vs. ISO) really mean for safety, and how storage design choices ripple through refueling, backup power, and site footprint. We also get a candid market tour—Spain/Portugal and Northern Europe's momentum, steady progress in the U.S. Gulf—and a call for practical collaboration across suppliers, developers, and communities. Kamden closes with advice for early-career professionals on leading with authenticity and pushing the envelope in a constantly evolving industry.

It's Day 3 of IAAPA Expo Europe, and this episode of Skip the Queue brings you insights from industry leaders. Hear from Andreas Andersen (Liseberg), Peter van der Schans (IAAPA EMEA), Laura Read (Marwell Zoo), Aaron Wilson (ProSlide), and Robbi Jones (Katapult) on resilience, creativity, and the future of attractions.Skip the Queue is brought to you by Rubber Cheese, a digital agency that builds remarkable systems and websites for attractions that helps them increase their visitor numbers. Your host is Paul Marden, with co host Andy Povey and roving reporter Claire Furnival.If you like what you hear, you can subscribe on iTunes, Spotify, and all the usual channels by searching Skip the Queue or visit our website SkiptheQueue.fm.If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave us a five star review, it really helps others find us. And remember to follow us on LinkedIn. Show references:  https://www.liseberg.se/en/https://www.linkedin.com/in/andreas-veilstrup-andersen/Andreas Veilstrup Andersen is the CEO and President of the Liseberg Group, Sweden – operating one of Scandinavia's most visited amusement parks. Andreas has a legal and financial background and has been working in the amusement park industry since 2000.  First in several capacities at Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen, Denmark, later as Vice President of European operations at IAAPA EMEA in Brussels, Belgium. Andreas was the 2018 Chairman of IAAPA. He currently holds board positions at Farup Sommerland and Alsik Hotel in Denmark, as well as Momentum Leisure and Leo's Lekland, Europe's largest chain of FEC's. Andreas is heading up IAAPA's sustainability initiatives, and occasionally blogs on https://reflections.liseberg.se/.Plus, live from the Day 3 of the IAAPA Expo Europe show floor, we catch up with:Aaron Wilson - Vice President, Business Development Europe & Latin America, Proslide Technologyhttps://www.proslide.com/https://www.linkedin.com/in/aaronlouiswilson/Robbie Jones - Insights Director, Katapaulthttps://www.katapult.co.uk/https://www.linkedin.com/in/mrrobbiejones/Peter van der Schans - Executive Director & Vice President, IAAPA EMEAhttps://iaapa.org/expos-and-events/expo-europehttps://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-van-der-schans-87715717/Laura Read - Chief Executive, Marwell Zoohttps://www.marwell.org.uk/https://www.linkedin.com/in/laura-read-she-her-98110726/ Transcriptions:  Paul Marden: Welcome to Skip the Queue, the podcast about the world's best attractions and the amazing people that work in them. I'm your host, Paul Marden, and together with my co-host, Andy Povey, and roving reporter Claire Furnival, we're here at day 3 of IAAPA Expo Europe. On today's show, Andy talks to Andreas Andersen, CEO and President of iseberg Group, about resilience. I meet Peter van der Schans from IAAPA EMEA, and we catch up with Laura Read from Marwell Zoo. First, let's go over to Andy.Andy Povey: So I'm joined now by Andreas Andersen, who's the chief exec of Liseberg, Scandinavia's most visited amusement park. Andreas, welcome to Barcelona. It's very good to see you here. Can you tell the listeners at home a little bit about Liseberg and what you do there?Andreas Andersen:  Sure. So I'm heading up one of the classic regional city-based parks in Northern Europe. So you have Liseberg, you have Tivoli in Copenhagen, you have Kornalund in Stockholm, and Linnanmaki in Helsinki. And we're part of this tradition of parks that have a very strong community base and a long history. Liseberg is 102 years old and three years old. And also parks that represent cultural heritage as well as reflect the cities we're located in. Lovely, lovely regional park in downtown Gothenburg. And if you haven't been, you should come visit.Andy Povey: Absolutely. I must admit, I haven't made it there myself yet. It's on the bucket list. So our theme for today's recording is about recovery and resilience. And recently, in your blog address, you wrote that you feel like for the past four years, you've been in constant crisis mode. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?Andreas Andersen: Well, I think a lot of executives or just people working in this industry can recognise that the last four or five years have been very turbulent, very, very, very volatile.Andreas Andersen: It all started with the pandemic in March 2020, we were at Lisa closed down for 17 months, so we didn't have any any business at all for for 17 months. Then we reopened in the middle of '21, very very hard— you know, with a lot of restrictions and an organisation that had not been you know operating anything for a long time and we also had to let go a lot of people. Then in '22, I think everybody experienced this giant rush, you know, that everybody wanted to get back into the park. So we couldn't really keep up with demand. And that was stressful in a different way. In '23, the market in the Nordics really suffered for some reason. It was a wit, summer and inflation, and interest rates.Andreas Andersen: And everything that went with, you could say, sort of the beginning of an economic downturn. And then, in 2024, our biggest investment, our biggest project expansion in the last 100 years, a large new indoor water park burned down. So it feels like these four or five years has really been this chain of crisis that we've had to get over and manage, basically.Andy Povey: Yeah, I mean, what we're hearing from people on the show floor is that the economic and political unrest that we have all over the Western world is creating some turbulence in the market. So talk to us a little bit more about the fire at Oceania. What happened?Andreas Andersen: We had been building the water park for almost three years, and we were six, seven weeks away from handover. It was some of the last works on the right installation that went wrong. It was a plastic welding that overheated, and these things happen, as you know.Andreas Andersen: Unfortunately, we lost a colleague in the fire and that was basically, you could say, that overshadowed, I would say, everything, especially in the first weeks. Andreas Andersen: That was devastating to all of us and obviously, especially his family. But soon after, we also had to make some decisions. You know, did we want to rebuild? How did we want to rebuild? At what pace? How would we finance? etc. etc. So you also very quickly move into the next phase of a crisis management and that is recovery. And we've been in that phase ever since. Andy Povey: Interesting. It's a devastating situation. I mean, your concern obviously has to be for the team and the people involved— not just those affected directly, but everybody on the floor who feels an emotional impact from this situation. So what tips would you give, as a leader, going through a situation like that, to anyone else listening who may be facing their own challenges?Andreas Andersen:  Well, I think I learned a lot during those weeks and months. And I think I learned that in a crisis, especially of this magnitude, everything becomes very naked. Everything becomes very raw. And you cannot really play a role as a leader. You have to be yourself. You have to be authentic. And it's okay to also show emotions and be caught up in this process of figuring out what to do with the project and the team and yourself when you meet challenges of this severity. Andreas Andersen:  So I would say be yourself, but also recognise that I always say that leadership in a crisis is a little bit like your biggest asset is the confidence that people have in you. And that confidence is something you build up over years. It's a little bit like a bank account that you can then draw on when the crisis hits. But you really have to make sure that you have something on that bank account. You can't borrow confidence. It's not up for loan. So you really, you know, crisis management, from a leadership perspective, actually starts a lot earlier than the crisis. It's about, you know, building a team that works well together, that trusts you and has confidence in you. And then, when the crisis hits, you know, you can draw on that trust, draw on that confidence. So I think that's two of the learnings that I had during this process.Andy Povey: I love the idea of the bank that you can draw on. We're making deposits in our bank every day, not just as a commercial leadership level, but a personal level as well. You need to have that resilience built in yourself. A lovely analogy. And I really love the idea of authenticity. So, if we move on now to talking a little bit more about what we do in an attraction, I think authenticity plays a really big part in that. So, how important is it for you to keep innovating at Liseberg?Andreas Andersen: It's super important because we are in a regional market. I mean, if you look at how our guests are composed, you know, we have 90% Swedish people and then 10%, maybe 12% in a good year from other, especially Nordic countries. But the majority are Swedish and about 60% of our total volume is actually from the local market. And if you want to attract the local market and you want to drive revisitation, Gothenburg is a large city, but it's not a huge city. You have to keep the product fresh. You have to reinvest, reinvent, and constantly adapt. And I think that's actually... part of the, you could say, the formula for these Nordic city-based parks that we've actually had to all reinvent, you know, throughout our history. I mean, Tivoli, that was founded in 1843, it was built by this crazy entrepreneur called Geo Carstensen.Andreas Andersen: And when Tivoli opened on the 15th of August, it was late, it was over budget, and it was not quite finished. And he got a question from a journalist, you know, asking him, you know, when will Tivoli be finished? And his response was, 'Never.' Tivoli will never be finished. And I think, you know, it's almost 200 years ago that he said this, but I think it encompasses sort of the real DNA of our industry that we have to constantly evolve with our guests and reinvent ourselves. And I think, again, that the city, the Nordic city-based parks have really been quite good at that.Andy Povey: Obviously, I mean, Liseberg with 100 years, Tivoli with almost 200 years. There's something good there. You're doing something right. So more recently, you've taken a position with, I'm going to pronounce this awfully, Leo's Lekland. Compare and contrast Liseberg to Europe's largest chain of family entertainment centres?Andreas Andersen:  I mean, there are a lot of similarities and also a lot of differences. I think what is interesting for me, you know, working with Leos is that it's, in many ways, the model is the same. I mean, you pay an entrance fee, you spend a few hours with your family, you may eat a lunch or buy an ice cream or a plush animal. So in many ways, it's the same. But I think, when we're talking about these attractions that are really designed for shorter visits, there is a convenience perspective to them that it's slightly different than, you know, visiting an amusement park or a theme park for a full day. I remember once I had a conversation with one of our competitors in this market, not FECs as such, but, you know, these shorter visits, you know, two, three-hour visit attractions, very often midway attractionsAndreas Andersen: And he said, 'What we sell is actually not.' necessarily an experience, it is two hours spent and I think that's a little bit of a different perspective on an attraction that you actually also go to, Leo's Lekland, to have your kids, you know, be really really tired when they get home, you know, in today's world, where everything is a lot of a lot of stuff is digital and and the kids sit there with their with the tablets and their phones and or their game consoles or they're online with their friends. I think play has a huge and important role to play in the development of motoric and social skills for kids. I think physical play will be something we're going to discuss a lot in the decades to come, because I think we lost a couple of generations the last 20 years. And I think that's a super dangerous thing. So getting back to your question, a lot of similarities, but there are also some differences and I've learned a lot by working with them.Andy Povey: Fantastic. The talk about play really resonates. We lost a year, maybe 18 months through COVID. I have 11-year-old twin girls. I love the idea that me taking them to our local FEC on a Saturday morning so I could recover from a hangover while they went and played was a really positive, good parent thing to do. So thank you for that. We're at the show. What are you looking forward to seeing when you get out on the show floor, when we eventually let you go out on the show floor?Andreas Andersen:  Oh! I very rarely have a plan. I like to just stroll around. Actually, I see it a little bit like visiting an amusement park. You shop for experiences and you see what happens. I think one of the great things about these expos is the fact that, and that's probably what I look most forward to, is that you meet your industry colleagues.Andreas Andersen:  A company like ours, Liseberg, we do not exist; we do not operate within a chain structure. We do not have a corporate mother that knows a lot about what we do. We do not have other parks that we can benchmark with. So these shows is also a little bit a way for us to get out of the bubble and meet other people that work with the same thing as we do. So it's actually not as much the expo floor or the events or the educational program as it is meeting the people. I enjoy.Andy Povey: Andreas, it's been great talking to you. Thank you very much for your time and have a fantastic show.Andreas Andersen:  And I wish you the very same. Thank you.Paul Marden: Now let's head over to the show floor. So we are here on the ProSlide stand, and I'm here with Aaron. Aaron, introduce yourself. Tell us a little bit about ProSlide.Aaron  Wilson: Hi, nice to meet you. Thanks for coming in. I'm Aaron Wilson, Senior Vice President, Business Development, EMEA, with ProSlide. I've been with ProSlide for nine years. We're focused really on the design and innovation of rides. That's where we really form the nucleus of who ProSlide is.Paul Marden: Okay, so what are you launching here at this year's IAAPA?Aaron  Wilson:  Yeah, so let's walk over here to our model table. Where we have a large model of our newest feature, which is the Hive. We actually opened up two rides this year, one at Chimelong in China, the most attended water park in the world. Paul Marden: Wow. Aaron  Wilson:  And that's with a five-person family raft, everyone seated facing each other.Paul Marden: That's amazing. So you're going through this on a five-person ring kind of thing?Aaron  Wilson:  Exactly, a five-person tube. So it's a tight radius helix curve. So as you enter, you're entering into a completely open, basically cathedral space. But as you're dropping and turning very quickly, you're staying really stuck along the outside of the wall, feeling those centrifugal forces. And you have a 360-degree global view. So you're able to look forward, backwards, upwards, down. See everywhere where you came from and where you're headed.Paul Marden: It's amazing, isn't it? Because you've got transparent sides on it. So you can see outside as well.Aaron  Wilson:  Absolutely. And there's a ton of theming potential here. In the middle is a support structure. And so we're working on theming there in the middle, if we can. Special effects around the outside. In this case, it's transparent. Exactly.Paul Marden: You've got some amazing models on the table here. This is one of those rides that you can't really bring to IAAPA and experience in real life because we'd all have to be in our swimmers.Aaron  Wilson:  Unfortunately, yes.Paul Marden: But some amazing, amazing models. What's innovative about this? What's this bringing to the market, which is unusual?Aaron  Wilson:  So you have that 360-degree helix turn. We've completely opened it up. So normally in a turn, you can only see a few meters in front of you. In this case, it's a feature that's completely open as you're making that turn. And so you can see everywhere, right? Up and down, forwards, backwards. And that's really part of the differentiation. But obviously the biggest sensation is actually that experience you feel as you have those centrifugal forces around the outside. With a five-person boat, you're looking at about 800 pounds, and you're whipping around the outside, gaining tons of speed throughout. So it's really exciting. The additional interesting thing about this element is we're also doing a two-person tube and a small compact footprint.Aaron  Wilson:  So it's very adaptable for indoor parks or even outdoor parks that don't have a ton of space. That compact footprint gives a lot of flexibility in the design.Paul Marden: So you've got this in China at the moment, you say?Aaron  Wilson:  Yep, and one in the US. And there are a lot more to come in the next one to two years already programmed and open. So we're really excited about this for the water parks.Paul Marden: That's amazing. So we've been asking everybody to get their crystal ball out and tell us trends for 2026. Where do you think the market is going? What do you think that we can expect to see this time next year at IAAPA? Aaron  Wilson:  Water coasters. Water coasters are the big thing. Paul Marden: What on earth is a water coaster? Aaron  Wilson:  Yeah, well, let's head over here to another model table. We have a couple of examples here. So I would say, like in the last couple of years, specifically speaking about Europe, we've seen an amazing response to our water coaster technology using water propulsion. We call it the rocket blast.Paul Marden: Right.Aaron  Wilson:  And so what you have is a series of injectors placed along the uphill sections that actually push the boat uphill. That's amazing. And so with that technology, we're able to do a number of things. And this actually, this ride opened about a year and a half ago at Land of Legends in Turkey. This is, you know, one of the biggest things that will stand out to you here is, as you're looking around all the models, what's very common with a water park is you have—gravity-fed rides, meaning you climb a tower and use gravity to go down. Paul Marden:  This is very flat and long. Aaron  Wilson:  Exactly. This is built essentially on grade. There's no tower here. So, I mean, the first thing is accessibility. So now, as you know, there's no steps. You know, water parks are historically very difficult to meet accessibility. Paul Marden: Yeah. Do you know, I've never thought of that before. But of course, you need to climb the stairs to be able to get to the top of the tower.Aaron  Wilson:  So this case, this is called Turtle Coaster. And this is at Land of Legends. Our guests can walk or, you know, walk or wheel.Paul Marden: Yep.Aaron  Wilson:  As they want up this ramp. This is about four meters off grade. We have a little bit of a drop here. So this is a closed-circuit coaster, right? Meaning the guests are finishing and ending in the same location. Also something different from a water ride. Normally you're going up a tower and finishing in a pool. Here you're finishing and starting at the same location, much like a mechanical dry-growing coaster.Paul Marden: And this, just for listeners' benefit, this has got eight or nine turns in there. It's really, you know. It's going to be a normal coaster-type ride, isn't it?Aaron  Wilson:  This is a 420-meter-long coaster. You're looking at about a minute-and-a-half water ride, which is crazy. Most water rides are about 30 seconds, you know? So it's a really long experience. You have eight uphill last sections, along with what else is unique with our technology is we're able to incorporate these flat last sections. So much like a mechanical coaster has that launch element to it. We're able to do that with water propulsion. So right off the stop, you have this completely flat launch blast. Up, you're getting the elevation. You go around for 420 meters, a series of flying saucer features, uphill sections. Coming back into a water channel.Aaron  Wilson:  And landing in the landing pool, it picks you up on a moving station conveyor. So this conveyor is actually moving at a very slow pace. Guests are cutting off and getting back on.Paul Marden: This is not a lazy river, is it? That you're just sat around for a little while. This is going to hair around.Aaron  Wilson:  Absolutely not. And then here at Siam Park is another coaster here. We opened up in '23. Doolin. So you had two lanes.Paul Marden: Oh, wow.Aaron  Wilson:  And you're racing side by side throughout the experience.Paul Marden: That is amazing. Well, Aaron, look— it's been wonderful to meet you. Find out more about what you're doing here. Looks super, super exciting. I want to get my swimmers on and go and try some, but maybe not whilst we're here in Barcelona, but maybe one time soon.Andy Povey: So we're on the show floor again and I'm with Robbie Jones from Katapult. Robbie, please tell the listeners at home a little bit about Katapult, what you do with them.Robbie  Jones: So we design themed attractions, experiences and destinations. So that can be anything from theme parks all the way through to museums. And our— I guess our core competency is design stage, so pre-concept designs. We get involved quite a lot in theme parks that are very early stages. And my role in that is quite unique within the team of creatives and designers, in that I look towards the insights. So sometimes I work with feasibility partners to kind of pull together the economic requirements for a theme park or an attraction to exist. But more often than not, it's about the guest journey, the guest behaviour, how can we make the guest experience as best as possible by understanding information research that we might have already but also doing some primary research as well to make sure we're creating like that amazing moment for every person that walks through the door.Andy Povey: Fantastic. That sounds really, really impressive. Looking back over 2025, what are your key takeaways from this year so far?Robbie  Jones: Goodness, me. I think I'll speak with a lot of what the industry would say, which is it's been a little bit sticky in places in 2025. There's certainly been more maybes than yeses or nos in terms of projects. But I think we're starting to see things beginning to move. Someone's put some oil in the engine somewhere, which is great. And there's some really exciting projects coming up. Obviously, as a UK-based company, seeing the likes of Universal, Poodie Foo, setting up shop. It's going to be really interesting to see how that impacts not just the UK, but the European market as well.Andy Povey: I couldn't agree more. I really, really look forward to seeing that anticipated improvement in quality of experience that we'll get across the UK. So looking forward to '26 now, what are you anticipating as being the exciting things we're talking about in 12 months' time?Robbie  Jones: Gosh, I mean, I think there will be an element of a quiet time, I think, especially with the new build theme parks, whether that's in the UK or, of course, in the Middle East. I think there'll be an element of quiet that we need to get used to in terms of waiting to see what the next big thing is or the next IP that's going to be in those rides. But I certainly see a lot more positive vibes coming out of the industry. I think we'll see more exciting local experiences, maybe not just big global ones. And yeah, just on the horizon, maybe plenty more opportunity and positivity.Paul Marden: It has been my first IAAPA Expo, and I've had a whale of a time. And I am joined here by Peter van der Schans, the VP and Exec Director of IAAPA EMEA. Peter. Tell me a little bit about what the show has been like for you because I've had an amazing time.Peter van der Schans: Well, so did I. The funny thing is we've always worked so hard on these expos. It takes a hell of a lot of time and it all comes back in this one week. And once you exit that plane or train or however you arrive, you start in a bus and then it's over before you know it.Peter van der Schans: And the week is done and you fall in this big black hole. That's where we're going now. So it's been a wonderful week and it's great to see all our members and every industry leader that is visiting us. We're a small team at IAAPA. We're not a huge organisation, but we have our members supporting us. It's a team effort from both IAAPA and our members, basically. And it's only pride.Paul Marden: One of the most important parts of the show, I think, is the educational side of what you do. There's been a big educational program. Are there any big themes that you've spotted coming out of that education strand?Peter van der Schans: So the education program actually is built with our members and by our members. So, of course, we guide it and shape it. But it's actually done by our members. So it's our members saying, 'Hey, this is where I have issues with. This is the trends I see. This is where I think this is going, which makes it always accurate because we have that industry knowledge by our members.' So in that sense, what we saw this year, there's a lot of focus on AI, obviously, the hot topic nowadays. Paul Marden: It's not a single interview I do where somebody hasn't dropped AI into it. So it's a hot topic.Peter van der Schans: It's a hot topic. And I'm very curious also to see where it's going because right now, if you see execution, the focus is much on back office. For example, Parks Reunidos for example, shared on stage, that they can now predict their next, the next day in visitor numbers with accuracy of 93% which is perfect. Things like that. But I'm curious exactly to see how it's going to evolve in the future to the front end. So what is that visitor going to see in the future? Whenever I go to a theme park, for example, will I be recognised by my name? And if I ride a ride, will the animatronic know my name, for example? Things like that. I think there's limitless possibilities.Peter van der Schans: And we're just at the verge of the beginning. And it's also so, so, so excited about that education program that we share what we know and we work together to get to that point to make it better. Paul Marden: Yeah, absolutely. The collaboration in this sector is just amazing. And IAAPA is just the living proof of that. So many smiling faces. You know that there were competitors together on stands just chatting and enjoying. It's a really enriching experience seeing everybody work together.Peter van der Schans: It is, it is. And the funny thing is I've worked in this industry since I was 16. I started as a ride operator. I didn't know any better than when I had an issue when I became supervisor and manager that I could call the park at the other end of the country and ask, like, 'Hey, how are you dealing with this?' And they helped me. And then I worked at the cinema industry and suddenly I realised that that is not that common in all industries, to say it lightly. It was much more competitive and I didn't want to share anything and really opened my eyes in a way that I realised, like, 'hey, this is special'. And also made me realise that IAAPA plays a big part in that as well, as an organisation to bring all those people together, to provide that platform to work together.Paul Marden: Yes, the facilitators of the community, aren't you? I'm going to ask you a slightly controversial question here. Outside of show hours, what has been your favourite party or event? And you can name drop any one of them. It's absolutely fine. Nobody will be upset with you.Peter van der Schans: I must say the ballpark reception, obviously for the British people. Always good beers. The Tuesday events with the opening ceremony, where we really kick off the week. They made me dance again. I don't recommend watching that back, but that's always just a fun, fun morning where we really kick off the week with a big energy, with a nice connection to the host city as well. Peter van der Schans: It's always fun to work on that and to execute that, but also the evening event, the opening reception where we gather. Well, this year we had 1,400 industry professionals coming together and mixing, mingling in Tibidabo. Without rain, thankfully. Paul Marden: Well, yes, this is the thing. So I was watching the skies thinking this could go really badly wrong. The BBC weather forecasts were not looking good. Peter van der Schans: There's this tradition in Barcelona that you bring eggs to nuns and they make sure you'll have good weather. We did that. We brought three dozens.Paul Marden: Took a lot of eggs. There was a lot of eggs broken in the making of this party. But you did very well. We're at the end. And everybody gets to heave a big sigh of relief that the show's done. It's in the can. But there's also a touch of sadness and fondness looking forward to what comes next. So next year, what have you got coming up first? I understand there's something in the Middle East.Peter van der Schans: Yeah, absolutely. We actually last year at this expo in Amsterdam, we announced the launch of our newest expo, IAAPA Expo Middle East, which is actually the first time in IAAPA's history that we built a new expo from scratch.Peter van der Schans: Never done that before, our members and and people in the industry ask us year after year like, 'When is IAAPA coming to the Middle East?' Of course, there's a huge amount of investments going on in that region. It's crazy. And in that sense, we we simply listen to our members and decide that this is the time we need to go. And we're excited to get closer and closer to the actual launch of the event in March in 2026 in Abu Dhabi.Paul Marden: So March 2026, Abu Dhabi is our next event. But there is another event coming next year. IAAPA is coming to London, which I'm very pleased about. Tell me, is the planning all starting on Monday? Are you already a long way through planning? Plans you can share with me about what's coming up in London?Peter van der Schans: We will have an exciting program for sure, but we're not there yet with with the actual education programme. That takes a little bit more of time, but we do have the show Florencial already and that's looking to be another record-breaking show. What I think also remarkable is that we will have one third more education than we will have in our previous show. So we always had two conference rooms— we'll have three in London. So we'll have actually quite a big increase in our educational offerings as well.Paul Marden: That's amazing. I cannot wait. This has been my first IAAPA, but it won't be my last IAAPA. I think I can confidently say that. So grateful for you and the team inviting us along as Skip the Queue to be part of what you've been doing. We've had an amazing time and I cannot wait to see you again in London.Peter van der Schans: Thank you very much and happy to have you here.Paul Marden: We are here at the end of day three of IAAPA Expo Europe. We've had a wonderful time. Andy Povey: I'm broken. Paul Marden: Oh man, I'm going home a broken man. The voice is barely holding on. I am here with Laura Read from Marwell Zoo. Welcome to Skip the Queue, Laura.Laura Read: Hello. Thank you for having me.Paul Marden: Laura, what's it been like for you? What's the benefit of coming to IAAPA for you?Laura Read: So this is my first IAAPA. For me, this was all around looking at what's new for visitor attractions, what's innovative, what's coming up, and what could we potentially bring to the visitors of Marwell Zoo that might be exciting and might drive more visitors to come to us, really, ultimately. It's all about, for us, diversification, keeping the zoo product at the core of our offer, obviously, but seeing how we can augment that with other things.Paul Marden: So what can we expect? Is it going to be a 4D immersive ride experience? Water slides? Or are you looking for something that enriches the in-real-life experience for you? And it's a bit more low-tech.Laura Read: Oh, I'd love to put in like a water park. Do you know what? That's something like the coolest stalls. Like going around going, 'oh, I'd love to design a water park. That's so fun. No, no'. So for us, it's really about looking at sort of smaller, lower-level, new attractions that we can bring in, you know, we're primarily a family audience. So it's what do kids want to play on? You know, I've seen some really cool little ride-on Jeeps that we think would work really, really well because we also want to stay true to our ethos. You know, Marwell's built its reputation on our conservation work, our hands-on conservation work in the field, you know, reversing species decline and also around sustainability. So sustainability is really core to our offer.Laura Read: This is not about turning Marwell into a theme park or a water park or anything like that, because the animals are still very much the stars of the show, as is the conservation work. But it's about how we can best utilise our space to provide that density of guest experience. And I think seeing all the things here today. That's where the inspiration comes in.Paul Marden: I think it's really interesting, isn't it? Because when you take your kids to the zoo, you need some space. You need a palate cleanser between the animals, don't you? To give the kids time to burn off some energy, to do something a little bit different. And then they come back re-energised and you're hiding the vegetables. You're teaching them about the conservation efforts and all the really important stuff that you do, but hidden around lots of things that keep them happy and engaged in what's going on.Laura Read: Exactly. The problem with zoos is the animals— they don't care that they're the exhibits.Laura Read: And, you know, we are a primarily outdoor attraction. Extremes of heat, rainy days, animals disappear. We know that. We know that the perennial problem is: I didn't see any animals because we have really, really high animal welfare levels and standards. And if those animals want to go off show and take themselves off to bed or away from the public view, they all can and should and do. So we need something that can keep kids particularly engaged and entertained, hopefully getting across a bit of education and messaging as well at the same time. That's a massive tick in the box. But, you know, it fills in the gaps when those animals just aren't playing ball.Paul Marden: Yeah, absolutely. Andy, what's been the highlight of day three for you, mate?Andy Povey: So I think it's actually talking to Laura.Paul Marden: Such a charmer.Andy Povey: Let me finish. Let me justify. It's really picking up the fact that this isn't just a theme park show. Yeah. There are elements for everything you could possibly do any day out any attraction, even in any shopping centre or any place you go to where there's large crowds of people— so it's all of that kind of stuff. I think is it's refreshing to see it through someone else's eyes, through our conversations.Laura Read: I was going to say, 'I have to say,'  Before I was chief exec at Marwell, I ran a really large, shopping centre like retail, leisure, events, and destination. And I'm amazed that this is not on more commercial real estate people's radar. I look to see if there's anyone from a previous company here, then there isn't on the attendees list. And I'm like, 'Wow,' this is all the stuff that we should have been thinking about five years ago, ten years ago, when we were realising that diversification from a retail point of view is so important because of online shopping. So that's really interesting what you say. It's not just the theme parks.Andy Povey: No, absolutely not. It's all about the day out. And ultimately, that's all. We're all here to do is we work in a fun industry, and fun doesn't have to just be an amusement park.Paul Marden: Yeah, I found it really interesting. Seeing the things that I've seen has stretched my definition of what a visitor attraction actually is, because it is more than just a theme park. As you wander around and you see the different exhibitors, I was expecting to see... The ride designers and some of the really cool tech that I've seen. But there was other stuff that I've seen that I just hadn't expected.Andy Povey: No, I mean, I was chatting yesterday to a guy who supplies park benches and litter bins.  You see them everywhere. Paul Marden: I say the park bench thing. I remember when I was working at the Botanic Gardens in Wales as it was being built, the importance of the park bench and sitting on them. And they were beautiful park benches, but they were also super comfy. The importance of a park bench, like a good toilet, can't be underestimated.Laura Read: You can always tell someone who works in visitor attraction operations, when they go to any other visitor attraction, they take pictures of the bins. I think that is an absolute giveaway. When I go places with my family and the kids are there, taking pictures of animals or taking pictures of each other or whatever they're doing. And I'm there. Oh, I'm just gonna take a picture of that sign. You know, like.Andy Povey: I have another confession to make. I had a conversation with my wife who took the kids to an attraction a couple of weeks ago. And I was most distressed that she hadn't taken a picture of the till for me.Paul Marden: Oh, you would know what the part number and everything about that till, wouldn't you? Such a retail geek.Paul Marden: Laura, thank you so much for joining us on Skip the Queue. It has been delightful. I feel that there might be a full episode coming on, talking about the zoo, if you'll have me.Laura Read: Yes, absolutely. Bring it on. Paul Marden: Oh, wonderful. Thank you so much.Andy Povey: Andy, take me to the airport.Paul Marden: If you enjoyed this episode, please like and comment in your podcast app. It really helps more people to find us. Show notes and links to all our guests this week are available on our website, skipthequeue.fm. It's been a massive team effort to take Skip the Queue to IAAPA. A huge thank you to Emily Burrows and Sami Entwistle, Steve Folland and Wenalyn Dionaldo, Claire Furnival and Andy Povey, as well as Erica Washington-Perry and her team at IAAPA Global Communications.Paul Marden: Next week, we're wrapping up our IAAPA theme, talking to Choni Fernandez, Chief Sustainability Officer at PortAventura Entertainment, and Jakob Wahl, President and CEO of IAAPA. See you then.  The 2025 Visitor Attraction Website Survey is now LIVE! Dive into groundbreaking benchmarks for the industryGain a better understanding of how to achieve the highest conversion ratesExplore the "why" behind visitor attraction site performanceLearn the impact of website optimisation and visitor engagement on conversion ratesUncover key steps to enhance user experience for greater conversionsTake the Rubber Cheese Visitor Attraction Website Survey Report

Join us as we examine the recent UFO/DRONE reports from Copenhagen and Oslo. What is going on in Northern Europe? Is this a UFO invasion or something more down to earth? Listen in to know more.

On this episode, my guest is Stephen Jenkinson, culture activist and ceremonialist advocating a handmade life and eloquence. He is an author, a storyteller, a musician, sculptor and off-grid organic farmer. Stephen is the founder/ principal instructor of the Orphan Wisdom School in Canada, co-founded with his wife Nathalie Roy in 2010. Also a sought-after workshop leader, articulating matters of the heart, human suffering, confusions through ceremony.He is the author of several influential books, including Money and the Soul's Desires, Die Wise: A Manifesto for Sanity and Soul (2015), Come of Age: The Case for Elderhood in a Time of Trouble (2018), A Generation's Worth: Spirit Work While the Crisis Reigns (2021), and Reckoning (2022), co-written with Kimberly Ann Johnson. His most recent book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work, was released in August 2025. He is also involved in the musical project Nights of Grief & Mystery with singer-songwriter Gregory Hoskins, which has toured across North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.Show Notes:* The Bone House of the Orphan Wisdom Enterprise* Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work* The Wedding Industry* Romantic Sameness and Psychic Withering* The Two Tribes* The Roots of Hospitality* The Pompous Ending of Hospitality* Debt, And the Estrangement of the Stranger* More Than Human Hospitality* The Alchemy of the Orphan Wisdom SchoolHomework:Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work | PurchaseOrphan WisdomThe Scriptorium: Echoes of an Orphan WisdomTranscription:Chris: This is an interview that I've been wondering about for a long time in part, because Stephen was the first person I ever interviewed for the End of Tourism Podcast. In Oaxaca, Mexico, where I live Stephen and Natalie were visiting and were incredibly, incredibly generous. Stephen, in offering his voice as a way to raise up my questions to a level that deserve to be contended with.We spoke for about two and a half hours, if I remember correctly. And there was a lot in what you spoke to towards the second half of the interview that I think we're the first kind of iterations of the Matrimony book.We spoke a little bit about the stranger and trade, and it was kind of startling as someone trying to offer their first interview and suddenly hearing something [00:01:00] that I'd never heard before from Stephen. Right. And so it was quite impressive. And I'm grateful to be here now with y'all and to get to wonder about this a little more deeply with you Stephen.Stephen: Mm-hmm. Hmm.Chris: This is also a special occasion for the fact that for the first time in the history of the podcast, we have a live audience among us today. Strange doings. Some scholars and some stewards and caretakers of the Orphan Wisdom enterprise. So, thank you all as well for coming tonight and being willing to listen and put your ears to this.And so to begin, Stephen, I'm wondering if you'd be willing to let those who will be listening to this recording later on know where we're gathered in tonight?Stephen: Well, we're in... what's the name of this township?Nathalie: North Algona.Stephen: North Algona township on the borders, an eastern gate [00:02:00] of Algonquin Park. Strangely named place, given the fact that they were the first casualties of the park being established. And we're in a place that never should have been cleared - my farm. It should never have been cleared of the talls, the white pines that were here, but the admiralty was in need back in the day. And that's what happened there. And we're in a place that the Irish immigrants who came here after the famine called "Tramore," which more or less means "good-frigging luck farming."It doesn't technically mean that, but it absolutely means that. It actually means "sandy shore," which about covers the joint, and it's the only thing that covers the joint - would be sand. You have to import clay. Now, that's a joke in many farming places in the world, but if we wanted any clay, we'd have to bring it in and pay for the privilege.And the farm has been in [00:03:00] my, my responsibility for about 25 years now, pretty close to that. And the sheep, or those of them left because the coyotes have been around for the first time in their casualty-making way... They're just out here, I'm facing the field where they're milling around.And it's the very, very beginnings of the long cooling into cold, into frigid, which is our lot in this northern part of the hemisphere, even though it's still August, but it's clear that things have changed. And then, we're on a top of a little hill, which was the first place that I think that we may have convened a School here.It was a tipi, which is really worked very well considering we didn't live here, so we could put it up and put it down in the same weekend. [00:04:00] And right on this very hill, we were, in the early days, and we've replaced that tipi with another kind of wooden structure. A lot more wood in this one.This has been known as "The Teaching Hall" or "The Great Hall," or "The Hall" or "The Money Pit, as it was known for a little while, but it actually worked out pretty well. And it was I mean, people who've come from Scandinavia are knocked out by the kind of old-style, old-world visitation that the place seems to be to them.And I'd never really been before I had the idea what this should look like, but I just went from a kind of ancestral memory that was knocking about, which is a little different than your preferences, you know. You have different kinds of preferences you pass through stylistically through your life, but the ones that lay claim to you are the ones that are not interested in your [00:05:00] preferences. They're interested in your kind of inheritance and your lineage.So I'm more or less from the northern climes of Northern Europe, and so the place looks that way and I was lucky enough to still have my carving tools from the old days. And I've carved most of the beams and most of the posts that keep the place upright with a sort of sequence of beasts and dragons and ne'er-do-wells and very, very few humans, I think two, maybe, in the whole joint. Something like that. And then, mostly what festoons a deeply running human life is depicted here. And there's all kinds of stories, which I've never really sat down and spoken to at great length with anybody, but they're here.And I do deeply favour the idea that one day [00:06:00] somebody will stumble into this field, and I suppose, upon the remains of where we sit right now, and wonder "What the hell got into somebody?" That they made this mountain of timber moldering away, and that for a while what must have been, and when they finally find the footprint of, you know, its original dimensions and sort of do the wild math and what must have been going on in this sandy field, a million miles in away from its home.And wherever I am at that time, I'll be wondering the same thing.Audience: Hmm.Stephen: "What went on there?" Even though I was here for almost all of it. So, this was the home of the Orphan Wisdom School for more than a decade and still is the home of the Orphan Wisdom School, even if it's in advance, or in retreat [00:07:00] or in its doldrums. We'll see.And many things besides, we've had weddings in here, which is wherein I discovered "old-order matrimony," as I've come to call it, was having its way with me in the same way that the design of the place did. And it's also a grainery for our storage of corn. Keep it up off the ground and out of the hands of the varmints, you know, for a while.Well that's the beginning.Chris: Hmm. Hmm. Thank you Stephen.Stephen: Mm-hmm.Chris: You were mentioning the tipi where the school began. I remember sleeping in there the first time I came here. Never would I have thought for a million years that I'd be sitting here with you.Stephen: It's wild, isn't it?Chris: 12 years later.?: Yeah.Chris: And so next, I'd like to do my best in part over the course of the next perhaps hour or two to congratulate you on the release of [00:08:00] your new book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work.Stephen: Thank you.Chris: Mm-hmm. I'm grateful to say like many others that I've received a copy and have lent my eyes to your good words, and what is really an incredible achievement.For those who haven't had a chance to lay their eyes on it just yet, I'm wondering if you could let us in on why you wrote a book about matrimony in our time and where it stands a week out from its publication.Stephen: Well, maybe the answer begins with the question, "why did you write a book, having done so before?" And you would imagine that the stuff that goes into writing a book, you'd think that the author has hopes for some kind of redemptive, redeeming outcome, some kind of superlative that drops out the back end of the enterprise.And you know, this is [00:09:00] the seventh I've written. And I would have to say that's not really how it goes, and you don't really know what becomes of what you've written, even with the kind people who do respond, and the odd non-monetary prize that comes your way, which Die Wise gamed that.But I suppose, I wrote, at all partly to see what was there. You know, I had done these weddings and I was a little bit loathe to let go, to let the weddings turn entirely into something historical, something that was past, even though I probably sensed pretty clearly that I was at the end of my willingness to subject myself to the slings and arrows that came along with the enterprise, but it's a sweet sorrow, or there's a [00:10:00] wonder that goes along with the tangle of it all. And so, I wrote to find out what happened, as strange as that might sound to you. You can say, "well, you were there, you kind of knew what happened." But yes, I was witness to the thing, but there's the act of writing a book gives you the opportunity to sort of wonder in three-dimensions and well, the other thing I should say is I was naive and figured that the outfit who had published the, more or less prior two books to this one, would kind of inevitably be drawn to the fact that same guy. Basically, same voice, new articulation. And I was dumbfounded to find out that they weren't. And so, it's sort of smarted, you know?And I think what I did was I just set the whole [00:11:00] enterprise aside, partly to contend with the the depths of the disappointment in that regard, and also not wanting to get into the terrible fray of having to parse or paraphrase the book in some kind of elevator pitch-style to see if anybody else wanted to look at it. You know, such as my touchy sense of nobility sometimes, you know, that I just rather not be involved in the snarl of the marketplace any longer.So, I withdrew and I just set it aside but it wasn't that content to be set, set aside. And you know, to the book's credit, it bothered me every once in a while. It wasn't a book at the point where I was actually trying to engineer it, you know, and, and give it some kind of structure. I had piles of paper on the floor representing the allegation of chapters, trying to figure out what the relationship was [00:12:00] between any of these things.What conceivably should come before what. What the names of any of these things might be. Did they have an identity? Was I just imposing it? And all of that stuff I was going through at the same time as I was contending with a kind of reversal in fortune, personally. And so in part, it was a bit of a life raft to give me something to work on that I wouldn't have to research or dig around in the backyard for it and give me some sort of self-administered occupation for a while.Finally, I think there's a parallel with the Die Wise book, in that when it came to Die Wise, I came up with what I came up with largely because, in their absolute darkest, most unpromising hours, an awful lot of dying people, all of whom are dead now, [00:13:00] let me in on some sort of breach in the, the house of their lives.And I did feel that I had some obligation to them long-term, and that part of that obligation turned into writing Die Wise and touring and talking about that stuff for years and years, and making a real fuss as if I'd met them all, as if what happened is really true. Not just factually accurate, but deeply, abidingly, mandatorily true.So, although it may be the situation doesn't sound as extreme, but the truth is, when a number of younger - than me - people came to me and asked me to do their weddings, I, over the kind of medium-term thereafter, felt a not dissimilar obligation that the events that ensued from all of that not [00:14:00] be entrusted entirely to those relatively few people who attended. You know, you can call them "an audience," although I hope I changed that. Or you could call them "witnesses," which I hope I made them that.And see to it that there could be, not the authorized or official version of what happened, but to the view from here, so to speak, which is, as I sit where I am in the hall right now, I can look at the spot where I conducted much of this when I wasn't sacheting up and down the middle aisle where the trestle tables now are.And I wanted to give a kind of concerted voice to that enterprise. And I say "concerted voice" to give you a feel for the fact that I don't think this is a really an artifact. It's not a record. It's a exhortation that employs the things that happened to suggest that even though it is the way it is [00:15:00] ritually, impoverished as it is in our time and place, it has been otherwise within recoverable time and history. It has.And if that's true, and it is, then it seems to me at least is true that it could be otherwise again. And so, I made a fuss and I made a case based on that conviction.There's probably other reasons I can't think of right now. Oh, being not 25 anymore, and not having that many more books in me, the kind of wear and tear on your psyche of imposing order on the ramble, which is your recollection, which has only so many visitations available in it. Right? You can only do that so many times, I think. And I'm not a born writing person, you know, I come to it maniacally when I [00:16:00] do, and then when it's done, I don't linger over it so much.So then, when it's time to talk about it, I actually have to have a look, because the act of writing it is not the act of reading it. The act of writing is a huge delivery and deliverance at the same time. It's a huge gestation. And you can't do that to yourself, you know, over and over again, but you can take some chances, and look the thing in the eye. So, and I think some people who are there, they're kind of well-intended amongst them, will recognize themselves in the details of the book, beyond "this is what happened and so on." You know, they'll recognize themselves in the advocacy that's there, and the exhortations that are there, and the [00:17:00] case-making that I made and, and probably the praying because there's a good degree of prayerfulness in there, too.That's why.Chris: Thank you. bless this new one in the world. And what's the sense for you?Stephen: Oh, yes.Chris: It being a one-week old newborn. How's that landing in your days?Stephen: Well, it's still damp, you know. It's still squeaky, squeaky and damp. It's walking around like a newborn primate, you know, kind of swaying in the breeze and listening to port or to starboard according to whatever's going on.I don't know that it's so very self-conscious in the best sense of that term, yet. Even though I recorded the audio version, I don't think [00:18:00] it's my voice is found every nook and cranny at this point, yet. So, it's kind of new. It's not "news," but it is new to me, you know, and it's very early in terms of anybody responding to it.I mean, nobody around me has really taken me aside and say, "look, now I want to tell you about this book you wrote." It hasn't happened, and we'll see if it does, but I've done a few events on the other side of the ocean and hear so far, very few, maybe handful of interviews. And those are wonderful opportunities to hear something of what you came up with mismanaged by others, you know, misapprehend, you could say by others.No problem. I mean, it's absolutely no problem. And if you don't want that to happen, don't talk, don't write anything down. So, I don't mind a bit, you know, and the chances are very good that it'll turn into things I didn't have in mind [00:19:00] as people take it up, and regard their own weddings and marriages and plans and schemes and fears and, you know, family mishigas and all the rest of it through this particular lens, you know. They may pick up a pen or a computer (it's an odd expression, "pick up a computer"), and be in touch with me and let me know. "Yeah, that was, we tried it" or whatever they're going to do, because, I mean, maybe Die Wise provided a bit of an inkling of how one might be able to proceed otherwise in their dying time or in their families or their loved ones dying time.This is the book that most readily lends itself to people translating into something they could actually do, without a huge kind of psychic revolution or revolt stirring in them, at least not initially. This is as close as I come, probably, to writing a sequence of things [00:20:00] that could be considered "add-ons" to what people are already thinking about, that I don't force everybody else outta the house in order to make room for the ideas that are in the book. That may happen, anyway, but it wasn't really the intent. The intent was to say, you know, we are in those days when we're insanely preoccupied with the notion of a special event. We are on the receiving end of a considerable number of shards showing up without any notion really about what these shards remember or are memories of. And that's the principle contention I think that runs down the spine of the book, is that when we undertake matrimony, however indelicately, however by rote, you know, however mindlessly we may do it, [00:21:00] inadvertently, we call upon those shards nonetheless.And they're pretty unspectacular if you don't think about them very deeply, like the rice or confetti, like the aisle, like the procession up the aisle, like the giving away of someone, like the seating arrangement, like the spectacle seating arrangement rather than the ritual seating arrangement.And I mean, there's a fistful of them. And they're around and scholars aside maybe, nobody knows why they do them. Everybody just knows, "this is what a wedding is," but nobody knows why. And because nobody knows why, nobody really seems to know what a wedding is for, although they do proceed like they would know a wedding if they saw one. So, I make this a question to be really wondered about, and the shards are a way in. They're the kind of [00:22:00] breadcrumb trail through the forest. They're the little bits of broken something, which if you begin to handle just three or four of them, and kind of fit them together, and find something of the original shape and inflection of the original vessel, kind of enunciates, begins to murmur in your hands, and from it you can begin to infer some three-dimensionality to the original shape. And from the sense of the shape, you get a set sense of contour, and from the sense of contour, you get a sense of scale or size. And from that you get a sense of purpose, or function, or design. And from that you get a sense of some kind of serious magisterial insight into some of the fundament of human being that was manifest in the "old-order matrimony," [00:23:00] as I came to call it.So, who wouldn't wanna read that book?Chris: Mm-hmm.Thank you. Mm-hmm. Thank you, Stephen. Yeah. It reminds me, just before coming up here, maybe two weeks ago, I was in attending a wedding. And there was a host or mc, and initially just given what I was hearing over the microphone, it was hard to tell if he was hired or family or friends. And it turned out he was, in fact, a friend of the groom. And throughout the night he proceeded to take up that role as a kind of comedian.Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: This was the idea, I guess. Mm-hmm. And he was buzzing and mumbling and swearing into the microphone, [00:24:00] and then finally minimizing the only remnant of traditional culture that showed up in the wedding. And his thing was, okay, so when can we get to the part where it's boom, boom, boom, right. And shot, shot, shot, whatever.Stephen: Right.Chris: There was so much that came up in my memories in part because I worked about a decade in Toronto in the wedding industry.Mm-hmm. Hospitality industry. Maybe a contradiction in terms, there. And there was one moment that really kind of summed it up. I kept coming back to this reading the book because it was everything that you wrote seemed to not only antithetical to this moment, but also an antidote.Anyways, it was in North Toronto and the [00:25:00] owner of the venue - it was a kind of movie theatre turned event venue - and there was a couple who was eventually going to get married there. They came in to do their tasting menu to see what they wanted to put on the menu for the dinner, for their wedding.And the owner was kind of this mafioso type. And he comes in and he sees them and he walks over and he says, "so, you're gonna get married at my wedding factory."Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: In all sincerity.Stephen: Mm-hmm.Chris: Right.Without skipping a beat. Could you imagine?Stephen: Yeah.I could. I sure could.Chris: Yeah. Yeah.Stephen: I mean, don't forget, if these people weren't doing what the people wanted, they'd be outta business.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: No, that's the thing. This is aiding and abetting. This is sleeping with the enemy, stylistically-speaking. [00:26:00] The fact that people "settle" (that's the term I would use for it), settle for this, the idea being that this somehow constitutes the most honest and authentic through line available to us is just jaw dropping. When you consider what allegedly this thing is supposed to be for. I mean, maybe we'll get into this, but I'll just leave this as a question for now. What is that moment allegedly doing?Not, what are the people in it allegedly doing? The moment itself, what is it? How is it different from us sitting here now talking about it? And how is it different from the gory frigging jet-fuelled aftermath of excess. And how's it different from the cursing alleged master of ceremonies? How can you [00:27:00] tell none of those things belong to this thing?And why do you have such a hard time imagining what doesAudience: Hmm mmChris: Well that leads me to my next question.Stephen: Ah, you're welcome.Chris: So, I've pulled a number of quotes from the book to read from over the course of the interview. And this one for anyone who's listening is on page 150. And you write Stephen,"Spiritually-speaking, most of the weddings in our corner of the world are endogamous affairs, inward-looking. What is, to me, most unnerving is that they can be spiritually-incestuous. The withering of psychic difference between people is the program of globalization. It is in the architecture of most things partaking of the internet, and it is in the homogeneity of our matrimony. [00:28:00] It is this very incestuous that matrimony was once crafted and entered into to avoid and subvert. Now, it grinds upon our differences until they are details.And so, this paragraph reminded me of a time in my youth when I seemed to be meeting couples who very eerily looked like each other. No blood or extended kin relation whatsoever, and yet they had very similar faces. And so as I get older, this kind of face fidelity aside, I continue to notice that people looking for companionship tend to base their search on similitude, on shared interests, customs, experiences, shared anything and everything. This, specifically, in opposition to those on the other side of the aisle or spectrum, to difference or divergence. And so, opposites don't attract anymore. I'm curious what you think this psychic [00:29:00] withering does to an achieve understanding of matrimony.Stephen: Well, I mean, let's wonder what it does to us, generally, first before we get to matrimony, let's say. It demonizes. Maybe that's too strong, but it certainly reconstitutes difference as some kind of affliction, some kind of not quite good enough, some kind of something that has to be overcome or overwhelmed on the road to, to what? On the road to sameness? So, if that's the goal, then are all of the differences between us, aberrations of some kind, if that's the goal? If that's the goal, are all the [00:30:00] differences between us, not God-given, but humanly misconstrued or worse? Humanly wrought? Do the differences between us conceivably then belong at all? Or is the principle object of the entire endeavor to marry yourself, trying to put up with the vague differences that the other person represents to you?I mean, I not very jokingly said years ago, that I coined a phrase that went something like "the compromise of infinity, which is other people." What does that mean? "The compromise of infinity, which is other people." Not to mention it's a pretty nice T-shirt. But what I meant by the [00:31:00] phrase is this: when you demonize difference in this fashion or when you go the other direction and lionize sameness, then one of the things that happens is that compromise becomes demonized, too. Compromise, by definition, is something you never should have done, right? Compromise is how much you surrender of yourself in order to get by. That's what all these things become. And before you know it, you're just beaten about the head and shoulders about "codependence" and you know, not being "true to yourself" as if being true to yourself is some kind of magic.I mean, the notion that "yourself is the best part of you" is just hilarious. I mean, when you think about it, like who's running amuck if yourself is what you're supposed to be? I ask you. Like, who's [00:32:00] doing the harm? Who's going mental if the self is such a good idea? So, of course, I'm maintaining here that I'm not persuaded that there is such a thing.I think it's a momentary lapse in judgment to have a self and to stick to it. That's the point I'm really making to kind of reify it until it turns ossified and dusty and bizarrely adamant like that estranged relative that lives in the basement of your house. Bizarrely, foreignly adamant, right? Like the house guest who just won't f**k off kind of thing.Okay, so "to thine own self be true," is it? Well, try being true to somebody else's self for ten minutes. Try that. [00:33:00] That's good at exercise for matrimony - being true to somebody else's self. You'll discover that their selves are not made in heaven, either. Either. I underscore it - either. I've completely lost track of the question you asked me.Chris: What are the consequences of the sameness on this anti-cultural sameness, and the program of it for an achieved understanding of matrimony.Stephen: Thank you. Well, I will fess up right now. I do so in the book. That's a terrible phrase. I swear I'd never say such a thing. "In my book... I say the following," but in this case, it's true. I did say this. I realized during the writing of it that I had made a tremendous tactical error in the convening of the event as I did it over the years, [00:34:00] and this is what it came to.I was very persuaded at the time of the story that appears in the chapter called "Salt and Indigo" in the book. I was very, very persuaded. I mean, listen, I made up the story (for what it's worth), okay, but I didn't make it up out of nothing. I made it up out of a kind of tribal memory that wouldn't quite let go.And in it, I was basically saying, here's these two tribes known principally for what they trade in and what they love most emphatically. They turn out to be the same thing. And I describe a circumstance in which they exchange things in a trade scenario, not a commerce scenario. And I'm using the chapter basically to make the case that matrimony's architecture derives in large measure from the sacraments of trade as manifest in that story. [00:35:00] Okay. And this is gonna sound obvious, but the fundamental requirement of the whole conceit that I came up with is that there are two tribes. Well, I thought to myself, "of course, there's always two tribes" at the time. And the two tribe-ness is reflected in when you come to the wedding site, you're typically asked (I hope you're still asked) " Are you family or friend of the groom or friend of the bride?" And you're seated "accordingly," right? That's the nominal, vestigial shard of this old tribal affiliation, that people came from over the rise, basically unknown to each other, to arrive at the kind of no man's land of matrimony, and proceeded accordingly. So, I put these things into motion in this very room and I sat people accordingly facing each other, not facing the alleged front of the room. [00:36:00] And of course, man, nobody knew where to look, because you raised your eyes and s**t. There's just humans across from you, just scads of them who you don't freaking know. And there's something about doing that to North Americas that just throws them. So, they're just looking at each other and then looking away, and looking at each other and looking away, and wondering what they're doing here and what it's for. And I'm going back and forth for three hours, orienting them as to what is is coming.Okay, so what's the miscalculation that I make? The miscalculation I made was assuming that by virtue of the seating arrangement, by virtue of me reminding them of the salt and indigo times, by virtue of the fact that they had a kind of allegiance of some sort or another to the people who are, for the moment, betrothed, that those distinctions and those affiliations together would congeal them, and constitute a [00:37:00] kind of tribal affiliation that they would intuitively be drawn towards as you would be drawn to heat on a cold winter's night.Only to discover, as I put the thing into motion that I was completely wrong about everything I just told you about. The nature of my error was this, virtually all of those people on one side of the room were fundamentally of the same tribe as the people on the other side of the room, apropos of your question, you see. They were card carrying members of the gray dominant culture of North America. Wow. The bleached, kind of amorphous, kind of rootless, ancestor-free... even regardless of whether their people came over in the last generation from the alleged old country. It doesn't really claim them.[00:38:00]There were two tribes, but I was wrong about who they were. That was one tribe. Virtually everybody sitting in the room was one tribe.So, who's the other tribe? Answer is: me and the four or five people who were in on the structural delivery of this endeavour with me. We were the other tribe.We didn't stand a chance, you see?And I didn't pick up on that, and I didn't cast it accordingly and employ that, instead. I employed the conceit that I insisted was manifest and mobilized in the thing, instead of the manifest dilemma, which is that everybody who came knew what a wedding was, and me and four or five other people were yet to know if this could be one. That was the tribal difference, if you [00:39:00] will.So, it was kind of invisible, wasn't it? Even to me at the time. Or, I say, maybe especially to me at the time. And so, things often went the way they went, which was for however much fascination and willingness to consider that there might have been in the room, there was quite a bit more either flat affect and kind of lack of real fascination, or curiosity, or sometimes downright hostility and pushback. Yeah.So, all of that comes from the fact that I didn't credit as thoroughly as I should have done, the persistence in Anglo-North America of a kind of generic sameness that turned out to be what most people came here ancestrally to become. "Starting again" is recipe for culture [00:40:00] loss of a catastrophic order. The fantasy of starting again. Right?And we've talked about that in your podcast, and you and I have talked about it privately, apropos of your own family and everybody's sitting in this room knows what I'm talking about. And when does this show up? Does it show up, oh, when you're walking down the street? Does it show up when you're on the mountaintop? Does it show up in your peak experiences? And the answer is "maybe." It probably shows up most emphatically in those times when you have a feeling that something special is supposed to be so, and all you can get from the "supposed to" is the allegation of specialness.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: And then, you look around in the context of matrimony and you see a kind of febral, kind of strained, the famous bridezilla stuff, all of that stuff. [00:41:00] You saw it in the hospitality industry, no doubt. You know, the kind of mania for perfection, as if perfection constitutes culture. Right? With every detail checked off in the checkbox, that's culture. You know, as if everything goes off without a hitch and there's no guffaws. And in fact, anybody could reasonably make the case, "Where do you think culture appears when the script finally goes f*****g sideways?" That's when. And when you find out what you're capable of, ceremonially.And generally speaking, I think most people discovered that their ceremonial illiteracy bordered on the bottomless.That's when you find out. Hmm.Chris: Wow.Stephen: Yeah. And that's why people, you know, in speech time, they reach in there and get that piece of paper, and just look at it. Mm-hmm. They don't even look up, terrified that they're gonna go off script for a minute as [00:42:00] if the Gods of Matrimony are a scripted proposition.Chris: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Thank you for sharing that with us, that degree of deep reflection and humility that I'm sure comes with it.Stephen: Mea Culpa, baby. Yeah, I was, I got that one totally wrong. Mm-hmm. And I didn't know it at the time. Meanwhile, like, how much can you transgress and have the consequences of doing so like spill out across the floor like a broken thermometer's mercury and not wise up.But of course, I was as driven as anybody. I was as driven to see if I could come through with what I promised to do the year before. And keeping your promise can make you into a maniac.Audience: Hmm hmm.Chris: But I imagine that, you [00:43:00] know, you wouldn't have been able to see that even years later if you didn't say yes in the first place.Stephen: Oh, yeah. Yeah. And I wouldn't have been able to make the errors.Chris: Right.Stephen: Right. Yeah. I mean, as errors go, this is not a mortal sin. Right, right. And you could chalk it up to being a legitimate miscalculation. Well, so? All I'm saying is, it turns out I was there too, and it turns out, even though I was allegedly the circus master of the enterprise, I wasn't free and clear of the things we were all contending with, the kind of mortality and sort of cultural ricketiness that were all heirs to. That's how I translated it, as it turns out.So, PS there was a moment, [00:44:00] which I don't remember which setting it was now, but there was a moment when the "maybe we'll see if she becomes a bride" bride's mother slid up to me during the course of the proceedings, and in a kind of stage whisper more or less hissed me as follows."Is this a real wedding?"I mean, that's not a question. Not in that setting, obviously not. That is an accusation. Right. And a withering one at that. And there was a tremendous amount of throw-down involved.So, was it? I mean, what we do know is that she did not go to any of the weddings [00:45:00] that she was thinking of at the time, and go to the front of the room where the celebrant is austerely standing there with the book, or the script, or the well-intentioned, or the self-penned vows and never hissed at him or her, "is this a real wedding?"Never once did she do that. We know that.Right.And I think we know why. But she was fairly persuaded she knew what a real wedding was. And all she was really persuaded by was the poverty of the weddings that she'd attended before that one. Well, I was as informed in that respect as she was, wasn't I? I just probably hadn't gone to as many reprobate weddings as she had, so she had more to deal with than I did, even though I was in the position of the line of fire.And I didn't respond too well to the question, I have to say. At the moment, I was rather combative. But I mean, you try to do [00:46:00] what I tried to do and not have a degree of fierceness to go along with your discernment, you know, just to see if you can drag this carcass across the threshold. Anyway, that happened too.Chris: Wow. Yeah. Dominant culture of North America.Stephen: Heard of it.Chris: Yeah. Well, in Matrimony, there's quite a bit in which you write about hospitality and radical hospitality. And I wanted to move in that direction a little bit, because in terms of these kind of marketplace rituals or ceremonies that you were mentioning you know, it's something that we might wonder, I think, as you have, how did it come to be this [00:47:00] way?And so I'd like to, if I can once again, quote from matrimony in which you speak to the etymology of hospitality. And so for those interested on page 88,"the word hospitality comes from hospitaller, meaning 'one who cares for the afflicted, the infirm, the needy.' There's that thread of our misgivings about being on the receiving end of hospitality. Pull on it. For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"End quote.Stephen: That's so great. I mean, before you go on with the quote. It's so great to know that the word, unexamined, just kind of leaks upside, doesn't it? Hospitality, I mean, nobody goes "Hospitality, ew." [00:48:00] And then, if you just quietly do the obvious math to yourself, there's so much awkwardness around hospitality.This awkwardness must have an origin, have a home. There must be some misgiving that goes along with the giving of hospitality, mustn't there be? How else to understand where that kind of ickiness is to be found. Right? And it turns out that the etymology is giving you the beginnings of a way of figuring it out what it is that you're on the receiving end of - a kind of succor that you wish you didn't need, which is why it's the root word for "hospital."Chris: Hmm hmm. Wow.Audience: Hmm.Chris: May I repeat that sentence please? Once more."For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, [00:49:00] 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"And so this last part hits home for me as I imagine it does for many.And it feels like the orthodoxy of hospitality in our time is one based not only in transaction, but in debt. And if you offer hospitality to me, then I owe you hospitality.Stephen: Right.Chris: I'm indebted to you. And we are taught, in our time, that the worst thing to be in is in debt.Stephen: Right?Chris: And so people refuse both the desire to give as well as the learning skill of receiving. And this is continuing on page 88 now."But there's mystery afoot with this word. In its old Latin form, hospice meant both 'host' and 'guest.'"Stephen: Amazing. One. Either one, This is absolutely amazing. We're fairly sure that there's a [00:50:00] acres of difference between the giver of hospitality and the receiver that the repertoire is entirely different, that the skew between them is almost insurmountable, that they're not interchangeable in any way. But the history of the word immediately says, "really?" The history of the word, without question, says that "host" and "guest" are virtually the same, sitting in different places, being different people, more or less joined at the hip. I'll say more, but you go ahead with what you were gonna do. Sure.Chris: "In it's proto Indo-European origins, hospitality and hospice is a compound word: gosh + pot. And it meant something like [00:51:00] 'stranger/guest/host + powerful Lord.'It is amazing to me that ancestrally, the old word for guest, host, and stranger were all the same word. Potent ceremonial business, this is. In those days, the server and the serve were partners in something mysterious. This could be confusing, but only if you think of guest, host, and stranger as fixed identities.If you think of them as functions, as verbs, the confusion softens and begins to clear. The word hospice in its ancient root is telling us that each of the people gathered together in hospitality is bound to the others by formal etiquette, yes, but the bond is transacted through a subtle scheme of graces.Hospitality, it tells us, is a web of longing and belonging that binds people for a time, some hithereto unknown to each other is a clutch of mutually-binding elegances, you could say. In its ancient practice, [00:52:00] hospitality was a covenant. According to that accord, however we were with each other. That was how the Gods would be with us. We learn our hospitality by being on the receiving end of Godly administration. That's what giving thanks for members. We proceed with our kin in imitation of that example and in gratitude for it."Mm-hmm.And so today, among "secular" people, with the Gods ignored, this old-time hospitality seems endangered, if not fugitive. I'm curious how you imagine that this rupture arose, the ones that separated and commercialized the radical relationships between hosts and guests, that turned them from verbs to nouns and something like strangers to marketplace functions.[00:53:00]Stephen: Well, of course this is a huge question you've asked, and I'll see if I can unhuge it a bit.Chris: Uhhuh.Stephen: Let's go right to the heart of what happened. Just no preliminaries, just right to it.So, to underscore again, the beauty of the etymology. I've told you over and over again, the words will not fail you. And this is just a shining example, isn't it? That the fraternization is a matter of ceremonial alacrity that the affiliation between host and guest, which makes them partners in something, that something is the [00:54:00] evocation of a third thing that's neither one of them. It's the thing they've lent themselves to by virtue of submitting to being either a host or a guest. One.Two. You could say that in circumstances of high culture or highly-functioning culture, one of the principle attributes of that culture is that the fundament of its understanding, is that only with the advent of the stranger in their midst that the best of them comes forward.Okay, follow that. Yeah.So, this is a little counterintuitive for those of us who don't come from such places. We imagine that the advent of strangers in the midst of the people I'm describing would be an occasion where people hide their [00:55:00] best stuff away until the stranger disappears, and upon the disappearance of the stranger, the good stuff comes out again.You know?So, I'm just remembering just now, there's a moment in the New Testament where Jesus says something about the best wine and he's coming from exactly this page that we're talking about - not the page in the book, but this understanding. He said, you know, "serve your best wine first," unlike the standard, that prevails, right?So again, what a stranger does in real culture is call upon the cultural treasure of the host's culture, and provides the opportunity for that to come forward, right? By which you can understand... Let's say for simplicity's sake, there's two kinds of hospitality. There's probably all kinds of gradations, [00:56:00] but for the purposes of responding to what you've asked, there's two.One of them is based on kinship. Okay? So, family meal. So, everybody knows whose place is whose around the table, or it doesn't matter - you sit wherever you want. Or, when we're together, we speak shorthand. That's the shorthand of familiarity and affinity, right?Everybody knows what everybody's talking about. A lot of things get half-said or less, isn't it? And there's a certain fineness, isn't it? That comes with that kind of affinity. Of course, there is, and I'm not diminishing it at all. I'm just characterizing it as being of a certain frequency or calibre or charge. And the charge is that it trades on familiarity. It requires that. There's that kind of hospitality."Oh, sit wherever you want."Remember this one?[00:57:00]"We don't stand on ceremony here.""Oh, you're one of the family now." I just got here. What, what?But, of course, you can hear in the protestations the understanding, in that circumstance, that formality is an enemy to feeling good in this moment, isn't it? It feels stiff and starched and uncalled for or worse.It feels imported from elsewhere. It doesn't feel friendly. So, I'm giving you now beginnings of a differentiation between how cultures who really function as cultures understand what it means to be hospitable and what often prevails today, trading is a kind of low-grade warfare conducted against the strangeness of the stranger.The whole purpose of treating somebody like their family is to mitigate, and finally neutralize their [00:58:00] strangeness, so that for the purposes of the few hours in front of us all, there are no strangers here. Right? Okay.Then there's another kind, and intuitively you can feel what I'm saying. You've been there, you know exactly what I mean.There's another kind of circumstance where the etiquette that prevails is almost more emphatic, more tangible to you than the familiar one. That's the one where your mother or your weird aunt or whoever she might be, brings out certain kind of stuff that doesn't come out every day. And maybe you sit in a room that you don't often sit in. And maybe what gets cooked is stuff you haven't seen in a long time. And some part of you might be thinking, "What the hell is all this about?" And the answer is: it's about that guy in the [00:59:00] corner that you don't know.And your own ancestral culture told acres of stories whose central purpose was to convey to outsiders their understanding of what hospitality was. That is fundamentally what The Iliad and The Odyssey are often returning to and returning to and returning to.They even had a word for the ending of the formal hospitality that accrued, that arose around the care and treatment of strangers. It was called pomp or pompe, from which we get the word "pompous." And you think about what the word "pompous" means today.It means "nose in the air," doesn't it? Mm-hmm. It means "thinks really highly of oneself," isn't it? And it means "useless, encumbering, kind of [01:00:00] artificial kind of going through the motions stuff with a kind of aggrandizement for fun." That's what "pompous" means. Well, the people who gave us the word didn't mean that at all. This word was the word they used to describe the particular moment of hospitality when it was time for the stranger to leave.And when it was mutually acknowledged that the time for hospitality has come to an end, and the final act of hospitality is to accompany the stranger out of the house, out of the compound, out into the street, and provision them accordingly, and wish them well, and as is oftentimes practiced around here, standing in the street and waving them long after they disappear from view.This is pompous. This is what it actually means. Pretty frigging cool when you get corrected once in a while, isn't it? [01:01:00] Yeah.So, as I said, to be simplistic about it, there's at least a couple of kinds, and one of them treasures the advent of the stranger, understanding it to be the detonation point for the most elegant part of us to come forward.Now, those of us who don't come from such a place, we're just bamboozled and Shanghai'ed by the notion of formality, which we kind of eschew. You don't like formality when it comes to celebration, as if these two things are hostile, one to the other. But I'd like you to consider the real possibility that formality is grace under pressure, and that formality is there to give you a repertoire of response that rescues you from the gross limitations of your autobiography.[01:02:00]Next question. I mean, that's the beginning.Chris: Absolutely. Absolutely. Mm-hmm. Thank you once again, Stephen. So alongside the term or concept of "pompe," in which the the guest or stranger was led out of the house or to the entrance of the village, there was also the consideration around the enforcement of hospitality, which you write about in the book. And you write that"the enforcement of hospitality runs the palpable risk of violating or undoing the cultural value it is there to advocate for. Forcing people to share their good fortune with the less fortunate stretches, to the point of undoing the generosity of spirit that the culture holds dear. Enforcement of hospitality is a sign of the eclipse of hospitality, typically spawned by insecurity, contracted self-definition, and the darkening of the [01:03:00] stranger at the door.Instead, such places and times are more likely to encourage the practice of hospitality in subtle generous ways, often by generously treating the ungenerous."And so there seems to be a need for limits placed on hospitality, in terms of the "pompe," the maximum three days in which a stranger can be given hospitality, and concurrently a need to resist enforcing hospitality. This seems like a kind of high-wire act that hospitable cultures have to balance in order to recognize and realize an honorable way of being with a stranger. And so I'm wondering if you could speak to the possibility of how these limits might be practiced without being enforced. What might that look like in a culture that engages with, with such limits, but without prohibitions?Stephen: Mm-hmm. That's a very good question. [01:04:00] Well, I think your previous question was what happened? I think, in a nutshell, and I didn't really answer that, so maybe see how I can use this question to answer the one that you asked before: what happened? So, there's no doubt in my mind that something happened that it's kind of demonstrable, if only with the benefit of hindsight.Audience: Right.Stephen: Or we can feel our way around the edges of the absence of the goneness of that thing that gives us some feel for the original shape of that thing.So you could say I'm trafficking in "ideals," here, and after a fashion, maybe, yeah. But the notion of "ideals," when it's used in this slanderous way suggests that "it was never like that."Chris: Mm-hmm.Stephen: And I suggest to you it's been like that in a lot of places, and there's a lot of places where it's still like that, although globalization [01:05:00] may be the coup de grâce performed upon this capacity. Okay. But anyway.Okay. So what happened? Well, you see in the circumstance that I described, apropos of the stranger, the stranger is in on it. The stranger's principle responsibility is to be the vector for this sort of grandiose generosity coming forward, and to experience that in a burdensome and unreciprocated fashion, until you realize that their willingness to do that is their reciprocity. Everybody doesn't get to do everything at once. You can't give and receive at the same time. You know what that's called? "Secret Santa at school," isn't it?That's where nobody owes nobody nothing at the end. That's what we're all after. I mean, one of your questions, you know, pointed to that, that there's a kind of, [01:06:00] what do you call that, teeter-totter balance between what people did for each other and what they received for each other. Right. And nobody feels slighted in any way, perfect balance, et cetera.Well, the circumstance here has nothing of the kind going with it. The circumstance we're describing now is one in which the hospitality is clearly unequal in terms of who's eating whose food, for example, in terms of the absolutely frustrated notion of reciprocity, that in fact you undo your end of the hospitality by trying to pay back, or give back, or pay at all, or break even, or not feel the burden of "God, you've been on the take for fricking hours here now." And if you really look in the face of the host, I mean, they're just getting started and you can't, you can't take it anymore.[01:07:00]So, one of the ways that we contend with this is through habits of speech. So, if somebody comes around with seconds. They say, "would you like a little more?"And you say, "I'm good. I'm good. I'm good." You see, "I'm good" is code for what? "F**k off." That's what it's code for. It's a little strong. It's a little strong. What I mean is, when "I'm good" comes to town, it means I don't need you and what you have. Good God, you're not there because you need it you knucklehead. You're there because they need it, because their culture needs an opportunity to remember itself. Right?Okay. So what happened? Because you're making it sound like a pretty good thing, really. Like who would say, "I think we've had enough of this hospitality thing, don't you? Let's try, oh, [01:08:00] keeping our s**t to ourselves. That sounds like a good alternative. Let's give it a week or two, see how it rolls." Never happened. Nobody decided to do this - this change, I don't think. I think the change happened, and sometime long after people realized that the change had had taken place. And it's very simple. The change, I think, went something like this.As long as the guest is in on it, there's a shared and mutually-held understanding that doesn't make them the same. It makes them to use the quote from the book "partners," okay, with different tasks to bring this thing to light, to make it so. What does that require? A mutually-held understanding in vivo as it's happening, what it is.Okay. [01:09:00] So, that the stranger who's not part of the host culture... sorry, let me say this differently.The culture of the stranger has made the culture of the host available to the stranger no matter how personally adept he or she may be at receiving. Did you follow that?Audience: A little.Stephen: Okay. Say it again?Audience: Yes, please.Stephen: Okay. The acculturation, the cultured sophistication of the stranger is at work in his or her strangerhood. Okay. He or she's not at home, but their cultural training helps them understand what their obligations are in terms of this arrangement we've been describing here.Okay, so I think the rupture takes place [01:10:00] when the culturation of one side or the other fails to make the other discernible to the one.One more time?When something happens whereby the acculturation of one of the partners makes the identity, the presence, and the valence of the other one untranslatable. Untranslatable.I could give you an example from what I call " the etiquette of trade," or the... what was the word? Not etiquette. What's the other word?Chris: The covenant?Stephen: Okay, " covenant of trade" we'll call it. So, imagine that people are sitting across from each other, two partners in a trade. Okay? [01:11:00] Imagine that they have one thing to sell or move or exchange and somebody has something else.How does this work? Not "what are the mechanics?" That can be another discussion, but, if this works, how does it work? Not "how does it happen?" How does it actually achieve what they're after? Maybe it's something like this.I have this pottery, and even though you're not a potter, but somebody in your extended family back home was, and you watched what they went through to make a fricking pot, okay?You watched how their hands seized up, because the clay leached all the moisture out of the hands. You distinctly remember that - how the old lady's hands looked cracked and worn, and so from the work of making vessels of hospitality, okay? [01:12:00] It doesn't matter that you didn't make it yourself. The point is you recognize in the item something we could call "cultural patrimony."You recognize the deep-runningness of the culture opposite you as manifest and embodied in this item for trade. Okay? So, the person doesn't have to "sell you" because your cultural sophistication makes this pot on the other side available to you for the deeply venerable thing that it is. Follow what I'm saying?Okay. So, you know what I'm gonna say next? When something happens, the items across from you cease to speak, cease to have their stories come along with them, cease to be available. There's something about your cultural atrophy that you project onto the [01:13:00] item that you don't recognize.You don't recognize it's valence, it's proprieties, it's value, it's deep-running worth and so on. Something happened, okay? And because you're not making your own stuff back home or any part of it. And so now, when you're in a circumstance like this and you're just trying to get this pot, but you know nothing about it, then the enterprise becomes, "Okay, so what do you have to part with to obtain the pot?"And the next thing is, you pretend you're not interested in obtaining the pot to obtain the pot. That becomes part of the deal. And then, the person on the making end feels the deep running slight of your disinterest, or your vague involvement in the proceedings, or maybe the worst: when it's not things you're going back and forth with, but there's a third thing called money, which nobody makes, [01:14:00] which you're not reminded of your grandma or anyone else's with the money. And then, money becomes the ghost of the original understanding of the cultural patrimony that sat between you. That's what happened, I'm fairly sure: the advent, the estrangement that comes with the stranger, instead of the opportunity to be your cultural best when the stranger comes.And then of course, it bleeds through all kinds of transactions beyond the "obvious material ones." So, it's a rupture in translatability, isn't it?Chris: You understand this to happen or have happened historically, culturally, et cetera, with matrimony as well?Stephen: Oh, absolutely. Yeah.Yeah. This is why, for example, things like the fetishization of virginity.Audience: Mm-hmm. [01:15:00]Stephen: I think it's traceable directly to what we're talking about. How so? Oh, this is a whole other long thing, but the very short version would be this.Do you really believe that through all of human history until the recent liberation, that people have forever fetishized the virginity of a young woman and jealously defended it, the "men" in particular, and that it became a commodity to trade back and forth in, and that it had to be prodded and poked at to determine its intactness? And this was deemed to be, you know, honourable behavior?Do you really think that's the people you come from, that they would've do that to the most cherished of their [01:16:00] own, barely pubescent girls? Come on now. I'm not saying it didn't happen and doesn't still happen. I'm not saying that. I'm saying, God almighty, something happened for that to be so.And I'm trying to allude to you now what I think took place. Then all of a sudden, the hymen takes the place of the pottery, doesn't it? And it becomes universally translatable. Doesn't it? It becomes a kind of a ghosted artifact of a culturally-intact time. It's as close as you can get.Hence, this allegation of its purity, or the association with purity, and so on. [01:17:00] I mean, there's lots to say, but that gives you a feel for what might have happened there.Chris: Thank you, Stephen. Thank you for being so generous with your considerations here.Stephen: You see why I had to write a book, eh?Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: There was too much bouncing around. Like I had to just keep track of my own thoughts on the matter.But can you imagine all of this at play in the year, oh, I don't know, 2022, trying to put into motion a redemptive passion play called "matrimony," with all of this at play? Not with all of this in my mind, but with all of this actually disfiguring the anticipation of the proceedings for the people who came.Can you imagine? Can you imagine trying to pull it off, and [01:18:00] contending overtly with all these things and trying to make room for them in a moment that's supposed to be allegedly - get ready for it - happy.I should have raised my rates on the first day, trying to pull that off.But anyway.Okay, you go now,Chris: Maybe now you'll have the opportunity.Stephen: No, man. No. I'm out of the running for that. "Pompe" has come and come and gone. Mm.Chris: So, in matrimony, Stephen, you write that"the brevity, the brevity of modern ceremonies is really there to make sure that nothing happens, nothing of substance, nothing of consequence, no alchemy, no mystery, no crazy other world stuff. That overreach there in its scripted heart tells me that deep in the rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day, the modern wedding is scared [01:19:00] silly of something happening. That's because it has an ages-old abandoned memory of a time when a wedding was a place where the Gods came around, where human testing and trying and making was at hand, when the dead lingered in the wings awaiting their turn to testify and inveigh."Gorgeous. Gorgeous.Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: And so I'm curious ifStephen: "Rayon-wrapped bosom." That's not, that's not shabby.Chris: "Rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day." Yeah.So, I'm curious do you think the more-than-human world practices matrimony, and if so, what, if anything, might you have learned about matrimony from the more-than-human world?Stephen: I would say the reverse. I would say, we practice the more-than-human world in matrimony, not that the more-than-human world practices matrimony. We practice them, [01:20:00] matrimonially.Next. Okay. Or no? I just gonna say that, that's pretty good.Well, where do we get our best stuff from? Let's just wonder that. Do we get our best stuff from being our best? Well, where does that come from? And this is a bit of a barbershop mirrors situation here, isn't it? To, to back, back, back, back.If you're thinking of time, you can kind of get lost in that generation before, or before, before, before. And it starts to sound like one of them biblical genealogies. But if you think of it as sort of the flash point of multiple presences, if you think of it that way, then you come to [01:21:00] credit the real possibility that your best stuff comes from you being remembered by those who came before you.Audience: Hmm.Stephen: Now just let that sit for a second, because what I just said is logically-incompatible.Okay? You're being remembered by people who came before you. That's not supposed to work. It doesn't work that way. Right?"Anticipated," maybe, but "remembered?" How? Well, if you credit the possibility of multiple beginnings, that's how. Okay. I'm saying that your best stuff, your best thoughts, not the most noble necessarily. I would mean the most timely, [01:22:00] the ones that seem most needed, suddenly.You could take credit and sure. Why, why not? Because ostensibly, it arrives here through you, but if you're frank with yourself, you know that you didn't do that on command, right? I mean, you could say, I just thought of it, but you know in your heart that it was thought of and came to you.I don't think there's any difference between saying that and saying you were thought of.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: So, that's what I think the rudiments of old-order matrimony are. They are old people and their benefactors in the food chain and spiritually speaking. Old people and their benefactors, the best part of them [01:23:00] willed to us, entrusted and willed to us. So, when you are willing to enter into the notion that old-order matrimony is older than you, older than your feelings for the other person, older than your love, and your commitment, and your willingness to make the vows and all that stuff, then you're crediting the possibility that your love is not the beginning of anything.You see. Your love is the advent of something, and I use that word deliberately in its Christian notion, right? It's the oncomingness, the eruption into the present day of something, which turns out to be hugely needed and deeply unsuspected at the same time.I used to ask in the school, "can you [01:24:00] have a memory of something you have no lived experience of?" I think that's what the best part of you is. I'm not saying the rest of you is shite. I'm not saying that. You could say that, but I am saying that when I say "the best part of you," that needs a lot of translating, doesn't it?But the gist of it is that the best part of you is entrusted to you. It's not your creation, it's your burden, your obligation, your best chance to get it right. And that's who we are to those who came before us. We are their chance to get it right, and matrimony is one of the places where you practice the gentle art of getting it right.[01:25:00] Another decent reason to write a book.Chris: So, gorgeous. Wow. Thank you Stephen. I might have one more question.Stephen: Okay. I might have one more answer. Let's see.Chris: Alright. Would I be able to ask if dear Nathalie Roy could join us up here alongside your good man.So, returning to Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work. On page 94, [01:26:00] Stephen, you write that"hospitality of the radical kind is

Northern Europe's shipping heartbeat is pulsing with profit. In this Hamburg special of Inside the Markets from GMS Podcasts, host Jamie speaks with Henning Prinzen, Head of the GMS Hamburg Office, to examine how German shipowners are prioritizing trading income over ship recycling. Henning explains how high charter rates and steady freight earnings across bulkers, tankers and container feeders keep ships active while recycling yards wait. With the Baltic Dry Index up 7.4 percent, crude holding near USD 62.74 per barrel and strong time charter demand, owners are locking in long term charters, forward deliveries and sale and leaseback deals to capture today's cash flows. Key Discussion Points Trading vs. Recycling: why strong earnings mean no tankers or bulkers heading for recycling in the near term Market Numbers: steel plate prices at India USD 448 per ton, Pakistan USD 625, Bangladesh USD 519, with the Indian rupee in the high 88s per USD and the Pakistan rupee around 284 Owner Strategy: efficient maintenance, creative financing and forward deals to hedge revenue and extend vessel life Future Outlook: what would trigger a sudden shift from trading to recycling and how HKC approved yards in the Indian subcontinent or Turkey fit long term plans From Hamburg boardrooms to global yards, the message is consistent: earn now, recycle later until freight softens.   Follow GMS Podcasts for market intelligence and regional updates from our country heads in Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. Subscribe to the GMS Podcasts and follow GMS on LinkedIn for future updates and discussions.

In this episode, the first sound magazine concerns a selection of recordings if diurnal calls at Hällögern, Sweden. Join me as I share audio recordings of some wonderful species in the far north of Sweden. This audio appetizer serves as a starter, in order to warm your ears for the main course...The main feature describes my journey uncovering the hidden migration of a rather special species along the Baltic coastline of Northern Sweden. Tengmalm's Owl is a species I dreamed about as a young birder. Over the course of the last few years, sound recording at night, along the coast of Västerbotten in Sweden, has allowed me a precious glimpse into the wonderful world of one of Northern Europe's most iconic species. The journey I have enjoyed with regard to this particular species has been a wonderful personal experience for me. Join me as I talk you through a voyage of birding discovery, from the first spark of personal joy, when a single call rang out through the darkness, to the resulting unravelling of the hidden world of a very special species...Leave a comment here....Support the showSubscibe to Wild Bird Acoustics here;https://wildbirdacoustics.buzzsprout.comLots more audio related material here at my long running website;https://blogbirder.blogspot.com/

An offshore wind farm near the island of Bornholm, Denmark shows how international energy sharing creates global energy progress. Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly email update on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard's StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary Barnes' YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! There's a little Danish island in the Baltic Sea that's about to make history. And it all started with a handshake worth seven billion euros. Bornholm. Population: forty thousand souls. About the size of Tulsa, Oklahoma. For eight hundred years, this island has watched the tides of war and peace wash over Northern Europe. But last week, Bornholm became the center of the most ambitious energy project in human history. Here's what just happened. The European Commission signed the largest energy grant in EU history. Six hundred forty five million euros. Seven hundred fifty six million dollars. All for one little island. But that's just the beginning. Siemens Energy just won the contract to build four massive converter stations. Two on Bornholm. One on Zealand. One in Germany. The job? Converting three gigawatts of offshore wind power into electricity that can flow between countries. Think about that. Three gigawatts. That's enough power for four and a half million homes. And the cables to carry all that electricity? NKT, a Danish company, just signed a six hundred fifty million euro contract. They'll lay two hundred kilometers of underwater cable. That's one hundred twenty four miles of electrical cord running beneath the Baltic Sea. But here's where this story gets remarkable. The cable won't be laid by just any ship. It'll be installed by the NKT Eleonora. A cable laying vessel currently under construction. When it launches in twenty twenty seven, it'll be one of the most advanced ships in the world. Powered by renewable energy. Built specifically for this project. They're not just connecting countries. They're connecting the future. Thomas Egebo, the Danish project leader, says this is about more than electricity. Quote: We are taking a big step towards a future where offshore wind from the Baltic Sea will supply electricity to millions of consumers. End quote. But let me tell you what makes this story truly extraordinary. This isn't about one country getting richer. This is about sharing power. Literally. When Denmark has too much wind, Germany gets the surplus. When Germany needs more electricity, Denmark shares theirs. Two gigawatts flow to Germany. One point two gigawatts stay in Denmark. It's like having the perfect neighbor. The kind who loans you sugar when you're out, except the sugar is enough electricity to power Berlin. The construction timeline reads like something from science fiction. Construction begins in twenty twenty eight. The island goes operational in twenty thirty. By then, Bornholm will be the electrical heart of Northern Europe. But here's the part that will give you goosebumps. This project started during the pandemic. June twenty twenty. When the world was falling apart, when nations were closing borders, one hundred seventy one out of one hundred seventy nine Danish parliamentarians voted yes. Democrats and conservatives. Liberals and traditionalists. They all agreed on one thing: the future belongs to cooperation. Stefan Kapferer, the German project leader, calls this efficient offshore cross linking between all countries bordering the North and Baltic Seas. Translation: It's the birth of a European electrical network. One that shares power, shares security, and shares prosperity. The wind turbines will be built fifteen kilometers offshore. That's about nine miles from Bornholm's coast.

Climate scientists have known about connections between oceans and the atmosphere for decades, but new research indicates warmer oceans may change ocean currents and atmospheric patterns in a big way. MPR News chief meteorologist Paul Huttner talked with John Abraham of the University of St. Thomas about shifting ocean currents in the Atlantic Ocean. The following has been lightly edited for clarity. Click play on the audio player above to listen to this episode, or subscribe to the Climate Cast podcast.This study finds a higher chance than previously thought that the Atlantic Ocean may see some big changes. What do we need to know here?There's what's called a conveyor belt in the ocean, and this is water that travels up the East Coast of the United States and then goes toward Greenland, Iceland and Northern Europe. The water gets cold, sinks to the bottom of the ocean and then it travels backward. It sort of goes in a like a loop — or a conveyor belt. That passageway of water is really, really important because it brings heat up to Europe, and it's the reason why England's temperatures are much more mild.These scientists discovered that this conveyor belt of water is slowing down, and it will likely stop in the future. It's going to have really crazy consequences for our climate. If that current were to slow down or collapse, how is that going to affect the weather in Europe?This event will likely make Europe colder. If this current shuts down, the heat from the ocean won't go up all the way to Europe. But the paradox is that this is a result of global warming. So, as the Earth warms, we're going to have some parts of the planet get really, really hot, and we're actually going to have some parts get colder. Europe will be one part of the planet that will have this paradoxical outcome of getting colder as the rest of the world gets warmer. What do you think could happen here in Minnesota? How might it affect our daily weather maps?It's going to make our weather more wild. We're going to have more extremes, especially the hot extremes. It's going to increase temperatures in the Midwest, and it's going to also make precipitation events more extreme. In Minnesota, we've seen this weather whiplash recently — where we go from cold and dry to hot and wet, back to maybe hot and dry — and we go from one extreme to the other. That is going to become even more significant as climate change continues. But one of the problems we've found is what's called a tipping point. And it's a tipping point where, once you cross it, you can't stop. It's like a locomotive going down a train track. You can't just pull the brakes and stop it instantaneously. So this process has started, and it's going to evolve over about 100 years. Even if humans take drastic action to reduce greenhouse gasses, that's not likely going to stop this shutdown of this current. It looks like we've passed over a threshold, and the natural tendency of the ocean is to change its circulation in a way that redistributes heat. It looks like there's not much we can do to stop it. The second part of this conversation about shifting ocean currents and climate change will be published next week.

Outsourcing podcast Get the full show notes for this outsourcing podcast here: outsourceaccelerator.com/555   Sigli In this week's episode, we visit Lithuania, a small but highly capable country in Northern Europe that's making waves in the software development space. Through conversation with Max Golikov, Chief Business Development Officer of Sigli, we explored how his company delivers outsourced development services, what makes Lithuania a strategic location for tech talent, and how artificial intelligence is changing the expectations of both engineers and clients.   References: Website: https://www.sigli.com/ Innovantage Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@InnovantagePodcast LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maxim-golikov/?originalSubdomain=lt   Start Outsourcing Outsource Accelerator can help you transform your business with outsourcing. Get in touch now, or use one of the resources below.   Business Process Outsourcing Get a Free Quote - Connect with 3 verified outsourcing experts & see how outsourcing can transform your business Book a Discovery Call - See how Outsource Accelerator can help you enhance your company's innovation and growth with outsourcing The Top 40 BPOs - We have compiled this review of the most notable 40 Business Process Outsourcing companies in the Philippines Outsourcing Calculator - This tool provides you with invaluable insight into the potential savings outsourcing can do for your business Outsourcing Salary Guide - Access the comprehensive guide to payroll salary compensation, benefits, and allowances in the Philippines Outsourcing Accelerator Podcast - Subscribe and listen to the world's leading outsourcing podcast, hosted by Derek Gallimore Payoneer - The leading global B2B payment solution for the outsourcing industry   About Outsource Accelerator Outsource Accelerator is the world's leading outsourcing marketplace and advisory. We offer the full spectrum of services, from light advisory and vendor brokerage, though to full implementation and fully-managed solutions. We service companies of all sectors, and all sizes, spanning all departmental verticals. Outsource Accelerator's unique approach to outsourcing enables our clients to build the best teams, access the most flexible solutions, and generate the best results possible. Our unrivaled sector knowledge and market reach mean that you get the best terms and results possible, at the best ALL-IN market-leading price - guaranteed.

Geographically, Denmark is situated in Northern Europe. It consists of the Jutland Peninsula and more than 400 islands, though only about 70 of them are inhabited. Its location makes it a bridge between mainland Europe and the Nordic countries.Denmark's closest neighbors are Germany to the south, Sweden across the Öresund Strait, and Norway to the north. With the Baltic Sea on one side and the North Sea on the other, Denmark has always been shaped by water.Despite its modest size, Denmark covers about 43,000 square kilometers, making it smaller than many of its European neighbors. Its population is around 6 million people, concentrated in cities like Copenhagen, Aarhus, and Odense. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Send us a textHi, it's Turo here. In this episode, I'm diving into something a little different: how culture shapes the way we eat, move, and think about health.Growing up in Finland, meals were quick, functional, and often tied to rules and restriction. Now living in Italy, I've experienced the complete opposite—meals as social events, daily movement built into life, and a guilt-free approach to enjoying food.I'll share the biggest lessons I've learned from both cultures, from how Italians stay active without “working out,” to why their relationship with pasta looks nothing like the diet culture mindset in Northern Europe.If you've ever struggled with guilt around food or felt like exercise was just a box to check, this episode will give you a fresh perspective on how to build sustainable, balanced habits—no matter where you live.

The most fascinating nations in Northern Europe—Finland. Known for its pristine landscapes, innovative culture, and deep traditions, Finland is often called the “Land of a Thousand Lakes.” But as we'll uncover, Finland is much more than its lakes—it's a story of resilience, beauty, and balance between nature and modernity.Finland sits in Northern Europe, bordered by Sweden to the west, Norway to the north, and Russia to the east, while the Baltic Sea lies to the south. This strategic position has shaped Finland's culture, trade, and history, making it both Scandinavian and distinctly unique.With over 188,000 lakes and forests covering about 75% of its land, Finland is one of the greenest countries on Earth. This abundance of nature has not only defined Finnish culture but also earned it a reputation for being one of the cleanest, most sustainable environments in the world. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Shortly after Peter F. Lane took office as a New York City Civil Court judge in January, he was surprised to get a call from the Estonian Embassy. He assumed it was a wrong number. Regardless, he picked it up and learned that he's apparently the first and only judge in the nation of Estonian descent. In this podcast, we'll explore Judge Lane's background and learn a little about a country in Northern Europe that some of us may have heard of, but most of us could never pinpoint on a map. Transcript: https://ww2.nycourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/files/2025-08/Judge%20Peter%20Lane.pdf

This week Nick talks to Mike England Mike holds a Master's Degree in Engineering and brings over 25 years of commercial and operational leadership experience in industrial product distribution and services. He spent eight years with FTSE100 RS Group plc, where he held key leadership roles including Group Chief Operating Officer, overseeing P&L across the Americas, EMEA, and APAC. Prior to that, he served as President of EMEA and, earlier, as Managing Director, successfully leading the turnaround of operations in the UK and Northern Europe. Before RS Group, Mike spent nine years at FTSE250 Brammer plc (now Rubix), where he was Key Account and Sales Director, following nine years at Rexel in a variety of commercial and operational leadership roles.Nick and Mike discuss how Flowtech has been through a major transformation, bringing 17 brands together under one name and shifting the business from service issues to a more stable, profitable footing. Mike points to the relaunch of the company's well-known fluid power catalogue and the launch of a new website that makes it easier for customers to buy online while showcasing the full range of products and services. They touch on the steady MRO market, the quick turnaround of recent acquisitions, and the fresh leadership team now in place. Looking ahead, Mike shares his optimism that with stronger foundations and a scalable model, Flowtech is well placed to grow as markets recover, both through its own improvements and selective acquisitions. Mike's book choice was: Start With Why by Simon SinekMike's music choice was:Don't You (Forget About Me) by Simple MindsThis content is issued by Zeus Capital Limited (“Zeus”) (Incorporated in England & Wales No. 4417845), which is authorised and regulated in the United Kingdom by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) for designated investment business, (Reg No. 224621) and is a member firm of the London Stock Exchange. This content is for information purposes only and neither the information contained, nor the opinions expressed within, constitute or are to be construed as an offer or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell the securities or other instruments mentioned in it. Zeus shall not be liable for any direct or indirect damages, including lost profits arising in any way from the information contained in this material. This material is for the use of intended recipients only.

The breathtaking land of Sweden—a country that perfectly balances natural beauty, cultural depth, and modern innovation. Known as one of the happiest nations on earth, Sweden is more than just IKEA furniture and ABBA songs; it's a country that thrives on history, sustainability, and creativity.Situated in Northern Europe, Sweden is the largest country in Scandinavia and the fifth largest in Europe by area. With coastlines along the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Bothnia, and borders shared with Norway and Finland, Sweden's geography is a tapestry of forests, mountains, lakes, and islands that provide endless opportunities for exploration.The capital city, Stockholm, is often called the “Venice of the North.” Built across 14 islands and connected by over 50 bridges, the city blends medieval architecture with modern design. From the cobblestone streets of Gamla Stan, the old town, to the futuristic architecture of its business district, Stockholm reflects both history and progress. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lots of talk these days about ultra-processed foods (UPFs). Along with confusion about what in the heck they are or what they're not, how bad they are for us, and what ought to be done about them. A landmark in the discussion of ultra-processed foods has been the publication of a book entitled Ultra-processed People, Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. The author of that book, Dr. Chris van Tulleken, joins us today. Dr. van Tulleken is a physician and is professor of Infection and Global Health at University College London. He also has a PhD in molecular virology and is an award-winning broadcaster on the BBC. His book on Ultra-processed People is a bestseller. Interview Summary Chris, sometimes somebody comes along that takes a complicated topic and makes it accessible and understandable and brings it to lots of people. You're a very fine scientist and scholar and academic, but you also have that ability to communicate effectively with lots of people, which I very much admire. So, thanks for doing that, and thank you for joining us. Oh, Kelly, it's such a pleasure. You know, I begin some of my talks now with a clipping from the New York Times. And it's a picture of you and an interview you gave in 1995. So exactly three decades ago. And in this article, you just beautifully communicate everything that 30 years later I'm still saying. So, yeah. I wonder if communication, it's necessary, but insufficient. I think we are needing to think of other means to bring about change. I totally agree. Well, thank you by the way. And I hope I've learned something over those 30 years. Tell us, please, what are ultra-processed foods? People hear the term a lot, but I don't think a lot of people know exactly what it means. The most important thing to know, I think, is that it's not a casual term. It's not like 'junk food' or 'fast food.' It is a formal scientific definition. It's been used in hundreds of research studies. The definition is very long. It's 11 paragraphs long. And I would urge anyone who's really interested in this topic, go to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization website. You can type in NFAO Ultra and you'll get the full 11 paragraph definition. It's an incredibly sophisticated piece of science. But it boils down to if you as a consumer, someone listening to this podcast, want to know if the thing you are eating right now is ultra-processed, look at the ingredients list. If there are ingredients on that list that you do not normally find in a domestic kitchen like an emulsifier, a coloring, a flavoring, a non-nutritive sweetener, then that product will be ultra-processed. And it's a way of describing this huge range of foods that kind of has taken over the American and the British and in fact diets all over the world. How come the food companies put this stuff in the foods? And the reason I ask is in talks I give I'll show an ingredient list from a food that most people would recognize. And ask people if they can guess what the food is from the ingredient list. And almost nobody can. There are 35 things on the ingredient list. Sugar is in there, four different forms. And then there are all kinds of things that are hard to pronounce. There are lots of strange things in there. They get in there through loopholes and government regulation. Why are they there in the first place? So, when I started looking at this I also noticed this long list of fancy sounding ingredients. And even things like peanut butter will have palm oil and emulsifiers. Cream cheese will have xanthum gum and emulsifiers. And you think, well, wouldn't it just be cheaper to make your peanut butter out of peanuts. In fact, every ingredient is in there to make money in one of two ways. Either it drives down the cost of production or storage. If you imagine using a real strawberry in your strawberry ice cream. Strawberries are expensive. They're not always in season. They rot. You've got to have a whole supply chain. Why would you use a strawberry if you could use ethyl methylphenylglycidate and pink dye and it'll taste the same. It'll look great. You could then put in a little chunky bit of modified corn starch that'll be chewy if you get it in the right gel mix. And there you go. You've got strawberries and you haven't had to deal with strawberry farmers or any supply chain. It's just you just buy bags and bottles of white powder and liquids. The other way is to extend the shelf life. Strawberries as I say, or fresh food, real food - food we might call it rots on shelves. It decays very quickly. If you can store something at room temperature in a warehouse for months and months, that saves enormous amounts of money. So, one thing is production, but the other thing is the additives allow us to consume to excess or encourage us to consume ultra-processed food to excess. So, I interviewed a scientist who was a food industry development scientist. And they said, you know, most ultra-processed food would be gray if it wasn't dyed, for example. So, if you want to make cheap food using these pastes and powders, unless you dye it and you flavor it, it will be inedible. But if you dye it and flavor it and add just the right amount of salt, sugar, flavor enhancers, then you can make these very addictive products. So that's the logic of UPF. Its purpose is to make money. And that's part of the definition. Right. So, a consumer might decide that there's, you know, beneficial trade-off for them at the end of the day. That they get things that have long shelf life. The price goes down because of the companies don't have to deal with the strawberry farmers and things like that. But if there's harm coming in waves from these things, then it changes the equation. And you found out some of that on your own. So as an experiment you did with a single person - you, you ate ultra-processed foods for a month. What did you eat and how did it affect your body, your mood, your sleep? What happened when you did this? So, what's really exciting, actually Kelly, is while it was an n=1, you know, one participant experiment, I was actually the pilot participant in a much larger study that we have published in Nature Medicine. One of the most reputable and high impact scientific journals there is. So, I was the first participant in a randomized control trial. I allowed us to gather the data about what we would then measure in a much larger number. Now we'll come back and talk about that study, which I think was really important. It was great to see it published. So, I was a bit skeptical. Partly it was with my research team at UCL, but we were also filming it for a BBC documentary. And I went into this going I'm going to eat a diet of 80% of my calories will come from ultra-processed food for four weeks. And this is a normal diet. A lifelong diet for a British teenager. We know around 20% of people in the UK and the US eat this as their normal food. They get 80% of their calories from ultra-processed products. I thought, well, nothing is going to happen to me, a middle-aged man, doing this for four weeks. But anyway, we did it kind of as a bit of fun. And we thought, well, if nothing happens, we don't have to do a bigger study. We can just publish this as a case report, and we'll leave it out of the documentary. Three big things happened. I gained a massive amount of weight, so six kilos. And I wasn't force feeding myself. I was just eating when I wanted. In American terms, that's about 15 pounds in four weeks. And that's very consistent with the other published trials that have been done on ultra-processed food. There have been two other RCTs (randomized control trials); ours is the third. There is one in Japan, one done at the NIH. So, people gain a lot of weight. I ate massively more calories. So much so that if I'd continued on the diet, I would've almost doubled my body weight in a year. And that may sound absurd, but I have an identical twin brother who did this natural experiment. He went to Harvard for a year. He did his masters there. During his year at Harvard he gained, let's see, 26 kilos, so almost 60 pounds just living in Cambridge, Massachusetts. But how did you decide how much of it to eat? Did you eat until you just kind of felt naturally full? I did what most people do most of the time, which is I just ate what I wanted when I felt like it. Which actually for me as a physician, I probably took the breaks off a bit because I don't normally have cocoa pops for breakfast. But I ate cocoa pops and if I felt like two bowls, I'd have two bowls. It turned out what I felt like a lot of mornings was four bowls and that was fine. I was barely full. So, I wasn't force feeding myself. It wasn't 'supersize' me. I was eating to appetite, which is how these experiments run. And then what we've done in the trials. So, I gained weight, then we measured my hormone response to a meal. When you eat, I mean, it's absurd to explain this to YOU. But when you eat, you have fullness hormones that go up and hunger hormones that go down, so you feel full and less hungry. And we measured my response to a standard meal at the beginning and at the end of this four-week diet. What we found is that I had a normal response to eating a big meal at the beginning of the diet. At the end of eating ultra-processed foods, the same meal caused a very blunted rise in the satiety hormones. In the 'fullness' hormones. So, I didn't feel as full. And my hunger hormones remained high. And so, the food is altering our response to all meals, not merely within the meal that we're eating. Then we did some MRI scans and again, I thought this would be a huge waste of time. But we saw at four weeks, and then again eight weeks later, very robust changes in the communication between the habit-forming bits at the back of the brain. So, the automatic behavior bits, the cerebellum. Very conscious I'm talking to YOU about this, Kelly. And the kind of addiction reward bits in the middle. Now these changes were physiological, not structural. They're about the two bits of the brain talking to each other. There's not really a new wire going between them. But we think if this kind of communication is happening a lot, that maybe a new pathway would form. And I think no one, I mean we did this with very expert neuroscientists at our National Center for Neuroscience and Neurosurgery, no one really knows what it means. But the general feeling was these are the kind of changes we might expect if we'd given someone, or a person or an animal, an addictive substance for four weeks. They're consistent with, you know, habit formation and addiction. And the fact that they happened so quickly, and they were so robust - they remained the same eight weeks after I stopped the diet, I think is really worrying from a kid's perspective. So, in a period of four weeks, it re-altered the way your brain works. It affected the way your hunger and satiety were working. And then you ended up with this massive weight. And heaven knows what sort of cardiovascular effects or other things like that might have been going on or had the early signs of that over time could have been really pretty severe, I imagine. I think one of the main effects was that I became very empathetic with my patients. Because we did actually a lot of, sort of, psychological testing as well. And there's an experience where, obviously in clinic, I mainly treat patients with infections. But many of my patients are living with other, sort of, disorders of modern life. They live with excess weight and cardiovascular disease and type two diabetes and metabolic problems and so on. And I felt in four weeks like I'd gone from being in my early 30, early 40s at the time, I felt like I'd just gone to my early 50s or 60s. I ached. I felt terrible. My sleep was bad. And it was like, oh! So many of the problems of modern life: waking up to pee in the middle of the night is because you've eaten so much sodium with your dinner. You've drunk all this water, and then you're trying to get rid of it all night. Then you're constipated. It's a low fiber diet, so you develop piles. Pain in your bum. The sleep deprivation then makes you eat more. And so, you get in this vicious cycle where the problem didn't feel like the food until I stopped and I went cold turkey. I virtually have not touched it since. It cured me of wanting UPF. That was the other amazing bit of the experience that I write about in the book is it eating it and understanding it made me not want it. It was like being told to smoke. You know, you get caught smoking as a kid and your parents are like, hey, now you finish the pack. It was that. It was an aversion experience. So, it gave me a lot of empathy with my patients that many of those kinds of things we regard as being normal aging, those symptoms are often to do with the way we are living our lives. Chris, I've talked to a lot of people about ultra-processed foods. You're the first one who's mentioned pain in the bum as one of the problems, so thank you. When I first became a physician, I trained as a surgeon, and I did a year doing colorectal surgery. So, I have a wealth of experience of where a low fiber diet leaves you. And many people listening to this podcast, I mean, look, we're all going to get piles. Everyone gets these, you know, anal fishes and so on. And bum pain it's funny to talk about it. No, not the... it destroys people's lives, so, you know, anyway. Right. I didn't want to make light of it. No, no. Okay. So, your own experiment would suggest that these foods are really bad actors and having this broad range of highly negative effects. But what does research say about these things beyond your own personal experience, including your own research? So, the food industry has been very skillful at portraying this as a kind of fad issue. As ultra-processed food is this sort of niche thing. Or it's a snobby thing. It's not a real classification. I want to be absolutely clear. UPF, the definition is used by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization to monitor global diet quality, okay? It's a legitimate way of thinking about food. The last time I looked, there are more than 30 meta-analyses - that is reviews of big studies. And the kind of high-quality studies that we use to say cigarettes cause lung cancer. So, we've got this what we call epidemiological evidence, population data. We now have probably more than a hundred of these prospective cohort studies. And they're really powerful tools. They need to be used in conjunction with other evidence, but they now link ultra-processed food to this very wide range of what we euphemistically call negative health outcomes. You know, problems that cause human suffering, mental health problems, anxiety, depression, multiple forms of cancer, inflammatory diseases like Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, metabolic disease, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer's and dementia. Of course, weight gain and obesity. And all cause mortality so you die earlier of all causes. And there are others too. So, the epidemiological evidence is strong and that's very plausible. So, we take that epidemiological evidence, as you well know, and we go, well look, association and causation are different things. You know, do matches cause cancer or does cigarettes cause cancer? Because people who buy lots of matches are also getting the lung cancer. And obviously epidemiologists are very sophisticated at teasing all this out. But we look at it in the context then of other evidence. My group published the third randomized control trial where we put a group of people, in a very controlled way, on a diet of either minimally processed food or ultra-processed food and looked at health outcomes. And we found what the other two trials did. We looked at weight gain as a primary outcome. It was a short trial, eight weeks. And we saw people just eat more calories on the ultra-processed food. This is food that is engineered to be consumed to excess. That's its purpose. So maybe to really understand the effect of it, you have to imagine if you are a food development engineer working in product design at a big food company - if you develop a food that's cheap to make and people will just eat loads of it and enjoy it, and then come back for it again and again and again, and eat it every day and almost become addicted to it, you are going to get promoted. That product is going to do well on the shelves. If you invent a food that's not addictive, it's very healthy, it's very satisfying, people eat it and then they're done for the day. And they don't consume it to excess. You are not going to keep your job. So that's a really important way of understanding the development process of the foods. So let me ask a question about industry and intent. Because one could say that the industry engineers these things to have long shelf life and nice physical properties and the right colors and things like this. And these effects on metabolism and appetite and stuff are unpleasant and difficult side effects, but the foods weren't made to produce those things. They weren't made to produce over consumption and then in turn produce those negative consequences. You're saying something different. That you think that they're intentionally designed to promote over consumption. And in some ways, how could the industry do otherwise? I mean, every industry in the world wants people to over consume or consume as much of their product as they can. The food industry is no different. That is exactly right. The food industry behaves like every other corporation. In my view, they commit evil acts sometimes, but they're not institutionally evil. And I have dear friends who work in big food, who work in big pharma. I have friends who work in tobacco. These are not evil people. They're constrained by commercial incentives, right? So, when I say I think the food is engineered, I don't think it. I know it because I've gone and interviewed loads of people in product development at big food companies. I put some of these interviewees in a BBC documentary called Irresistible. So rather than me in the documentary going, oh, ultra-processed food is bad. And everyone going, well, you are, you're a public health bore. I just got industry insiders to say, yes, this is how we make the food. And going back to Howard Moskovitz, in the 1970s, I think he was working for the Campbell Soup Company. And Howard, who was a psychologist by training, outlined the development process. And what he said was then underlined by many other people I've spoken to. You develop two different products. This one's a little bit saltier than the next, and you test them on a bunch of people. People like the saltier ones. So now you keep the saltier one and you develop a third product and this one's got a bit more sugar in it. And if this one does better, well you keep this one and you keep AB testing until you get people buying and eating lots. And one of the crucial things that food companies measure in product development is how fast do people eat and how quickly do they eat. And these kind of development tools were pioneered by the tobacco industry. I mean, Laura Schmidt has done a huge amount of the work on this. She's at University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), in California. And we know the tobacco industry bought the food industry and for a while in the '80s and '90s, the biggest food companies in the world were also the biggest tobacco companies in the world. And they used their flavor molecules and their marketing techniques and their distribution systems. You know, they've got a set of convenience tools selling cigarettes all over the country. Well, why don't we sell long shelf-life food marketed in the same way? And one thing that the tobacco industry was extremely good at was figuring out how to get the most rapid delivery of the drug possible into the human body when people smoke. Do you think that some of that same thing is true for food, rapid delivery of sugar, let's say? How close does the drug parallel fit, do you think? So, that's part of the reason the speed of consumption is important. Now, I think Ashley Gearhardt has done some of the most incredible work on this. And what Ashley says is we think of addictive drugs as like it's the molecule that's addictive. It's nicotine, it's caffeine, cocaine, diamorphine, heroin, the amphetamines. What we get addicted to is the molecule. And that Ashley says no. The processing of that molecule is crucially important. If you have slow-release nicotine in a chewing gum, that can actually treat your nicotine addiction. It's not very addictive. Slow-release amphetamine we use to treat children with attention and behavioral problems. Slow-release cocaine is an anesthetic. You use it for dentistry. No one ever gets addicted to dental anesthetics. And the food is the same. The rewarding molecules in the food we think are mainly the fat and the sugar. And food that requires a lot of chewing and is slow eaten slowly, you don't deliver the reward as quickly. And it tends not to be very addictive. Very soft foods or liquid foods with particular fat sugar ratios, if you deliver the nutrients into the gut fast, that seems to be really important for driving excessive consumption. And I think the growing evidence around addiction is very persuasive. I mean, my patients report feeling addicted to the food. And I don't feel it's legitimate to question their experience. Chris, a little interesting story about that concept of food and addiction. So going back several decades I was a professor at Yale, and I was teaching a graduate course. Ashley Gerhardt was a student in that course. And, she was there to study addiction, not in the context of food, but I brought up the issue of, you know, could food be addictive? There's some interesting research on this. It's consistent with what we're hearing from people, and that seems a really interesting topic. And Ashley, I give her credit, took this on as her life's work and now she's like the leading expert in the world on this very important topic. And what's nice for me to recall that story is that how fast the science on this is developed. And now something's coming out on this almost every day. It's some new research on the neuroscience of food and addiction and how the food is hijacking in the brain. And that whole concept of addiction seems really important in this context. And I know you've talked a lot about that yourself. She has reframed, I think, this idea about the way that addictive substances and behaviors really work. I mean it turns everything on its head to go the processing is important. The thing the food companies have always been able to say is, look, you can't say food is addictive. It doesn't contain any addictive molecules. And with Ashley's work you go, no, but the thing is it contains rewarding molecules and actually the spectrum of molecules that we can find rewarding and we can deliver fast is much, much broader than the traditionally addictive substances. For policy, it's vital because part of regulating the tobacco industry was about showing they know they are making addictive products. And I think this is where Ashley's work and Laura Schmidt's work are coming together. With Laura's digging in the tobacco archive, Ashley's doing the science on addiction, and I think these two things are going to come together. And I think it's just going to be a really exciting space to watch. I completely agree. You know when most people think about the word addiction, they basically kind of default to thinking about how much you want something. How much, you know, you desire something. But there are other parts of it that are really relevant here too. I mean one is how do you feel if you don't have it and sort of classic withdrawal. And people talk about, for example, being on high sugar drinks and stopping them and having withdrawal symptoms and things like that. And the other part of it that I think is really interesting here is tolerance. You know whether you need more of the substance over time in order to get the same reward benefit. And that hasn't been studied as much as the other part of addiction. But there's a lot to the picture other than just kind of craving things. And I would say that the thing I like about this is it chimes with my. Personal experience, which is, I have tried alcohol and cigarettes and I should probably end that list there. But I've never had any real desire for more of them. They aren't the things that tickle my brain. Whereas the food is a thing that I continue to struggle with. I would say in some senses, although I no longer like ultra-processed food at some level, I still want it. And I think of myself to some degree, without trivializing anyone's experience, to some degree I think I'm in sort of recovery from it. And it remains that tussle. I mean I don't know what you think about the difference between the kind of wanting and liking of different substances. Some scientists think those two things are quite, quite different. That you can like things you don't want, and you can want things you don't like. Well, that's exactly right. In the context of food and traditional substances of abuse, for many of them, people start consuming because they produce some sort of desired effect. But that pretty quickly goes away, and people then need the substance because if they don't have it, they feel terrible. So, you know, morphine or heroin or something like that always produces positive effects. But that initial part of the equation where you just take it because you like it turns into this needing it and having to have it. And whether that same thing exists with food is an interesting topic. I think the other really important part of the addiction argument in policy terms is that one counterargument by industrial scientists and advocates is by raising awareness around ultra-processed food we are at risk of driving, eating disorders. You know? The phenomenon of orthorexia, food avoidance, anorexia. Because all food is good food. There should be no moral value attached to food and we mustn't drive any food anxiety. And I think there are some really strong voices in the United Kingdom Eating Disorder scientists. People like Agnes Ayton, who are starting to say, look, when food is engineered, using brain scanners and using scientific development techniques to be consumed to excess, is it any wonder that people develop a disordered relationship with the food? And there may be a way of thinking about the rise of eating disorders, which is parallel to the rise of our consumption of ultra-processed food, that eating disorders are a reasonable response to a disordered food environment. And I think that's where I say all that somewhat tentatively. I feel like this is a safe space where you will correct me if I go off piste. But I think it's important to at least explore that question and go, you know, this is food with which it is very hard, I would say, to have a healthy relationship. That's my experience. And I think the early research is bearing that out. Tell us how these foods affect your hunger, how full you feel, your microbiome. That whole sort of interactive set of signals that might put people in harmony with food in a normal environment but gets thrown off when the foods get processed like this. Oh, I love that question. At some level as I'm understanding that question, one way of trying to answer that question is to go, well, what is the normal physiological response to food? Or maybe how do wild animals find, consume, and then interpret metabolically the food that they eat. And it is staggering how little we know about how we learn what food is safe and what food nourishes us. What's very clear is that wild mammals, and in fact all wild animals, are able to maintain near perfect energy balance. Obesity is basically unheard of in the wild. And, perfect nutritional intake, I mean, obviously there are famines in wild animals, but broadly, animals can do this without being literate, without being given packaging, without any nutritional advice at all. So, if you imagine an ungulate, an herbivore on the plains of the Serengeti, it has a huge difficulty. The carnivore turning herbivore into carnivore is fairly easy. They're made of the same stuff. Turning plant material into mammal is really complicated. And somehow the herbivore can do this without gaining weight, whilst maintaining total precision over its selenium intake, its manganese, its cobalt, its iron, all of which are terrible if you have too little and also terrible if you have too much. We understand there's some work done in a few wild animals, goats, and rats about how this works. Clearly, we have an ability to sense the nutrition we want. What we understand much more about is the sort of quantities needed. And so, we've ended up with a system of nutritional advice that says, well, just eat these numbers. And if you can stick to the numbers, 2,500 calories a day, 2300 milligrams of sodium, no more than 5% of your calories from free sugar or 10%, whatever it is, you know, you stick to these numbers, you'll be okay. And also, these many milligrams of cobalt, manganese, selenium, iron, zinc, all the rest of it. And obviously people can't really do that even with the packaging. This is a very long-winded answer. So, there's this system that is exquisitely sensitive at regulating micronutrient and energy intake. And what we understand, what the Academy understands about how ultra-processed food subverts this is, I would say there are sort of three or four big things that ultra-processed does that real food doesn't. It's generally very soft. And it's generally very energy dense. And that is true of even the foods that we think of as being healthy. That's like your supermarket whole grain bread. It's incredibly energy dense. It's incredibly soft. You eat calories very fast, and this research was done in the '90s, you know we've known that that kind of food promotes excessive intake. I guess in simple terms, and you would finesse this, you consume calories before your body has time to go, well, you've eaten enough. You can consume an excess. Then there's the ratios of fat, salt, and sugar and the way you can balance them, and any good cook knows if you can get the acid, fat, salt, sugar ratios right, you can make incredibly delicious food. That's kind of what I would call hyper palatability. And a lot of that work's being done in the states (US) by some incredible people. Then the food may be that because it's low in fiber and low in protein, quite often it's not satiating. And there may be, because it's also low in micronutrients and general nutrition, it may be that, and this is a little bit theoretical, but there's some evidence for this. Part of what drives the excess consumption is you're kind of searching for the nutrients. The nutrients are so dilute that you have to eat loads of it in order to get enough. Do you think, does that, is that how you understand it? It does, it makes perfect sense. In fact, I'm glad you brought up one particular issue because part of the ultra-processing that makes foods difficult for the body to deal with involves what gets put in, but also what gets taken out. And there was a study that got published recently that I think you and I might have discussed earlier on American breakfast cereals. And this study looked at how the formulation of them had changed over a period of about 20 years. And what they found is that the industry had systematically removed the protein and the fiber and then put in more things like sugar. So there, there's both what goes in and what gets taken out of foods that affects the body in this way. You know, what I hear you saying, and what I, you know, believe myself from the science, is the body's pretty capable of handling the food environment if food comes from the natural environment. You know, if you sit down to a meal of baked chicken and some beans and some leafy greens and maybe a little fruit or something, you're not going to overdo it. Over time you'd end up with the right mix of nutrients and things like that and you'd be pretty healthy. But all bets are off when these foods get processed and engineered, so you over consume them. You found that out in the experiment that you did on yourself. And then that's what science shows too. So, it's not like these things are sort of benign. People overeat them and they ought to just push away from the table. There's a lot more going on here in terms of hijacking the brain chemistry. Overriding the body signals. Really thwarting normal biology. Do you think it's important to add that we think of obesity as being the kind of dominant public health problem? That's the thing we all worry about. But the obesity is going hand in hand with stunting, for example. So, height as you reach adulthood in the US, at 19 US adults are something like eight or nine centimeters shorter than their counterparts in Northern Europe, Scandinavia, where people still eat more whole food. And we should come back to that evidence around harms, because I think the really important thing to say around the evidence is it has now reached the threshold for causality. So, we can say a dietary pattern high in ultra-processed food causes all of these negative health outcomes. That doesn't mean that any one product is going to kill you. It just means if this is the way you get your food, it's going to be harmful. And if all the evidence says, I mean, we've known this for decades. If you can cook the kind of meal, you just described at home, which is more or less the way that high income people eat, you are likely to have way better health outcomes across the board. Let me ask you about the title of your book. So, the subtitle of your book is Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. So, what is it? The ultra-processed definition is something I want to pay credit for. It's really important to pay a bit of credit here. Carlos Montero was the scientist in Brazil who led a team who together came up with this definition. And, I was speaking to Fernanda Rauber who was on that team, and we were trying to discuss some research we were doing. And every time I said food, she'd correct me and go, it is not, it's not food, Chris. It's an industrially produced edible substance. And that was a really helpful thing for me personally, it's something it went into my brain, and I sat down that night. I was actually on the UPF diet, and I sat down to eat some fried chicken wings from a popular chain that many people will know. And was unable to finish them. I think our shared understanding of the purpose of food is surely that its purpose is to nourish us. Whether it's, you know, sold by someone for this purpose, or whether it's made by someone at home. You know it should nourish us spiritually, socially, culturally, and of course physically and mentally. And ultra-processed food nourishes us in no dimension whatsoever. It destroys traditional knowledge, traditional land, food culture. You don't sit down with your family and break, you know, ultra-processed, you know, crisps together. You know, you break bread. To me that's a kind of very obvious distortion of what it's become. So, I don't think it is food. You know, I think it's not too hard of a stretch to see a time when people might consider these things non-food. Because if you think of food, what's edible and whether it's food or not is completely socially constructed. I mean, some parts of the world, people eat cockroaches or ants or other insects. And in other parts of the world that's considered non-food. So just because something's edible doesn't mean that it's food. And I wonder if at some point we might start to think of these things as, oh my God, these are awful. They're really bad for us. The companies are preying on us, and it's just not food. And yeah, totally your book helps push us in that direction. I love your optimism. The consumer facing marketing budget of a big food company is often in excess of $10 billion a year. And depends how you calculate it. I'll give you a quick quiz on this. So, for a while, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation was by far the biggest funder of research in the world on childhood obesity. And they were spending $500 million a year to address this problem. Just by which day of the year the food industry has already spent $500 million just advertising just junk food just to children. Okay, so the Robert V. Wood Foundation is spending it and they were spending that annually. Annually, right. So, what's, by what day of the year is the food industry already spent that amount? Just junk food advertising just to kids. I'm going to say by somewhere in early spring. No. January 4th. I mean, it's hysterical, but it's also horrifying. So, this is the genius of ultra-processed food, of the definition and the science, is that it creates this category which is discretionary. And so at least in theory, of course, for many people in the US it's not discretionary at all. It's the only stuff they can afford. But this is why the food industry hate it so much is because it offers the possibility of going, we can redefine food. And there is all this real food over there. And there is this UPF stuff that isn't food over here. But industry's very sophisticated, you know. I mean, they push back very hard against me in many different ways and forms. And they're very good at going, well, you're a snob. How dare you say that families with low incomes, that they're not eating food. Are you calling them dupes? Are you calling them stupid? You know, they're very, very sophisticated at positioning. Isn't it nice how concerned they are about the wellbeing of people without means? I mean they have created a pricing structure and a food subsidy environment and a tax environment where essentially people with low incomes in your country, in my country, are forced to eat food that harms them. So, one of the tells I think is if you're hearing someone criticize ultra-processed food, and you'll read them in the New York Times. And often their conflicts of interest won't be reported. They may be quite hidden. The clue is, are they demanding to seriously improve the food environment in a very clear way, or are they only criticizing the evidence around ultra-processed food? And if they're only criticizing that evidence? I'll bet you a pound to a pinch of salt they'll be food-industry funded. Let's talk about that. Let's talk about that a little more. So, there's a clear pattern of scientists who take money from industry finding things that favor industry. Otherwise, industry wouldn't pay that money. They're not stupid in the way they invest. And, you and I have talked about this before, but we did a study some years ago where we looked at industry and non-industry funded study on the health effects of consuming sugar sweetened beverages. And it's like the ocean parted. It's one of my favorites. And it was something like 98 or 99% of the independently funded studies found that sugar sweetened beverages do cause harm. And 98 or 99% of the industry funded studies funded by Snapple and Coke and a whole bunch of other companies found that they did not cause harm. It was that stark, was it? It was. And so you and I pay attention to the little print in these scientific studies about who's funded them and who might have conflicts of interest. And maybe you and I and other people who follow science closely might be able to dismiss those conflicted studies. But they have a big impact out there in the world, don't they? I had a meeting in London with someone recently, that they themselves were conflicted and they said, look, if a health study's funded by a big sugary drink company, if it's good science, that's fine. We should publish it and we should take it at face value. And in the discussion with them, I kind of accepted that, we were talking about other things. And afterwards I was like, no. If a study on human health is funded by a sugary drink corporation, in my opinion, we could just tear that up. None of that should be published. No journals should publish those studies and scientists should not really call themselves scientists who are doing it. It is better thought of as marketing and food industry-funded scientists who study human health, in my opinion, are better thought of as really an extension of the marketing division of the companies. You know, it's interesting when you talk to scientists, and you ask them do people who take money from industry is their work influenced by that money? They'll say yes. Yeah, but if you say, but if you take money from industry, will your work be influenced? They'll always say no. Oh yeah. There's this tremendous arrogance, blind spot, whatever it is that. I can remain untarnished. I can remain objective, and I can help change the industry from within. In the meantime, I'm having enough money to buy a house in the mountains, you know, from what they're paying me, and it's really pretty striking. Well, the money is a huge issue. You know, science, modern science it's not a very lucrative career compared to if someone like you went and worked in industry, you would add a zero to the end of your salary, possibly more. And the same is true of me. I think one of the things that adds real heft to the independent science is that the scientists are taking a pay cut to do it. So how do children figure in? Do you think children are being groomed by the industry to eat these foods? A senator, I think in Chile, got in hot water for comparing big food companies to kind of sex offenders. He made, in my view, a fairly legitimate comparison. I mean, the companies are knowingly selling harmful products that have addictive properties using the language of addiction to children who even if they could read warning labels, the warning labels aren't on the packs. So, I mean, we have breakfast cereals called Crave. We have slogans like, once you stop, once you pop, you can't stop. Bet you can't just eat one. Yeah, I think it is predatory and children are the most vulnerable group in our society. And you can't just blame the parents. Once kids get to 10, they have a little bit of money. They get their pocket money, they're walking to school, they walk past stores. You know, you have to rely on them making decisions. And at the moment, they're in a very poor environment to make good decisions. Perhaps the most important question of all what can be done. So, I'm speaking to you at a kind of funny moment because I've been feeling that a lot of my research and advocacy, broadcasting... you know, I've made documentaries, podcasts, I've written a book, I've published these papers. I've been in most of the major newspapers and during the time I've been doing this, you know, a little under 10 years I've been really focused on food. Much less time than you. Everything has got worse. Everything I've done has really failed totally. And I think this is a discussion about power, about unregulated corporate power. And the one glimmer of hope is this complaint that's been filed in Pennsylvania by a big US law firm. It's a very detailed complaint and some lawyers on behalf of a young person called Bryce Martinez are suing the food industry for causing kidney problems and type two diabetes. And I think that in the end is what's going to be needed. Strategic litigation. That's the only thing that worked with tobacco. All of the science, it eventually was useful, but the science on its own and the advocacy and the campaigning and all of it did no good until the lawyers said we would like billions and billions of dollars in compensation please. You know, this is an exciting moment, but there were a great many failed lawsuits for tobacco before the master settlement agreement in the '90s really sort of changed the game. You know, I agree with you. Are you, are you optimistic? I mean, what do you think? I am, and for exactly the same reason you are. You know, the poor people that worked on public health and tobacco labored for decades without anything happening long, long after the health consequences of cigarette smoking were well known. And we've done the same thing. I mean, those us who have been working in the field for all these years have seen precious little in the ways of policy advances. Now tobacco has undergone a complete transformation with high taxes on cigarettes, and marketing restrictions, and non-smoking in public places, laws, and things like that, that really have completely driven down the consumption of cigarettes, which has been a great public health victory. But what made those policies possible was the litigation that occurred by the state attorneys general, less so the private litigating attorneys. But the state attorneys general in the US that had discovery documents released. People began to understand more fully the duplicity of the tobacco companies. That gave cover for the politicians to start passing the policies that ultimately made the big difference. I think that same history is playing out here. The state attorneys general, as we both know, are starting to get interested in this. I say hurray to that. There is the private lawsuit that you mentioned, and there's some others in the mix as well. I think those things will bring a lot of propel the release of internal documents that will show people what the industry has been doing and how much of this they've known all along. And then all of a sudden some of these policy things like taxes, for example, on sugared beverages, might come in and really make a difference. That's my hope. But it makes me optimistic. Well, I'm really pleased to hear that because I think in your position it would be possible. You know, I'm still, two decades behind where I might be in my pessimism. One of the kind of engines of this problem to me is these conflicts of interest where people who say, I'm a physician, I'm a scientist, I believe all this. And they're quietly paid by the food industry. This was the major way the tobacco industry had a kind of social license. They were respectable. And I do hope the lawsuits, one of their functions is it becomes a little bit embarrassing to say my research institute is funded [by a company that keeps making headlines every day because more documents are coming out in court, and they're being sued by more and more people. So, I hope that this will diminish the conflict, particularly between scientists and physicians in the food industry. Because that to me, those are my biggest opponents. The food industry is really nice. They throw money at me. But it's the conflicted scientists that are really hard to argue with because they appear so respectable. Bio Dr. Chris van Tulleken is a physician and a professor of Infection and Global Health at University College London. He trained at Oxford and earned his PhD in molecular virology from University College London. His research focuses on how corporations affect human health especially in the context of child nutrition and he works with UNICEF and The World Health Organization on this area. He is the author of a book entitled Ultraprocessed People: Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. As one of the BBC's leading broadcasters for children and adults his work has won two BAFTAs. He lives in London with his wife and two children.

Norway is located in Northern Europe, sharing borders with Sweden, Finland, and Russia, while its long Atlantic coastline stretches thousands of kilometers. The country is famous for its dramatic landscapes—deep fjords carved by glaciers, towering cliffs plunging into icy waters, and vast forests and tundra. This rugged geography has shaped not only its natural environment but also the lifestyle of its people.One of Norway's most iconic features is its fjords, particularly the Geirangerfjord and Nærøyfjord, both UNESCO World Heritage Sites. These natural wonders attract millions of visitors each year, who come to marvel at their sheer cliffs, waterfalls, and crystal-clear waters. Norway's landscapes are often described as some of the most beautiful on Earth, earning it a top spot for adventure seekers and nature lovers alike. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this podcast Linus Fredberg answers our questions about Revenue Management and Optimization and walks us through his educational and global career paths.  Linus also talks about what a typical day looks like in his current position as the Regional Director of Northern Europe for Revenue Management for Accor's MGallery, Sofitel, Sofitel Legend and Emblems collections. We also ask Linus why he chose to follow a hospitality path and in particular, revenue management.  Linus also explains to our listeners how working in the US, The United Arab Emirates, Indonesia and Europe helped shape his ideas about hospitality and cultural intelligence.  He speaks about some of the highlights of his career and how he has continued to learn and evolve. Finally, Linus speaks to us about how technology has rapidly become a major disruptor and crucial tool in Revenue and Optimization and how he sees the hospitality field evolving over the next few years. Linus Fredberg is an accomplished Revenue Management leader with over a decade of experience driving profitability and strategic growth for globally recognized luxury hotel brands across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Currently overseeing revenue optimization for a portfolio of 34 properties under Sofitel, Sofitel Legend, MGallery, and Emblems across 15 countries, generating over USD 500 million in annual turnover.  Linus has a proven track record in achieving top-line budget goals, improving RGI and ARI performance year-over-year, and increasing RMS coverage. He is skilled in implementing cutting-edge revenue systems like IDeaS G3 and fostering high-performing revenue management cultures across multi-property portfolios. Linus has successfully led pre-opening strategies for iconic properties such as Raffles London at The OWO.  Linus' expertise includes pricing strategy, market analysis, forecasting accuracy, and team leadership. He is passionate about leveraging data-driven insights and innovative technologies to shape the future of revenue management in the luxury hospitality sector.  

What does it take to stay at the top of the global yacht-building game—and why do American owners still look to Northern Europe? In this high-level episode of Yachting USA, host Rick Thomas sits down with Timothy Hamilton, Director of Lürssen Americas, to explore why Fort Lauderdale continues to thrive as the yachting capital of the world and how Lürssen maintains its dominance in ultra-luxury yacht construction. Timothy shares: ✅ His journey from Florida parasail operator to Lürssen executive ✅ Insights into the evolution and future of American yacht building ✅ Why Lürssen remains the gold standard for discerning U.S. yacht buyers ✅ The economic ripple effect of yacht ownership ✅ The “Sacred Trinity” of yachting: owners, crew, and shipyards ✅ Innovations redefining yacht design and crew accommodations Whether you're building, brokering, buying, or simply dreaming—this is your insider's guide to the industry at its highest level. ⚓ Proud Sponsor DeAngelo Marine Exhaust – Leaders in marine exhaust systems, engineering excellence, and American manufacturing.

In this episode, we finally come to the end of Ljósvetninga saga! And there are a lot of loose ends to wrap up. Eyjolf Guðmundarson still burns for vengeance against his brother's killers, but the courts have spared the Möðruvellings, exiling them instead. The outlawed Möðruvellings plan to spread out across Northern Europe, but they have to get out of Iceland first—and the clock is ticking. Our story this time takes us from the court of Harald Hardrada to the streets of Rome, from the bustle of Byzantium to the famous Battle of Hastings, as everyone tries to move on with their lives. And try as they might, not everyone's making it out alive. Pack your bags for a globe-trotting conclusion to Ljósvetninga saga! Listen and let us know what you think: Sagathingpodcast on Facebook Sagathingpodcast on Instagram Sagathingpodcast on Bluesky Saga Thing's unofficial official Discord Music Credits Intro Music - "Prelude and Action" by Kevin MacLeod Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Outro Music - "Stormfront" by Kevin MacLeod Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Hello Interactors,It's been awhile as I've been enjoying summer — including getting in my kayak to paddle over to a park to water plants. Time on the water also gets me thinking. Lately, it's been about what belongs here, what doesn't, and who decides? This week's essay follows my trail of thought from ivy-covered fences to international borders. I trace how science, politics, and even physics shape our ideas of what's “native” and what's “invasive.”INVASION, IVY, AND ICEAs I was contemplating this essay in my car at a stop light, a fireweed seedling floated through the sunroof. Fireweed is considered “native” by the U.S. Government, but when researching this opportunistic plant — which thrives in disturbed areas (hence it's name) — I learned it can be found across the entire Northern Hemisphere. It's “native” to Japan, China, Korea, Siberia, Mongolia, Russia, and all of Northern Europe. Because its primary dispersal is through the wind, it's impossible to know where exactly it originated and when. And unlike humans, it doesn't have to worry about borders.So long as a species arrives on its own accord through wind, wings, currents, or chance — without a human hand guiding it — it's often granted the status of “native.” Never mind whether the journey took decades or millennia, or if the ecosystem has since changed. What matters is that it got there on its own, as if nature somehow stamped its passport.As long time Interactors may recall, I spend the summer helping water “native” baby plants into maturity in a local public green space. A bordering homeowner had planted an “invasive species”, English Ivy, years ago and it climbed the fence engulfing the Sword Ferns, Vine Maples, and towering Douglas Fir trees common in Pacific Northwest woodlands. A nearby concerned environmentalist volunteered to remove the “alien” ivy and plant “native” species through a city program called Green Kirkland. Some of the first Firs he planted are now taller than he is! Meanwhile, on the ground you see remnants of English Ivy still trying to muster a comeback. The stuff is tenacious.This is also the time of year in the Seattle area when Himalayan Black Berries are ripening. These sprawls of arching spikey vines are as pernicious as they are delicious. Nativist defenders try squelching these invaders too. But unlike English Ivy, these “aliens” come with a sugary prize. You'll see people walking along the side of roads with buckets and step stools trying their darnedest to pluck a plump prize — taking care not to get poked or pierced by their prickly spurs.This framing of “invasive” versus “native” has given me pause like never before, especially as I witness armed, masked raids on homes and businesses carried out by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. These government officials, who are also concerned and deeply committed citizens, see themselves as removing what they label “invasive aliens” — individuals they fear might overwhelm the so-called “native” population. As part of the Department of Homeland Security, they work to secure the “Homeland” from what is perceived as an invasion by unwanted human movement. In reflecting on this, I ask myself: how different am I from an ICE agent when I labor to eradicate plants I have been taught to call “invasive” while nurturing so-called “native” species back to health? Both of us are acting within a worldview that categorizes beings as either threats or treasures. At what cost, and with what consequences?According to a couple other U.S. agencies (like the National Park Service and the U.S. Department of Agriculture) species are considered native if they were present before European colonization (i.e., pre-1492). The idea that a species is “native” if it was present before 1492 obviously reflects less a scientific ecological reality than a political opinion of convenience. Framing nativity through the lens of settler history rather than ecological process ignores not only millennia of Indigenous land stewardship, but prehistoric human introductions and natural migrations shaped by climate and geology. Trying pin down what is “native” is like picking up a squirming earthworm.These little critters, which have profoundly altered soil ecosystems in postglacial North America, are often labeled “naturalized” rather than “native” because their arrival followed European colonization. Yet this classification ignores the fact that northern North America had no earthworms at all for thousands of years after the glaciers retreated. There were scraped away with the topsoil. What native species may exist in North America are confined to the unglaciated South.What's disturbing isn't just the worms' historical presence but the simplistic persistent narrative that ecosystems were somehow stable until 1492. How is it possible that so many people still insist it was colonial contact that supposedly flipped some ecological switch? In truth, landscapes have always been in motion. They've been shaped and reshaped by earth's systems — especially human systems — long before borders were drawn. Defining nativity by a colonial decree doesn't just flatten ecological complexity, it overwrites a deep history of entangled alteration.MIGRATION, MOVEMENT, AND MEANINGIf a monarch butterfly flutters across the U.S. border from Mexico, no one demands its papers. There are no butterfly checkpoints in Laredo or Yuma. It rides the wind northward, tracing ancient pathways across Texas, the Midwest, all the way to southern Canada. The return trip happens generations later — back to the oyamel forests in the state of Michoacán. This movement is a marvel. It's so essential we feel compelled to watch it, map it, and even plant milkweed to help it along. But when human beings try to make a similar journey on the ground — fleeing drought, violence, or economic collapse — we call it a crisis, build walls, and question their right to belong.This double standard starts to unravel when you look closely at the natural world. Species are constantly on the move. Some of the most astonishing feats of endurance on Earth are migratory: the Arctic tern flies from pole to pole each year; caribou migrate thousands of miles across melting tundra and newly paved roads. GPS data compiled in Where the Animals Go shows lions slipping through suburban gardens and wolves threading through farmland, using hedgerows and railways like interstates. Animal movement isn't the exception; it's the ecological norm.And it's not just animals. Plants, too, are masters of mobility. A single seed can cross oceans, whether on the back of a bird, in a gust of wind, or tucked into a canoe by a human hand. In one famous case, researchers once proposed that a tree found on a remote Pacific Island must have arrived via floating debris. But later genetic and archaeological evidence suggested a different story: it may have arrived with early Polynesian voyagers — people whose seafaring knowledge shaped entire ecosystems across the Pacific.DNA evidence and phylogeographic studies (how historical processes shape the geographic distribution of genetic lineages within species) now support the idea that Polynesians carried plants such as paper mulberry, sweet potato, taro, and even some trees across vast ocean distances well before the Europeans showed up. What was once considered improbable — human-mediated dispersal to incredibly beautiful and remote islands — is now understood as a core part of Pacific ecological and cultural history.Either way, that plant didn't ask to be there. It simply was. And with no obvious harm done, it was allowed to stay. We humans can also often conflate our inability to perceive harm with the idea that a species “belongs.” We tend to assume that if we can't see, measure, or immediately notice any negative impact a species is having, then it must not be causing harm — and therefore it “belongs” in the ecosystem. But belonging is contextual. It can be slow to reveal and is rarely absolute. British ecologist and writer Ken Thompson has spent much of his career challenging our tidy categories of “native” and “invasive.” In his book Where Do Camels Belong?, he reminds us that the “belonging” question is less about biology than bureaucracy. Camels originated in North America and left via the Bering land bridge around 3–5 million years ago. They eventually domesticated in the Middle East about ~3,000–4,000 years ago to be used for transportation, milk, and meat. Then, in the 19th century, British colonists brought camels to Australia to help explore and settle the arid interior. Australia is now home to the largest population of feral camels in the world. So where, exactly, do they “belong”? Our ecological borders, like our political ones, often make more sense on a map than they do in the field.Even the language we use is steeped in militaristic and xenophobic overtones. Scottish geographer Charles Warren has written extensively on how conservation debates are shaped by the words we choose. In a 2007 paper, he argues that terms like invasive, alien, and non-native don't just describe, but pass judgment. They carrying moral and political weight into what should be an ecological conversation. They conjure feelings of threat, disorder, and contamination. When applied to plants, they frame restoration as a battle. With people, they prepare the ground for exclusion.Which is why I now hesitate when I yank ivy or judge a blackberry bramble. I still do it because I believe in fostering ecological resilience and am sensitive to slowing or stopping overly aggressive and harmful plants (and animals). But now I do it more humbly, more questioningly. What makes something a threat, and who gets to decide? What if the real harm lies not in movement of species, but in the stories we tell about it?MIGRATION, MYTHS, AND MATTERThe impulse to define who belongs and who doesn't isn't limited to the forest floor. It echoes in immigration policy, in the architecture of the border wall, and in the sterile vocabulary of "population control." Historians of science Sebastian Normandin and Sean Valles have examined how science, politics, and social movements intersect. In a 2015 paper, they show that many conservation policies we take for granted today — ostensibly about protecting ecosystems — emerged from the same ideological soil that nourished eugenics programs and early anti-immigration campaigns. What began as a concern for environmental balance often mutated into a desire for demographic purity.We see this convergence in the early 1900s, when the U.S. Dillingham Commission launched an exhaustive effort to classify immigrants by race, culture, and supposed “fitness” for American life. Historian Robert Zeidel, in his 2004 account of U.S. immigration politics, details how the Dillingham Commission's findings hardened the notion that certain groups — like certain species — are inherently better suited to thrive in the nation's “ecological” and cultural landscape. Their conclusions fueled the 1924 Immigration Act, one of the most restrictive in U.S. history, and laid groundwork for a century of racialized immigration policy.These ideas didn't stay in the realm of policy. They seeped into science. Carl Linnaeus, the father of modern taxonomy, built racial categories into the very fabric of biological classification. Historian of science Lisbet Koerner, in her 1999 study of Carl Linnaeus, shows how his taxonomy reflected and reinforced 18th-century European ideals of empire and control. His system sorted not only plants and animals, but people. Nature, under his framework, was not only to be known but to be ordered. As Linneaus often said, "God created, Linnaeus organized." Brad observes that Carl also spoke in the third person.The Linnaeus legacy lingers. Legal scholar and sociologist Dorothy Roberts and anthropologist Robert Sussman both argue that modern science has quietly resurrected racial categories in genetic research, often under the guise of ancestry testing or precision medicine. But race, like “nativity,” is not a biological fact — it's a social construct. Anthropologist Jonathan Marks and geneticist David Reich reach the same conclusion from different directions: the human genome tells a story not of fixed, isolated groups, but of constant migration, mixing, and adaptation.This is why defining species as “native” or “invasive” based on a colonial timestamp like 1492 is more than just a scientific shortcut. It's a worldview that imagines a pristine past disrupted by foreign intrusion. This myth is mirrored in nationalist movements around the globe — including the troubling MAGA blueprint: Project 2025.When we talk about securing borders, protecting bloodlines, or restoring purity, we're often echoing the same flawed logic that labels blackberry and ivy as existential threats, while ignoring the systems that truly destabilize ecosystems — like extractive capitalism, industrial agriculture, and global trade. But even these forces may not be purely ideological. As complexity theorist Yaneer Bar-Yam, founder of the New England Complex Systems Institute, has argued, large-scale societal and ecological patterns often emerge not through top-down intent, but through the bottom-up dynamics of complex systems under stress.These dynamics are shaped by entropy — not in the popular sense of disorder, but as the tendency of energy and influence to disperse across systems in unpredictable ways as complexity increases. In this view, what we experience as exploitation or collapse may also be the inevitable result of a world growing too intricate to govern by simple, centralized rules.Consider those early Polynesians. Perhaps we best think of them as complex, intelligent, tool-bearing animals who crossed vast oceans long before Europe entered the story. They didn't defy nature, they expressed it. They simply scaled up the same dispersal seen in wind-blown seeds or migratory birds. Their movement, like that of camels, fireweed, or monarchs, reminds us that life is always pushing outward, but because it can. This outward motion follows physics.Even in an open system like Earth, the Second Law of Thermodynamics holds sway. Energy flows in and life finds ever more complex ways to move it along. A sunbeam warms a rock, releasing energy into the air above. That warmth lifts air, forming wind. The wind carries seeds across fields and fence lines, scattering the future wherever friction allows. Seeds take root, drawing in sunlight, water, and minerals. They build structure to move energy forward. Muscles twitch as animals rise to consume that energy then follow warmth, water, or instinct. Wings of the bird lift so it may fly. Herds of the plain press so they may migrate. These patterns stretch across microseconds, minutes, and millennia — creeks, crevices, and continents. And eventually, humans launch canoes in the ocean tracing the same thermodynamic pull, riding currents of wind, wave, desire, and need. None of it defies nature. It is nature. It can be seen as different forms of energy dispersing through motion, life, and relationship at different scales.One of the first scientists to recognize this was a Belgian chemist in the 1970s who saw something radical in the chaos of fluctuations and energy flows in nonequilibrium chemical systems: that complexity could arise not despite entropy, but because of it. Ilya Prigogine called these emergent forms dissipative structures — systems that spontaneously self-organize to transform and disperse energy more efficiently. A familiar example is a snowflake, which forms highly ordered crystal structures as water vapor crystallizes under just the right conditions. This beautiful pattern represents order emerging directly from the molecular chaos of a winter storm.Extending this idea, we might begin to see migration, dispersal, and adaptation not as disruptions or disturbances, but as natural expressions of complex systems tirelessly working toward order. These processes are ways in which living systems unfold, expand, and improvise — dynamically responding to the flows of energy they must transform to sustain themselves and their environments.To call such movement unnatural is to forget that we, too, are part of nature's restless patterning. The real challenge isn't to freeze the world in place, but to understand these flows so we might shape them with care, rather than react to them with fear.To be clear: not all movement is benign. Some species — like kudzu or cane toads — have caused undeniable ecological damage. But the danger lies not in movement itself, but in the conditions of arrival and the systems of control. Climate change, habitat destruction, and globalization create the disturbances that opportunistic species exploit. They don't “invade” so much as arrive when the door is already open.And entropy doesn't mean indifferent inevitability, and complexity doesn't mean plodding passivity. Living systems are capable of generating counter-forces like cooperative networks, defensive alliances, and feedback loops. This form of collective actions resists domination and reasserts balance. Forests shade out overzealous colonizers, coral fish guard polyps from overgrazers, microbial webs starve out pathogens. Agency, be it a fungus or a human community, operates within the same flow of energy, shaping it toward persistence, resilience, and sometimes justice.So, when I pull ivy or water a fern, I do it with a different awareness now. I see myself not as a border guard, but as one actor in a much older drama — a participant in the ceaseless give-and-take through which living systems maintain their balance. My hands are not outside the flow, but in it, nudging here, ceding there, trying to tip the scales toward diversity, reciprocity, and resilience. It's not purity I'm after, but possibility: a landscape, human and more-than-human, capable of adapting to what comes next. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

Imelda Almqvist is an international teacher of Sacred Art and Seiðr/Old Norse Traditions (the ancestral wisdom teachings of Northern Europe). ⁠She has her own Forest School in Sweden, in a remote place where the Forest Meets the Sea and where wolves (sometimes) howl at night. Imelda appears in a TV program, titled Ice Age Shaman, made for the Smithsonian Museum, in the series Mystic Britain, talking about Mesolithic arctic deer shamanism. She has also presented her work on Sounds True and The Shift Network.  Her five non-fiction books include:

This is Episode 2 of our Summer Sessions — and this week, we're going global. After visiting nearly 50 countries together, we're spilling the tea on where to go, where to avoid, and how to actually get work done without melting, buffering, or losing your mind. From long-stays in Southeast Asia to one-night stands in Northern Europe, we're unpacking the joy and chaos of remote work around the world. Expect real talk, surprising tips, and at least one mosquito-related meltdown.

Ken O'Sullivan, Underwater cameraman and Documentary-maker.

Grönlands historia, från dansk koloni till självstyre, har präglats av politisk kamp, kulturella motsättningar och sociala omvälvningar. När Donald Trump uttryckte intresse för att köpa Grönland sattes öns politiska ställning i blixtbelysning. De första inuiterna anlände för tusentals år sedan, och nordborna som bosatte sig där år 985 försvann så småningom. År 1721 grundade den danske prästen Hans Egede en ny bosättning.Nordens nationer fick sin nuvarande utformning under Napoleonkrigen i början av 1800-talet. Under 1900-talet utvecklades flera modeller för självstyre i Norden, grundade på historiska, geografiska och kulturella särdrag. Världens största ö blev en integrerad del av Danmark 1953 och fick självstyre först 1979.I detta avsnitt av podden Historia Nu samtalar programledaren Urban Lindstedt med Jan Sundberg, professor emeritus i allmän statslära vid Helsingfors universitet, om Grönlands historia, dess koloniala arv och den långsamma men betydelsefulla vägen mot självstyre. Sundberg är aktuell som medredaktör för boken Governing Partially Independent Nation-Territories: Evidence from Northern Europe, tillsammans med Stefan Sjöblom.Ålands självstyre, etablerat 1921 under Nationernas Förbunds beskydd, är det äldsta och mest långtgående. Åland har ett eget parlament, ett officiellt språk (svenska) och rätt att lagstifta i de flesta inrikesfrågor. Färöarna fick självstyre 1948, och Grönland följde efter 1979. Även samerna har etablerat sameting i Norge, Sverige och Finland med kulturellt självbestämmande.Grönlands självstyre skiljer sig från Ålands och Färöarnas genom sin geografiska storlek, sina naturresurser samt befolkningens etniska och språkliga särart. Till skillnad från Åland, som är en autonom region inom Finland, har Grönland ett kolonialt förflutet som dansk besittning. Självstyrelselagen från 2009 erkänner grönländarna som ett folk med rätt till självbestämmande enligt internationell rätt. Lagen gav Grönland kontroll över sina naturresurser, vilket särskiljer ön från andra nordiska autonomier.Napoleonkrigen (1803–1815) bidrog till en omvälvning av den nordiska maktbalansen. Danmark, som ställde sig på Frankrikes sida, drabbades hårt när Storbritannien bombarderade Köpenhamn 1807 och beslagtog den danska flottan. Efter freden i Kiel 1814 tvingades Danmark att avträda Norge till Sverige, vilket markerade slutet på den dansk-norska unionen. Freden förändrade det nordiska statssystemet radikalt och inledde en ny epok av nationell omstrukturering – något som också påverkade relationerna till perifera områden som Grönland, Färöarna och Island.Danskarna införde ett handelsmonopol och kontrollerade Grönlands ekonomi och samhällsstruktur. Kristendomen och det latinska alfabetet introducerades, vilket förändrade inuiternas traditionella livsstil och världsbild. Den danska administrationen begränsade inuiternas möjligheter till självständig handel, och moderniseringen gick långsamt. Grönland förblev isolerat från omvärlden, och inuiterna hade begränsade rättigheter inom det danska kolonialsystemet.Musik: Grönlands nationalsång, Nunarput, utoqqarsuanngoravit ("Vårt land, som blev gammalt"), skrevs av Henrik Lund och tonsattes av Jonathan Petersen. Den antogs officiellt som nationalsång 1916 och används fortfarande som en symbol för Grönlands identitet och kultur. Texten hyllar landets natur, dess historia och folkets stolthet över sitt arv. Wikimedia Common. Public Domain.Lyssna på Vikingarnas episka världsresor.Klippare: Emanuel Lehtonen Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The death of Edward I in 1307 marked the beginning of a period of intense turmoil and change in England. The fourteenth century ushered in the beginning of the bloody Hundred Years' War with France, an epic conflict with Scotland that would last into the sixteenth century, famine in Northern Europe and the largest human catastrophe in known history, the Black Death. In this episode, medieval historian and writer Helen Carr speaks to Myhtili Rao about this period of social, political and cultural upheaval, about how this century shaped England as we know it today. If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Surfshark's study reports that Ireland's data breaches increased by 70% in Q2 compared to Q1 2025 (87k vs. 51.1k), meaning over 100 thousand accounts were compromised in Ireland during the first half of the year. Globally, the latest data shows a 34% increase from 70 million to 94 million leaked accounts. The United States, France, India, Germany, and Israel were the countries most affected by breaches in Q2 2025. "Today's digital age requires all of us to share more and more personal information to carry out daily tasks. Whether sharing your name and address for food deliveries, or phone numbers when making a booking at a barber shop, there is no guarantee that businesses are keeping crucial information safe and secure. In the wrong hands, this data can be used to commit identity theft, via social media, for targeted scams or sold on the dark web - where they're traded for further illegal use." says Sarunas Sereika, Product Manager at Surfshark. An upward trend in breached Irish accounts is observed in Q2 2025, where data breaches increased by 70% compared to the previous quarter. Ireland ranks 38th globally with 87 thousand breached accounts (previously 51k in Q1 2025). Data breach statistics over the years Surfshark's analysis of data breaches since 2004 shows Ireland is the 4th in Northern Europe, with 27.3M compromised user accounts. A total of 6.5M unique emails were breached from Ireland. Statistically, the average Irish has been affected by data breaches around 5 times. 18.4M passwords were leaked together with Irish accounts, putting 67% of breached users in danger of account take over that might lead to identity theft, extortion or other cybercrimes. Ireland's full profile in the Global Data Breach Monitoring project can be found here: https://surfshark.com/research/data-breach-monitoring?country=ie Which countries have been the most affected in Q2 2025? In descending order, the ten most breached countries in Q2 2025 were the US (42.5M), France (11.4M), India (1.7M), Germany (1.3M), Israel (1.2M), Canada (968.6k), the UK (944k), Thailand (889.1k), Brazil (639.6k), and China (578.3k). The countries with the highest breach density over Q2 2025 (number of leaked accounts per 1,000 residents): France (172), Israel (130), the US (123), Singapore (26), Canada (24), South Sudan (23), Belgium (21), Ireland (16), Switzerland (16) and Germany (15). METHODOLOGY A data breach happens when confidential and sensitive data gets exposed to unauthorised third parties. In this study, we treat every breached or leaked email address used to register for online services as a separate user account, which may have been leaked with additional information, such as password, phone number, IP address, eircode, and more. The data was collected by our independent partners from 29,000 publicly available databases and aggregated by email address. This data was then anonymised and passed on to Surfshark's researchers to analyse their findings statistically. Countries with a population of less than 1M people were not included in the analysis. The Data Breach World Map is updated quarterly with the most recent data from our independent partners. For the full methodology, please refer to: https://surfshark.com/research/data-breach-monitoring/methodology See more stories here. More about Irish Tech News Irish Tech News are Ireland's No. 1 Online Tech Publication and often Ireland's No.1 Tech Podcast too. You can find hundreds of fantastic previous episodes and subscribe using whatever platform you like via our Anchor.fm page here: https://anchor.fm/irish-tech-news If you'd like to be featured in an upcoming Podcast email us at Simon@IrishTechNews.ie now to discuss. Irish Tech News have a range of services available to help promote your business. Why not drop us a line at Info@IrishTechNews.ie now to find out more about how we can help you reach our audience. You can also find and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat.

It's week two of Strangers Go to Camp and the brutal summer continues! This week, the Strangers head to Sweden to party with the Harga in Ari Aster's 2019 folk horror film "Midsommar" starring Florence Pugh, Jack Reynor, William Jackson Harper, and Will Poulter!"Midsommar" is currently available to stream on Amazon Prime Video!A couple travels to Northern Europe to visit a rural hometown's fabled Swedish mid-summer festival. What begins as an idyllic retreat quickly devolves into an increasingly violent and bizarre competition at the hands of a pagan cult.#horror #scary #comedy #film #reviews #commentary #movies #slasher #strangersinthealps #satellite12 #moviepodcast #ariaster #midsommar #florencepugh #willpoulter Follow all of our relevant links here: https://linktr.ee/satellite12

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, I reconnect with Dan Sullivan for another wide-ranging conversation that blends current events, history, technology, and human behavior. We start by reflecting on the safety and comfort of life in Canada while discussing the news of missile strikes in Israel. From there, we explore the idea that innovation often advances when entrenched leaders move on—whether in science, business, or geopolitics. Dan brings up Thomas Kuhn's idea that progress happens after the old guard exits, creating room for new ways of thinking. Our conversation shifts into the role of AI as a horizontal layer over everything—similar to electricity. We compare this shift to earlier transitions like the printing press and the rise of coffee culture. Dan shares his belief that while AI will transform systems, the core of human life will still revolve around handled needs and personal desires. We wrap by talking about convenience as the ultimate driver of progress. From automated cooking to frictionless hospitality, we recognize that people mostly want things to be “handled.” Despite how fast technology evolves, it's clear that unless something is of deep personal interest, most people will let it pass by. As always, the conversation leaves room for reflection and humor, grounded in the reality that technological change doesn't always mean personal change. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Dan and I explore the complexities of living in a "world-class" city like Toronto, discussing its cultural vibrancy against the backdrop of global geopolitical tensions. Dan delves into Toronto's significant role as a financial and technological hub, emphasizing its strategic importance in trade with the United States, where a substantial portion of Canadian exports cross the border. We discuss the transformative potential of AI in today's digital revolution, drawing parallels with historical innovations like Gutenberg's printing press, and how these advancements continuously redefine our society. We examine the evolution of Starbucks, from a unique third space with artisanal baristas to a more automated environment, and ponder the implications of this shift on quality and customer experience. The conversation shifts to the rise of independent coffee shops, highlighting how they meet the demands of discerning customers by offering premium experiences. Dean reflects on our relentless pursuit of convenience in modern urban life, where technological advancements shape our daily routines and enhance our quality of life. We conclude with a discussion on habit formation and the role of technology in reinforcing existing habits, while considering the balance between maintaining old routines and embracing new ones. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan, Dan: Mr Jackson, I hope the rest of your day yesterday went well. Dean: Oh, delightful, I learned stuff yesterday. That was a very nice day, beautiful, beautiful weather today. You know what, dan, if you could, as an option at the Hazleton, upgrade to include your perfect weather for $1,000, this is what you'd order, it's this kind of day. Yeah, mid-70s perfect white fluffy clouds. Yes, it's why. Dan: Living in a safe, globally unimportant country. That's exactly right. Holy cow, I don't know if you've seen, yeah, what's uh? I woke up like literally just a few minutes ago seeing all the, uh, the raining missiles on israel right now from Iran. Have you seen that this morning? Dean: Oh yeah, there's a lot of them. Most of them don't hit anything and most of them are shot down, but still it puts some excitement in your day. Dan: I mean really, yeah, these ones look like. They're something unique about these ones that they're supersonicersonic and many of them are hitting, yeah, different than what we've normally seen. Like normally, when you see it, it's the, the iron dome or whatever is, you know, intercepting them, which is always interesting, but these ones are like Direct, like you can see them hitting in inrael that's. I mean, could you imagine, dan, like you, just look at how geographically we are. You know we've won the geographic lottery in where we're positioned here, you know, just realizing that's never. Even though you can, all you know you always take precautions with the umbrella above us, over the outside. Dean: But I mean still that today. I've lived in Toronto for 54 years now, just past the anniversary, the 54th anniversary and I think that, first of all, when you have a really large city like Toronto, the center of a lot of things that go on in Canada, A world-class city like Toronto. Well, it's not a world-class city. But yeah, they have to go five years. I'm putting a new rule in for world-class cities. You have to go five years without ever saying the words. Dan: Yeah, we're a world-class city. Dean: We're a world-class city. And that takes you to stage one probation. Dan: Yeah. Dean: No, that takes you to stage two, probation, and then stage three probation is where all the people who've been saying it's a world-class city have either died or moved, and then it's sort of like science. There was a famous he wasn't a scientist, but he was a, I think, a science historian. Thomas Kuhn K-U-H-N if you ever came across that name wrote in the 1960s and he wrote a very influential book which is called the Structure of Scientific Revolutions, and he was asked many times when you have a sudden series of scientific breakthroughs and we really haven't had any for quite a long time, it's been mostly almost a century since we've had any real scientific revolutions. So all the progress we've made over the last century were for discoveries in physics and magnetism and electricity and uh, you know nuclear but they had already worked out how that was going to happen in the by the 1920s. and he said what when, all of a sudden, when you get a breakthrough, let's say, for example, they discover a new hydrogen atom and it essentially gives everybody free energy? That would be a scientific breakthrough. Do you think that I mean? Would you think? Dan: that would be. Dean: Yeah, yeah. In other words, energy just didn't cost anything anymore, you know, and the price of energy would go down. Dan: That would free up a lot of that, free up a lot of other things energy would go down that would free up a lot of that'd free up a lot of other things, and, uh, and, and he said, the single biggest cause for scientific breakthroughs is the funerals of old scientists. Oh who everybody defers to that you can't first them. Dean: Yeah, well, defers to, but they control promotion of young scientists. They control where the money goes for a scientist and then they die and their control loosens up and to the degree that control disappears. Now you get new. Dan: Yes. Dean: Yeah, so that's a long way around. But I think that in the world today there are people who are basically in control of geopolitical systems, economic systems, you know, cultural systems, and in the next 10 years, I think, a lot of the controllers are going. They'll either die or people will think they've already died. They don't have to actually die, they just have to be in a room somewhere and no one's heard, and no one's heard anything from them recently, and uh and uh, you know, and everything like that, and then things change and then things really shifted. But my sense about Toronto is that it's going to be the Geneva of the Western Hemisphere. Dan: Okay, that's interesting. Dean: Switzerland from a geopolitical standpoint really. I mean, nobody ever talks about well, what do the Swiss think about this? But lots of stuff happens in Geneva. People meet in Geneva. There's tons of money that goes through Geneva and you know, when you know people who hate each other want to talk to each other and feel safe about it, they do it in Geneva that's interesting. Dan: How did Switzerland become its neutrality known for? Is that just because of its positioning between Austria? Dean: and Germany mountains. Yeah, the uh, the germans had given some thought during the second world war to invade switzerland, and switzerland can put into the field in a very short period of time a very big army. I don't know what the numbers are. But the other thing is, uh, for the longest period I know maybe a century long they've been howling out the mountains. So they've got, you know, they've got secret bases inside the mountains, but there's also they've created lots of dams with big reservoirs and if there was ever an invasion they would just blow up the dams and they would flood the entire lowlands of. You know, people are told to the mountains, the entire lowlands of you know, people are told to the mountains, get to your bunker. You know everybody's got a bunker and they've all got guns and they do it. You know they just want to. They're in the middle of one of the most warfare inclined continents in human history. Europe is very warlike. It's always been warlike. Dan: Europe is very warlike. It's always been warlike, but they haven't wanted to be part of the wars, so they've taken the other approach. Dean: Yeah, and Canada is kind of like that, but the US is very uniquely positioned, because a lot of people don't know this. I mean, you come to Toronto and it's big skyscrapers, yeah, you know, and it's a financial center. It's very clearly a big financial center, it's a big communication center, it's a big tech center. But a lot of people don't know it's a big manufacturing center. There's the airport here. Dan: Oh yeah, All around the airport. Dean: Mile after mile of low-rise manufacturing Industrial yeah, all around the airport Mile after mile of low-rise manufacturing Industrial. Yeah Actually, sasha Kurzmer, who you'll see tomorrow, you'll see Sasha says it's the hottest real estate in Toronto right now is industrial space Really Wow, yeah. Yeah, we have enough condos for the next 10 years. I mean most of the condos we got enough. Dan: It's enough already. Yeah, that's true. That's funny right. Dean: I mean the vast number of them are empty. They're just. You know they just built them. Dan: Money lockers. Dean: Right yeah, money lockers right, yeah and uh, but a semi-truck you know like a big semi-truck loaded with industrial products can reach 100 million americans in 24 hours and that's where the wealth. That's where the wealth of toronto comes from. It comes from that distribution. Dan: Access to American market. Dean: Yeah, that's true. So you have the bridge at Buffalo, the big bridge at Buffalo. That goes across to New York and you have the big bridge at Detroit or at Windsor that goes across to Michigan and 80% of all the exports that Canada makes goes over those two bridges. Dan: Wow. Dean: Rapid-fire factoids for our listening audience. Dan: Yeah, absolutely, I mean that's. Dean: I like things like that. I like things like that. Dan: I do too. I always learn. You know, and that's kind of the you think about those as those are all mainland exports physical goods and the like but you know that doesn't. Where the real impact is is all the Cloudlandia transfers. You know, the transfer of digital stuff that goes across the border. There are no borders in Cloudlandia. That's the real exciting thing. This juxtaposition is like nothing else. I mean, you see, navigating this definite global migration to Cloudlandia. That's why I'm so fascinated by it. You know is just the implications. You know and you see. Now I saw that Jeff Bezos is back, apparently after stepping down. He's gotten so excited about AI that's bringing him back into the fold, you know. Dean: What at Amazon? Dan: Yes. Dean: Oh, I didn't know that. Dan: I saw that just yesterday, but he was talking about AI being, you know, a horizontal layer over everything, like electricity was layer over everything. Like electricity was, like the internet is, like AI is just going to be a horizontal, like over everything layer that will there's not a single thing that AI will not impact. It's going to be in everything. And so when you think about it, like electricity, like that I think I mentioned a few weeks ago that was kind of a curiosity of mine Now is seeing who were and what was the progression of electricity kind of thing, as a you know where it, how long it took for the alternate things to come aside from just lighting and now to where it's just everything we take for granted, right, like like you can't imagine a world without electricity. We just take it for granted, it's there, you plug something in and it and it works. Dean: You know, yeah, no, I, I agree, I agree, yeah, and so I wonder who I mean? Dan: do you? Uh and I think I go all the way back to you know that was where, like gutenberg, you know, like the first, the transition there, like when you could print Bibles okay, then you could print, you know, multiple copies and you know, took a vision, applied to it and made it a newspaper or a magazine. You know all the evolution things of it. Who were the organizers of all of these things? And I wonder about the timelines of them, you know? Dean: And I wonder about the timelines of them. You know Well, I do know, because I think that Gutenberg is a real, you know, it's a real watershed and I do know that in Northern Europe so Gutenberg was in Germany, that in Northern Europe, right across the you know you would take from Poland and then Germany, you would take from Poland and then Germany, and then you would take Scandinavia, then the low countries. Lux date that they give for Gutenberg is 1455. That's when you know a document that he printed. It has the year 1455, that within about a 30-year period there were 30,000 working presses in Northern Europe. How many years. That'd be about 30 years after 1455. So by the end of the—you've already surpassed 30,000 presses. Yes, but the vast majority of it wasn't things like Bibles. Dan: The vast majority of it was't things like Bibles. Dean: The vast majority of it was contracts. It was regulations. Dan: It was trade agreements. Dean: It was mostly commercial. It went commercial and so actually maps, maps became a big deal, yeah, yeah. So that made a difference and also those next 150 years were just tumultuous, I mean politically, economically I mean yeah yeah, enormous amount of warfare, enormous amount of became. Dan: Uh, I imagine that part of that was the ability for a precise idea to spread in the way it was intended to spread, like unified in its presentation, compared to an oral history of somebody saying, well, he said this and this was an actual, you know, duplicate representation of what you wanted, because it was a multiplier, really right. Dean: I mean that's, yeah, I'm. It was a bad time for monasteries yeah, exactly. Dan: They started drinking and one of them said you know what? We should start selling this beer. That's what we should be doing. Dean: We should get one of those new printing presses and print ads labels. Dan: Oh, we got to join in. Oh man, it's so funny, dan, that's so true, right? I mean every transition. It's like you know what did the buggy whip people start transitioning into? We're not strangers to entire industries being wiped out, you know, in the progress of things, yeah. Dean: Well, it wasn't until the end of the Second World War that horses really disappeared, certainly in Europe, certainly in Europe. It's. One of the big problems of the Germans during the Second World War is that most of their shipping was still by horses. Throughout the Second World War, you know they presented themselves as a super modern army military. You know they had the Air Force and everything like that, but their biggest problem is that they had terrible logistical systems, because one of the problems was that the roads weren't everywhere and the railroads were different gauges. They had a real problem, and horses are really expensive. I mean, you can't gas up a horse like you can gas up a truck, and you have to take care of them, you have to feed them. You have to use half of them to. You have to use half the horses to haul the food for the other half for all the horses. Dan: It's a self-perpetuating system. Yeah, exactly, that's so funny. Dean: Yeah, it's really an interesting thing, but then there's also a lot of other surprises that happen along the way. You know, happen with electricity and you know everything, but it's all gases and beds. Dan: Well, that's exactly it, and I think that it's clear. Dean: It'd be interesting with Bezos whether he can come back, because he had all sorts of novel ideas, but those novel ideas are standard now throughout the economy. And can he? I don't know how old he is now. Is he 50s? I guess 50s. Dan: Yeah, he might be 60-something. Dean: Yeah, well, well, there's probably some more ingenious 20 year olds that are. Dan: You know that are coming up with new stuff yeah, that were born when amazon already existed, you know I mean, it's like howard schultz with starbucks. Dean: He had the sweet spot for about 10 years, I think, probably from, I would say probably from around 90 to 2000. Starbucks really really had this sweet spot. They had this third space. You know, they had great baristas. Dan: They had. Dean: You walked in and the smell of coffee was fantastic and everything. And then they went public and it required that they put the emphasis on quantity rather than quality, and the first thing they had to do was replace the baristas with automatic machines. Okay, so you know, a personal touch went out of it. The barista would remember your drink. You know, yeah, a personal touch went out of it. The barista would remember your drink you know yeah. Dan: They were artists and they could create you know they punched the buttons and do the things, but they were not really making. Dean: Yeah, and then the other thing was that they went to sugar. They, you know, they brought in all sorts of sugar drinks and pastries and everything else. And now it wasn't the smell of coffee. When you walked in, it was the smell of sugar drinks and pastries and everything else. And now it wasn't the smell of coffee. When you walked in, it was the smell of sugar and uh and uh. So that I mean, people are used to sugar, but it's an interesting you know, and then he also, he trained his competition, you know, if you look at all the independent coffee places that could have a great barista and have freshly ground coffee. He trained all those people and then they went into competition with him. Dan: I think what really you know, the transition or the shift for Starbucks was that it was imagined in a time when the internet was still a place that you largely went to at home or at work, and the third place was a necessary, like you know, a gathering spot. But as soon as I think the downfall for that was when Wi-Fi became a thing and people started using Starbucks as their branch office. They would go and just sit there, take up all their tables all day. Dean: I'm guilty. Dan: I'm guilty, right exactly and that that kind of economically iconic urban locations, you know where you would be a nice little oasis. Yeah, it was exotically, exotically. European, I mean, he got the idea sitting in the. Dean: Grand Plaza in Venice you know that's where he got the idea for it, and yeah, so it was a period in a period in time. He had an era, period in time to take advantage and of course he did. You know he espresso drinks to. Dan: North. Dean: America. We, you know, maxwell House was coffee before Jeff Bezos, you know, and yeah, I think there's just a time. You, you know, I mean one of the things is that we talk about. We have Jeff Madoff and I are writing a book called Casting, not Hiring where we talk about bringing theater into your business and we study Starbucks and we say it's a cautionary tale and the idea that I came up with is that starbucks would create the world's greatest barista school and then you would apply to be, uh, become a barista in a starbucks and you would get a certification, okay, and then they would cream. They would always take the best baristas for their own stores and and. But then other people could buy a license to have a barista licensed, starbucks licensed barista license yes. And that he wouldn't have gone as quickly but he would have made quality brand. Yeah, but I think not grinding the coffee was the big, the big thing, because the smell of coffee and they're not as good. I mean, the starbucks drinks aren't as good as they. They were when they had the baristas, because it was just always freshly ground. You know, and yeah, that that was in the coffee and everything like that. I I haven't been. I actually haven't been to a starbucks myself in about two years that's interesting, we've got like it's very funny. Dan: But the in winter haven there's a independent you know cafe called haven cafe and they have won three out of five years the, the international competition in in Melbourne. Uh. Dean: Australia. Yeah see, that's good, that's fantastic yeah yeah yeah and Starbucks can't get back to Starbucks. Can't get back to that. You know that they're too big right, yeah, we just in winter. Dan: I haven't been yet because I've been up here, but it just opened a new Dutch Brothers coffee, which you know has been they've been more West Coast oriented, but making quite a stir. Dean: West Coast. That's where the riots are right. The riots are in the United. Dan: States. Dean: Oh man, holy cow, riot copy, riot copy. Dan: Yeah, exactly, I mean that's yeah. I can't imagine, you know, being in Los Angeles right now. That's just yeah unbelievable. Dean: Yeah, I think they're keeping it out of Santa Monica. That's all I really care about. Dan: Nothing at shutters right. Dean: Yeah, I mean Ocean Avenue and that. Have that tightly policed and keep them out of there. Dan: Yeah, exactly, it's amazing To protect the business. Yeah, I'm very interested in this whole, you know seeing, just looking back historically to see where the you know directionally what's going to happen with AI as it progresses here. Dean: Yeah, you know like learning from the platforms it's just constant discovery. I mean, you know like learning from that, it's just constant discovery. Dan: I mean uh, you know yeah yeah, I mean it's um. Dean: I had a podcast with mike kanix on tuesday and 60 days ago I thought it was going in this direction. Dan: He says now it's totally changed it and I said, well, that's probably going to be true 60 days from now yeah, I guess that's true, right, layer after layer, because we won't even know what it's going to, uh, what it's going to do. Yeah, I do just look at these uh things, though, you know, like the enabling everything, I'm really thinking more. I was telling you yesterday I was working on an email about the what if the robots really do take over? And just because everybody kind of says that with either fear or excitement, you know, and I think if you take it from. Dean: Well, what does take over mean? I mean, what does the word take over? Dan: mean, well, that's the thing, that's the word, right. That's what I mean is that people have that fear that they're going to lose control, but I think I look at it from that you get to give up control or to give control to the robot. You don't have to do anything. You know, I was thinking with with breakfast, with Chad Jenkins this morning, and we had, you and I had that delicious steak yesterday, we had one this morning and you know just thinking. You know, imagine that your house has a robot that is trained in all of the culinary, you know the very best culinary minds and you can order up anything you want prepared, exactly how it's prepared, you know, right there at your house, brought right to you by a robot. That's not, I mean, that's definitely in the realm of, of realistic here. You know, in the next, certainly, if we, if we take depending on how far a window out you take, right, like I think that things are moving so fast that that's, I think, 2030, you know, five years we're going to have a, even if just thinking about the trajectory that we've had right now yeah, my belief is that it's going to be um 90 of. Dean: It is going to be backstage and not front stage. That's going to be backstage yes, and that's got. You know I use the. Remember when google brought out their glasses, yeah, and they said this is the great breakthrough. You know all new technology does. And immediately all the bars and restaurants in San Francisco barred Google glasses. Dan: Okay, why? Dean: Well, because you can take pictures with them. Oh, I see, okay, and say you're not coming in here with those glasses and taking pictures of people who are having private meetings and private conversations. So yesterday after lunch I had some time to wander around. I wandered over to the new Hyatt. You know they completely remodeled the Hyatt. Dan: Yeah, how is? Dean: that it's very, very nice. It's 10 times better than the Four Seasons. First of all, they've got this big, massive restaurant the moment you walk into the lobby. I mean it probably has 100 seats in the restaurant. Dan: Like our kind of seats yeah. Dean: Yeah, I mean it's nice. I mean you might not like it, but you know you know, you walk into the Four Seasons and it's the most impersonal possible architecture and interior design. This is really nice. And so I just went over there and I, you know, and I just got on the internet and I was, you know, I was creating a new tool, I was actually creating a new tool and but I was thinking that AI is now part of reality. Dan: Yes. Dean: But reality is not part of AI. Dan: Say more about that. Dean: Well, it's not reality, it's artificial, oh it's artificial. Dan: It's artificial. Oh, exactly it's artificial. Dean: I mean, if you look up the definition of artificial, half of it means fake. Dan: Yes, exactly. Dean: Yeah, so part of our reality now is that there's a thing called AI, but AI is in a thing called reality, but reality is not in a thing called AI. Dan: Right. Dean: In other words, ai is continually taking pieces of reality and automating it and everything like that, and humans at the same time are creating more reality. That is not AI. Dan: AI, yeah, and that's I wonder. You know, this is kind of the thing where it's really the lines between. I'd be very interested to see, dan, in terms of the economy, like and I'll call that like a average you know family budget how much of it is spent on reality versus, you know, digital. You know mainland versus cloudlandia. Physical goods, food you know we talked about the different, you know the pillars of spending, mm-hmm and much of it you know on housing, transportation, food, health, kids. You know money and me, all of those things. Much of it is consumed in a. You know we're all everybody's competing outside of. You know, for everybody puts all this emphasis on Cloudlandia and I wonder you know what, how much of that is really? It's digital enabled. I don't know if you know. I just I don't know that. I told you yesterday. Dean: Yeah, but here, how much of it? The better question is. I mean to get a handle on this. How much of it is electricity enabled? Dan: Oh for sure, All of it. Dean: Most of it Well, not all of it, but most of it. I mean conversation, you know when you're sitting in a room with someone is I mean it's electronically enabled in the sense you like. Have it the temperature good and the lighting good and everything like that, but that's not the important thing. You would do it. Great conversations were happening before there was electricity, so yes, you know and any anything, but I think that most humans don't want to think about it. My, my sense is, you know, I don't want to have conversations about technology, except it's with someone like yourself or anything like that, but I don't spend most of my day talking about technology or electricity. The conversation we had last year about AI the conversation we're having about AI isn't much different than the conversation we're going to have about AI 10 years from now Did you? see this Next year. You're going to say did you see this new thing? And I said we were having a conversation like this 10 years ago. Yeah, yeah, that's absolutely true, I don't think it's going to change humanity at all. Dan: Yeah, I'm just going through like I'm looking at something you just said. We don't want to think about these things. Girding of that is our desire for convenience, progressively, you know, conserving energy, right. So it's that we've evolved to a point where we don't have to think about those things, like if we just take the, if we take the house or housing, shelter is is the core thing. That that has done. And our desire, you know, thousands of years ago, for shelter, even hundreds of years ago, was that it was, you know, safe and that it was gave did the job of shelter. But then, you know, when, electricity and plumbing and Wi-Fi and entertainment streaming and comfortable furniture and all these things, this progression, this ratcheting of elevations, were never. I think that's really interesting. We're never really satisfied. We're constantly have an appetite for progressing. Very few things do we ever reach a point where we say, oh, that's good enough, this is great. Like outhouses, you know, we're not as good as indoor plumbing and having, you know, having electricity is much nicer than having to chop wood and carry water. Dean: Yeah, well, I think the big thing is that efficiency and convenience and comfort, once you have them, no longer have any meaning. Dan: Right. But the ratchet is, once we've reached one level, we're ratcheted in at that level of acceptance. Dean: I mean possibly I don't know. I mean I don't know how you would measure this in relationship to everybody's after this. First of all, I don't know how you measure everybody and the big thing. I mean there are certain people who are keenly interested in this. It's more of an intellectual pleasure than it is actually. See that technology is of intellectual interest. You me, you know, you myself and everything else will be interested in talking about this, but I'm going home for a family reunion next weekend in Ohio. I bet in the four or five hours we're together none of us talks about this because it's of no intellectual interest to anyone else. Ok, so you know but it is for us. It's a, you know, and so I was reading. I'm reading a is the observation of the interest and behavior of a very small portion of the population who have freedom and money and that. And the era is defined by the interest of this very, very small portion, the rest of the people probably they're not doing things that would characterize the era. They're doing things that may have lasted for hundreds but it doesn't. It's not interesting to study, it's not interesting to write about, and you know, I mean we look at movies and we say, well, that's like America. No, that's like actors and producers and directors saying this is how we're going to describe America, but that's not how America actually lives. Dan: Yeah, that's interesting, right, movies are kind of holding up a mirror to the zeitgeist, in a way, right. Dean: Like Strategic Coast, is not a description of how the entrepreneurial world operates no, you know the yeah. Dan: The interesting thing thinking about your thinking is is transferable across all. You know it's a durable context. That's kind of the way. That's what I look about. That's what I love about the eight prophet activators. The breakthrough DNA model is very it's a durable context. It's timeless. Dean: Yes, I mean if the Romans had the eight prophet activators, and they did, but they just didn't know they did. Dan: Right. Dean: Yeah, and you go forward to the Star Wars cafe and probably the ones who are buying drinks for the whole house are the ones who know the eight prophet activators. Dan: Secretly, secretly, secretly. Who's that? Dean: weird. Who's that weird looking guy? I don't know if it's a guy. Who is it who you know? Well, I don't know, but buy him a drink oh my goodness, yeah, I'm. Dan: I think this thing that is convenience. We certainly want things to get easier. I mean, when you look at, I'm just looking down no, we want some things to get easier. What things do we not want to get easier? Dean: The things that are handled. We don't want to get easier. Dan: Oh right exactly. Dean: Yeah, for example, if there was a home robot, we would never buy one, because we've got things handled. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah, I have no interest in having a home robot. I have no interest in having a home shop for a cook. I have no interest in everything because it's already handled and it's not worth the thinking it would take to introduce that into my, into our life I mean yeah, and it right like that. So it's. Dan: There are certain things that we'd like to get easier okay, and we're and we're focused on that yeah, yeah, I think about that, like that's I was thinking, you know, in terms of you know the access we have through Cloudlandia is I can get anything that is from any restaurant you know delivered to my house in 22 minutes. You know, that's from the moment I have the thought, I just push the button and so, yeah, I don't have. There's no, no thinking about that. We were talking about being here in the. You know the seamlessness of you know being here at the Hazleton and of you know I love this, uh, environment, I love being right here in this footprint and the fact that you know the hotel allows you to just like, come, I can walk right in step, you know, get all the function of the shelter and the food and being in this environment without any of the concern of it, right? No yeah, no maintenance. No, I never think about it when I leave. Yeah, it's handled. Think about that compared to when I had a house here, you know you have so much. Yeah, that's the thing, that's a good word handled. We just want things handled. You know Our desires. We want our desires handled and our desires are not really. I think our basic desires don't really. Maybe they evolve, it's just the novelty of the things, but the actual verbs of what we're doing are not really. I think you look at, if we look at the health category, you know where you are a you know you are at the apex level of consumer of health and longevity. Consumer of health and longevity. You know all the offerings that are available in terms of you know, from the physio that you're doing to the stem cells, to the work with David Hasse, all of those things. You are certainly at the leading edge and it shows you're nationally ranked, internationally ranked, as aging backwards. Dean: I'm on the chart. You're on the chart exactly, but I got on the chart without knowing it. It's just a function of one of the tests that I take. Somebody created sort of a ranking out of this and I was on it. It's just part of something that I do every quarter that shows up on some sort of chart. They ask you whether you want to be listed or not, and I thought it was good for um, because your doctor is listed on it too, and I. I did it mostly because david hoss he gets credit for it, you know he does it for yeah you know, it's good. It's good for his advertising and you know his marketing and I mean it's just good for. It's just good for his advertising and you know his marketing, I mean it's just good for his satisfaction and everything like that. But you know that's a really good thing because you know I created that. It was like two years I created a workshop called well, it's a lifetime extender, and then I changed it to age reversal future, because not a really interesting term, because it's in the future somewhere. Right but age reversal you can actually see right now it's a more meaningful comparison number and I had hundreds of people. I had hundreds of people on that and to my knowledge nobody's done anything that we talked about which kind of proves to you, unless it's a keen interest you can have the information and you can have the knowledge. But if it isn't actually something of central motivational interest to you, the knowledge and the information just passes by. The knowledge and the information just passes. Dan: Yeah, and I think it goes. If you have to disrupt your established habits, what do you always say? We don't want any habits except for the ones that we have already established. Right, except for the ones that are existing. Dean: Reinforce them, yeah, reinforce them and anyway, today I'm going to have to cut off early because I have, and so in about two minutes I'm going to have to jump, but I'm seeing you tomorrow and I'm seeing you the next day. It's a banner week. It's four days in a row. We'll be in contact, so, anyway, you know what we're doing in context, so anyway you know what we're doing. We're really developing, you know, psychological, philosophical, conceptual structures here. How do you think about this stuff? That's what I think about it a lot. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's always pleasurable. Dan: Always, Dan, I will. I'll see you tomorrow At the party. That's right. Have an amazing day and I'll see you tomorrow night okay, thanks, bye.

Vor ziemlich genau 50 Jahren hob John "Jack" Bogle den Indexfonds – ein Vorläufer des ETF – aus der Taufe. Und nicht nur das: Er ist auch Gründer von Vanguard. Zum 50. Geburtstag haben wir Sebastian Kuelps (Head of Germany and Northern Europe) eingeladen. Von ihm wollen wir wissen, ob Bogles Grundsätze noch Bestand haben, welche Erfolge und Misserfolge Vanguard über die Zeit verzeichnete und wie er selbst anlegt. Dazu die alles entscheidende Frage: Wird der FTSE All-World bald noch günstiger? ++++++++ Im neuen Extra-Magazin findest du alle goldenen Regeln der Geldanlage. Plus: Erfahre welcher Broker das beste Aktiensparplan-Angebot hat und vieles mehr. Jetzt bestellen: https://shop.extraetf.com/collections/einzelausgaben ++++++++

From the World of John Wick....this is techically a spin-off which takes place between the events of John Wick Chapter 3 and Chapter 4, the focus here is on Eve who is played by Ana De Armas.  Eve is an assassin who was initially trainied as as a ballerina, hence the title!  The Director of her "academy" is Angelica Huston who was also featured as a character in Chapter 3.  Eve is seeking revenge against a rival organization which murdered her father when she was a young child - that organization is lead by The Chancellor played by Gabriel Byrne.  And off she goes from New York City throughout Northern Europe on an increasingly violent adventure where she is tasked with defeating rival assassins through a variety of methods including her fists, grenades, flame throwers, knives, and dishes. ;) Along the way, she also encounters the "Baba Yaga" himself, John Wick once again played by Keanu Reeves.  Ken Wiseman (Live Free or Die Hard, Underworld) directs with a supporting cast also including Ian McShane, Catalina Sandino Moreno, Norman Reedus, Sharon Duncan-Brewster, and in sadly his final on-screen appearance, the late great Lance Reddick. Host & Editor: Geoff GershonEditor: Ella GershonProducer: Marlene GershonSend us a texthttps://livingforthecinema.com/Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/Living-for-the-Cinema-Podcast-101167838847578Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/livingforthecinema/Letterboxd:https://letterboxd.com/Living4Cinema/

We are back, at long last, after a lengthy break, with a new Domain Query podcast. Once again, we are answering a question from LRFotS Randale6, who draws an intriguing parallel between the current, parlous, state of the FUSA, and the old Byzantine Empire. Our friend argues that, like the Byzantines, the descendants of the Americans may find themselves one day surrounded by foreigners, speaking the languages of those foreigners, treating the English language (and the inheritance given to them by their English and European ancestors) as barbarous relics: As the west declines and dies I am struck by an eerie parallel between the USA and Byzantium. If I remember correctly it was the Byzantine Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos who said words to the effect of "Latin is the language of barbarians". America I think is heading for the same fate, like the Eastern Romans we are increasingly finding ourselves surrounded by another group (for them it was the native Greeks). This group being primarily Latin American, typical on the mestizo side of the racial scale. Eventually I suspect the outcome will be the same, as the Eastern Romans became the Byzantines (Latin overtaken by Greek) we will become the Neo-Byzantines. We may "live on" as a polity, but we will not be the same. I am personally not sure what to make of this, it certainly seems preferable to collapse but... Will our descendants eventually mutter the words (in Spanish), "English is a foreigner's tongue"? Will this transfigured nation continue descending into decadence or will it give rise to renewal (with a distinctly Latin tinge)? As the USA before this change was the second coming of Northern Europe will this future USA be the New Southern Europe? Will we inherit the same toxic politics and power struggles from the former USA (much as Byzantium inherited the Roman Empire's political intrigues)? Your thoughts on this Didact? I went through this at some length, first by looking at the history behind the (supposed) statement of Michael VIII Palaiologos. (I'm not saying he didn't say it, I just cannot confirm it, as I am not historian enough to do so.) Then, I looked at the way the FUSA is likely to devolve and split apart, and I argued that Amerikhastan will break up into multiple nations – at least one of which will be a majority-White, majority-Christian, English-speaking country, in which aberrations and psychoses like Mohammedanism and the LGBTQWTFISTHISSHIT degeneracy, will be outlawed on pain of death. This is not merely something spawned out of my fevered brain. My own reading into and around the coming breakup of the FUSA, have led me to think that the future of the FUSA will NOT be quite as dire as what our friend predicts. It will likely be much more like what we saw in South Africa under apartheid – which is NOT a justification of that system – or Rhodesia, in which White Christians find a way to build and maintain a beacon of civilisation, in the midst of savagery and darkness around them, by rediscovering their core and roots. Note that I recorded this yesterday, before I saw how badly the riots in Clownipornia had spun out of control, and before I learned about the activation of the National Guard and the US Marines to go stomp on the rioters. Subsequent events lend, in my view, a certain authenticity and validity to the things I have described in this podcast. Reading List Victoria: A Novel of 4th Generation War by William S. Lind The Coming Civil War by Tom Kawczynski Support the War College If you like what I do, and you would like to express your appreciation, please feel free to do so here via my Buy Me a Coffee page. All funds go to upkeep of the site and podcast (well, whatever is left over after buying good Scotch, obviously…) Protect Yourself From Big Tech I make some pretty incendiary statements in this podcast, and in most of my podcasts. I can only do so because I take steps to protect myself from the Big Tech companies, and preserve my identity. You need to do the same – this is no longer optional, because if you don't, the gatekeepers WILL come for your head. If you don't know where to start, then I've got you covered right here with this post. Here are the specific steps that you can take: Make sure that your web traffic is safe and protected from prying eyes using a VPN – click here to get a massive 80% OFF on a 24-month subscription with Surfshark; Be sure also to check out Incogni, the new data and privacy management tool offered by Surfshark, which simply works behind the scenes to ensure that no malign actors can take advantage of your data ever again; Another solid VPN option for you is Atlas VPN, brought to you by the same company that creates NordVPN; The best SSD drive that you can get right now, with blazing fast speeds and near-native storage capabilities, is probably the SanDisk Extreme 1TB Portable SSD with NVMe technology – I bought this myself to keep a moving backup of all of my files, it's the size of a credit card, and it's absolutely superb; Build Your Platform Get yourself a proper domain for your site or business with Namecheap; Put your site onto a shared hosting service using A2Hosting for the fastest, most secure, and stable hosting platform around – along with unlimited email accounts of unlimited size; Create beautiful websites with amazing, feature-rich content using Divi from Elegant Themes; Stand for Western Civilisation Buy yourself a proper Bible; Get your Castalia Library books here; Buy yourself a proper knife for personal defence;

One of the most popular sports in North America and Northern Europe is ice hockey. Ice hockey, like all popular sports, has undergone considerable changes since its inception. In fact, hockey has a rather surprising origin and a relationship to other sports that many people are unaware of.  Today, professional hockey is a multibillion-dollar business, and it is played internationally and at the Olympics by both men and women.  Learn more about ice hockey and its origins on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. ***5th Anniversary Celebration RSVP*** Sponsors Newspapers.com Get 20% off your subscription to Newspapers.com Mint Mobile Cut your wireless bill to 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com/eed Quince Go to quince.com/daily for 365-day returns, plus free shipping on your order! Stitch Fix Go to stitchfix.com/everywhere to have a stylist help you look your best Stash Go to get.stash.com/EVERYTHING to see how you can receive $25 towards your first stock purchase and to view important disclosures. Subscribe to the podcast!  https://everything-everywhere.com/everything-everywhere-daily-podcast/ -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Austin Oetken & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Update your podcast app at newpodcastapps.com Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/  Disce aliquid novi cotidie Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today special guest, Kate Olson (the Mystic in the Woods) joins us! Kate is a priestess and Seidr practitioner whose work is centered around reclaiming the sacred feminine and reintegrating the feminine into our collective consciousness and our individual lives.   Sitting at the intersection of history, psychology, and spirituality Kate weaves together the Pre-Christian traditions of Northern Europe and the Lineage of The Rose to hold truly transformational spaces. In today's episode we're discussing: Unearthing Christian programming in the depths of the shadow  Mary Magdalene & the truth about the sacred feminine  What it means to be a priestess  What Avalon is  Working with dragons  Work with Kate: https://linktr.ee/themysticinthewoods     WORK WITH ME:   Get on the waitlist for my DEMON THEMED RETREAT in New Orleans this coming Halloween!  https://www.kristenramezzana.com/demon-retreat    Snag a spot in the next round of Defense Against the Dark Arts! We kick off in June: https://www.kristenramezzana.com/defense-against-the-dark-arts Join the Infernal Membership! There are 3 tiers to choose from: https://www.kristenramezzana.com/infernal-memberships Grab the replay of the Spirit Pyramid Masterclass here: https://www.kristenramezzana.com/offers/KN7Rb5Ev/checkout Catch a replay of last summer's masterclasses, inspired by my ayahuasca experience: https://www.kristenramezzana.com/store Follow Kristen on IG: @the_underworld_queen   

Merlyn Silva - Field Trip (Original Mix) Senescence - Sofa Beats SOFABEATS159 1. Merlyn Silva - Field Trip (Original Mix) 2. Merlyn Silva - Meandering 3. Merlyn Silva - Falls Upwards (Original Mix) 4. Merlyn Silva - Unlearning (Original Mix) 5. Merlyn Silva - Red Sky Thinking (Original Mix) 6. Merlyn Silva - Ecocentrism 7. Merlyn Silva - The Swing That Swung (Original Mix) 8. Merlyn Silva - Senescence (Original Mix) Merlyn Silva returns with his fourth album Senescence; a kaleidoscopic ode to the gentle passage of time. Wandering between transcendent downtempo journeys and wiggly dancefloor mischief, Senescence is a refinement of Merlyn's leftfield take on psychedelic electronic music. From the euphoric downtempo of "Unlearning" to the mooching grooves of "Meandering", Senescence creates a space where acousmatic field recordings can drink chai and high-five with contemporary synth workouts and dank midtempo beats. As the album evolves it's hard not to notice the parallel to the dramatic seasons of Northern Europe, staring lighthearted and optimistic before culminating in the introspective deepness of title track.

Tony watched the Pacers win last night! Elon disappointed, US warns Venezuela now poses 'highest risk' for American travelers, Travel warning for US citizens heading to Italy, In Gaza, this is not a surprise, Is a Les Grossman movie in the works? Trump asking SCOTUS to allow Executive Branch to continue with specific deportations, Charles Barkley smoking cigar at Commission Row. You can smoke cigars at Commission Row? Diego Morales is now in Turkey, Leftists continue to obsess on Micah Beckwith, Greg Taylor claimed that Tony was "too afraid to talk to him" on air, Kyra Sedgwick has a major case of the TDS, Baby think it over dolls, WNBA Finds No Evidence Of Racist Fan Behavior At Angel Reese Vs. Caitlin Clark Game Trump suspends all student visas temporarily to expand social media screening of international students to the US, Trump has informed Canada that it will cost $61B if they want to be a part of the Golden Dome System, Female secret service agents fighting in front of Obama's DC house, U.S. military is doubling down in Northern Europe in a quest to make NATO more lethal, Pacers never relented last night See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Trump suspends all student visas temporarily to expand social media screening of international students to the US, Trump has informed Canada that it will cost $61B if they want to be a part of the Golden Dome System, Female secret service agents fighting in front of Obama's DC house, U.S. military is doubling down in Northern Europe in a quest to make NATO more lethal, Pacers never relented last nightSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When it comes to battery storage deployment in Europe, most of the attention has been focused on familiar markets like the UK, Germany, and southern Europe. But in the background, a quieter shift has been taking place in the Nordics - one that's now starting to accelerate.Long seen as too stable, too hydro-dominated, or simply too slow, the Nordic markets were largely overlooked by early battery investors. Yet growing volatility, falling capex, and the evolving needs of a decarbonising grid have started to change the picture.In this episode of Transmission, we explore what's driving battery investment in Sweden, Finland, and beyond. From market signals and dispatch dynamics to cross-border optimisation and grid readiness, this conversation offers a window into a part of the European market that's now waking up and scaling fast. Quentin speaks with Nicklas Bäcker, Co-Founder & Chief Strategy Officer at Ingrid Capacity. Over the course of the conversation, you'll hear about:Why the Nordics were initially overlooked: How the prevalence of dispatchable hydro capacity led many investors to undervalue the incremental role of batteries in grid flexibility.Shifting storage economics: How declining capex, increased price volatility, and evolving ancillary service markets have improved the commercial viability of BESS in the region.Scaling rapidly in a new market: Insights into how more than €250 million was raised to deliver more than 200 MW of battery capacity within a compressed timeframe.Complementing hydro with fast-response assets: Why batteries offer unique value even in hydro-heavy systems. From frequency control to short-duration balancing and market arbitrage.A cross-border approach to Nordic flexibility: How project developers are expanding into Finland and other markets, and what differentiates the Nordic power system in a European context.About our guest:Nicklas Bäcker is Chief Strategy Officer at Ingrid Capacity, one of the fastest-growing battery storage platforms in Northern Europe. With a background in energy markets and infrastructure strategy, Nicklas plays a key role in shaping the company's growth across Sweden, Finland, and other European markets. Ingrid Capacity currently operates over 200 MW/MWh of battery storage, with an additional 200 MW/MWh under construction—positioning it as a first mover in delivering large-scale flexibility to the Nordic grid. Nicklas brings strategic insight into project development, market entry, and the role of storage in accelerating electrification across Europe. For more information on Ingrid Capacity, head to their website.About Modo EnergyModo Energy helps the owners, operators, builders, and financiers of battery energy storage solutions understand the market - and make the most out of their assets.All of our podcasts are available to watch or listen to on the Modo Energy site. To keep up with all of our latest updates, research, analysis, videos, podcasts, data visualizations, live events, and more, follow us on LinkedIn or Twitter. Check out The Energy Academy, our bite-sized video series breaking down how power markets work.

When it comes to battery storage deployment in Europe, most of the attention has been focused on familiar markets like the UK, Germany, and southern Europe. But in the background, a quieter shift has been taking place in the Nordics - one that's now starting to accelerate.Long seen as too stable, too hydro-dominated, or simply too slow, the Nordic markets were largely overlooked by early battery investors. Yet growing volatility, falling capex, and the evolving needs of a decarbonising grid have started to change the picture.In this episode of Transmission, we explore what's driving battery investment in Sweden, Finland, and beyond. From market signals and dispatch dynamics to cross-border optimisation and grid readiness, this conversation offers a window into a part of the European market that's now waking up and scaling fast. Quentin speaks with Nicklas Bäcker, Co-Founder & Chief Strategy Officer at Ingrid Capacity. Over the course of the conversation, you'll hear about:Why the Nordics were initially overlooked: How the prevalence of dispatchable hydro capacity led many investors to undervalue the incremental role of batteries in grid flexibility.Shifting storage economics: How declining capex, increased price volatility, and evolving ancillary service markets have improved the commercial viability of BESS in the region.Scaling rapidly in a new market: Insights into how more than €250 million was raised to deliver more than 200 MW of battery capacity within a compressed timeframe.Complementing hydro with fast-response assets: Why batteries offer unique value even in hydro-heavy systems. From frequency control to short-duration balancing and market arbitrage.A cross-border approach to Nordic flexibility: How project developers are expanding into Finland and other markets, and what differentiates the Nordic power system in a European context.About our guest:Nicklas Bäcker is Chief Strategy Officer at Ingrid Capacity, one of the fastest-growing battery storage platforms in Northern Europe. With a background in energy markets and infrastructure strategy, Nicklas plays a key role in shaping the company's growth across Sweden, Finland, and other European markets. Ingrid Capacity currently operates over 200 MW/MWh of battery storage, with an additional 200 MW/MWh under construction—positioning it as a first mover in delivering large-scale flexibility to the Nordic grid. Nicklas brings strategic insight into project development, market entry, and the role of storage in accelerating electrification across Europe. For more information on Ingrid Capacity, head to their website.About Modo EnergyModo Energy helps the owners, operators, builders, and financiers of battery energy storage solutions understand the market - and make the most out of their assets.All of our podcasts are available to watch or listen to on the Modo Energy site. To keep up with all of our latest updates, research, analysis, videos, podcasts, data visualizations, live events, and more, follow us on LinkedIn or Twitter. Check out The Energy Academy, our bite-sized video series breaking down how power markets work.

本期概要：篮球：回顾最近比赛，分析关键回合与球员表现，预测NBA总决赛。旅行：沈阳婚礼印象；越南街头美食与摩托之旅；丹麦自行车游与瑞典群岛自驾。生活工作：分享如何平衡远程工作、篮球与旅行，以及推荐相关线上课程。未来预告：东南亚背包游攻略、北欧隐藏景点、更多访谈与实用干货。Episode Overview:Basketball: Recap recent game highlights, player performance, and NBA Finals predictions.Travel: Shenyang wedding insights; Vietnam street food and motorbike tours; Denmark bike tour and Sweden archipelago road trip.Life & Work: Tips for balancing remote work with basketball and travel; recommended online courses.What's Next: Upcoming Southeast Asia backpacking guides, Northern Europe hidden spots, and more interviews.

Leading into the Commodities Global Expo 2025, happening on May 11–13 at the Four Seasons in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, we speak with First Nordic Metals (TSX.V: FNM | FNSE: FNMC SDB | OTCQB: FNMCF) to explore the company's progress and prospects in advancing gold exploration projects in Northern Europe.In this insightful interview, President Adam Cegielski discusses why investors should take a closer look at the company's projects in Sweden and Finland, highlighting the potential of the Barsele Gold Project in Northern Sweden, a joint venture with Agnico Eagle Mines Limited. He also shares key milestones and ongoing efforts to establish Europe's next gold camp.Secure your spot at the Commodities Global Expo 2025 and connect with First Nordic Metals: https://topshelf-partners.com/Discover First Nordic Metals' full portfolio here: https://firstnordicmetals.comWatch the full YouTube interview here: https://youtu.be/m2mFqNxvX_0 And follow us to stay updated: https://www.youtube.com/@GlobalOneMedia?sub_confirmation=1

This week on Vietnam Innovators (English edition), we welcome Mads Werner, CEO and Co-founder of Ekko. After many years working across Northern Europe and Singapore, Mads decided to settle in Vietnam in 2018 - a country where he spent part of his youth and developed a deep affection for its culture and people.In 2022, recognizing the urgent need for improved financial well-being among workers in Vietnam, Mads and his co-founders launched Ekko - a pioneering fintech application specializing in earned wage access (EWA). Ekko allows employees to access a portion of their earned wages at any time during the month, rather than waiting for a fixed payday. This service enables workers to manage unexpected financial needs without resorting to high-interest loans or predatory lending.For businesses, Ekko serves not only as a valuable employee welfare tool but also as a solution that enhances their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) performance, while strengthening employee engagement and satisfaction.Listen to this episode on YoutubeAnd explore many amazing articles about the pioneers at: https://vietcetera.com/vn/bo-suu-tap/vietnam-innovatorFeel free to leave any questions or invitations for business cooperation at hello@vietnaminnovators.com

This is a special concert edition of Live N' Local featuring the String Orchestra of New York City (SONYC) performing NORTHERN LIGHTS – a chamber concert program of string music focusing on composers from Northern Europe whose music brings vibrant, unique colors to the stark landscapes. It was recorded live on March 30, 2025 at the Church of the Good Shepherd to a full house. Program: G. Bacewicz – Quartet #3 J. Sibelius – Suite Champetre R. Gliere – String Sextet Musicians: Violin: Anna Lim, Arthur Moeller, Keiko TokunagaViola: Jessica Thompson, Molly GoldmanCello: Mihai Marica, Kirsten JerméBass: Dominic Law

So what, exactly, was “The Enlightenment”? According to the Princeton historian David A. Bell, it was an intellectual movement roughly spanning the early 18th century through to the French Revolution. In his Spring 2025 Liberties Quarterly piece “The Enlightenment, Then and Now”, Bell charts the Enlightenment as a complex intellectual movement centered in Paris but with hubs across Europe and America. He highlights key figures like Montesquieu, Voltaire, Kant, and Franklin, discussing their contributions to concepts of religious tolerance, free speech, and rationality. In our conversation, Bell addresses criticisms of the Enlightenment, including its complicated relationship with colonialism and slavery, while arguing that its principles of freedom and reason remain relevant today. 5 Key Takeaways* The Enlightenment emerged in the early 18th century (around 1720s) and was characterized by intellectual inquiry, skepticism toward religion, and a growing sense among thinkers that they were living in an "enlightened century."* While Paris was the central hub, the Enlightenment had multiple centers including Scotland, Germany, and America, with thinkers like Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant, Hume, and Franklin contributing to its development.* The Enlightenment introduced the concept of "society" as a sphere of human existence separate from religion and politics, forming the basis of modern social sciences.* The movement had a complex relationship with colonialism and slavery - many Enlightenment thinkers criticized slavery, but some of their ideas about human progress were later used to justify imperialism.* According to Bell, rather than trying to "return to the Enlightenment," modern society should selectively adopt and adapt its valuable principles of free speech, religious tolerance, and education to create our "own Enlightenment."David Avrom Bell is a historian of early modern and modern Europe at Princeton University. His most recent book, published in 2020 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, is Men on Horseback: The Power of Charisma in the Age of Revolution. Described in the Journal of Modern History as an "instant classic," it is available in paperback from Picador, in French translation from Fayard, and in Italian translation from Viella. A study of how new forms of political charisma arose in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the book shows that charismatic authoritarianism is as modern a political form as liberal democracy, and shares many of the same origins. Based on exhaustive research in original sources, the book includes case studies of the careers of George Washington, Napoleon Bonaparte, Toussaint Louverture and Simon Bolivar. The book's Introduction can be read here. An online conversation about the book with Annette Gordon-Reed, hosted by the Cullman Center of the New York Public Library, can be viewed here. Links to material about the book, including reviews in The New York Review of Books, The Guardian, Harper's, The New Republic, The Nation, Le Monde, The Los Angeles Review of Books and other venues can be found here. Bell is also the author of six previous books. He has published academic articles in both English and French and contributes regularly to general interest publications on a variety of subjects, ranging from modern warfare, to contemporary French politics, to the impact of digital technology on learning and scholarship, and of course French history. A list of his publications from 2023 and 2024 can be found here. His Substack newsletter can be found here. His writings have been translated into French, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Hebrew, Swedish, Polish, Russian, German, Croatian, Italian, Turkish and Japanese. At the History Department at Princeton University, he holds the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus Chair in the Era of North Atlantic Revolutions, and offers courses on early modern Europe, on military history, and on the early modern French empire. Previously, he spent fourteen years at Johns Hopkins University, including three as Dean of Faculty in its School of Arts and Sciences. From 2020 to 2024 he served as Director of the Shelby Cullom Davis Center for Historical Studies at Princeton. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a corresponding fellow of the British Academy. Bell's new project is a history of the Enlightenment. A preliminary article from the project was published in early 2022 by Modern Intellectual History. Another is now out in French History.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. FULL TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello everybody, in these supposedly dark times, the E word comes up a lot, the Enlightenment. Are we at the end of the Enlightenment or the beginning? Was there even an Enlightenment? My guest today, David Bell, a professor of history, very distinguished professor of history at Princeton University, has an interesting piece in the spring issue of It is One of our, our favorite quarterlies here on Keen on America, Bell's piece is The Enlightenment Then and Now, and David is joining us from the home of the Enlightenment, perhaps Paris in France, where he's on sabbatical hard life. David being an academic these days, isn't it?David Bell: Very difficult. I'm having to suffer the Parisian bread and croissant. It's terrible.Andrew Keen: Yeah. Well, I won't keep you too long. Is Paris then, or France? Is it the home of the Enlightenment? I know there are many Enlightenments, the French, the Scottish, maybe even the English, perhaps even the American.David Bell: It's certainly one of the homes of the Enlightenment, and it's probably the closest that the Enlightened had to a center, absolutely. But as you say, there were Edinburgh, Glasgow, plenty of places in Germany, Philadelphia, all those places have good claims to being centers of the enlightenment as well.Andrew Keen: All the same David, is it like one of those sports games in California where everyone gets a medal?David Bell: Well, they're different metals, right, but I think certainly Paris is where everybody went. I mean, if you look at the figures from the German Enlightenment, from the Scottish Enlightenment from the American Enlightenment they all tended to congregate in Paris and the Parisians didn't tend to go anywhere else unless they were forced to. So that gives you a pretty good sense of where the most important center was.Andrew Keen: So David, before we get to specifics, map out for us, because everyone is perhaps as familiar or comfortable with the history of the Enlightenment, and certainly as you are. When did it happen? What years? And who are the leaders of this thing called the Enlightenment?David Bell: Well, that's a big question. And I'm afraid, of course, that if you ask 10 historians, you'll get 10 different answers.Andrew Keen: Well, I'm only asking you, so I only want one answer.David Bell: So I would say that the Enlightenment really gets going around the first couple of decades of the 18th century. And that's when people really start to think that they are actually living in what they start to call an Enlightenment century. There are a lot of reasons for this. They are seeing what we now call the scientific revolution. They're looking at the progress that has been made with that. They are experiencing the changes in the religious sphere, including the end of religious wars, coming with a great deal of skepticism about religion. They are living in a relative period of peace where they're able to speculate much more broadly and daringly than before. But it's really in those first couple of decades that they start thinking of themselves as living in an enlightened century. They start defining themselves as something that would later be called the enlightenment. So I would say that it's, really, really there between maybe the end of the 17th century and 1720s that it really gets started.Andrew Keen: So let's have some names, David, of philosophers, I guess. I mean, if those are the right words. I know that there was a term in French. There is a term called philosoph. Were they the founders, the leaders of the Enlightenment?David Bell: Well, there is a... Again, I don't want to descend into academic quibbling here, but there were lots of leaders. Let me give an example, though. So the year 1721 is a remarkable year. So in the year, 1721, two amazing events happened within a couple of months of each other. So in May, Montesquieu, one of the great philosophers by any definition, publishes his novel called Persian Letters. And this is an incredible novel. Still, I think one of greatest novels ever written, and it's very daring. It is the account, it is supposedly a an account written by two Persian travelers to Europe who are writing back to people in Isfahan about what they're seeing. And it is very critical of French society. It is very of religion. It is, as I said, very daring philosophically. It is a product in part of the increasing contact between Europe and the rest of the world that is also very central to the Enlightenment. So that novel comes out. So it's immediately, you know, the police try to suppress it. But they don't have much success because it's incredibly popular and Montesquieu doesn't suffer any particular problems because...Andrew Keen: And the French police have never been the most efficient police force in the world, have they?David Bell: Oh, they could be, but not in this case. And then two months later, after Montesquieu published this novel, there's a German philosopher much less well-known than Montesqiu, than Christian Bolz, who is a professor at the Universität Haller in Prussia, and he gives an oration in Latin, a very typical university oration for the time, about Chinese philosophy, in which he says that the Chinese have sort of proved to the world, particularly through the writings of Confucius and others, that you can have a virtuous society without religion. Obviously very controversial. Statement for the time it actually gets him fired from his job, he has to leave the Kingdom of Prussia within 48 hours on penalty of death, starts an enormous controversy. But here are two events, both of which involving non-European people, involving the way in which Europeans are starting to look out at the rest of the world and starting to imagine Europe as just one part of a larger humanity, and at the same time they are starting to speculate very daringly about whether you can have. You know, what it means to have a society, do you need to have religion in order to have morality in society? Do you need the proper, what kind of government do you need to to have virtuous conduct and a proper society? So all of these things get, you know, really crystallize, I think, around these two incidents as much as anything. So if I had to pick a single date for when the enlightenment starts, I'd probably pick that 1721.Andrew Keen: And when was, David, I thought you were going to tell me about the earthquake in Lisbon, when was that earthquake?David Bell: That earthquake comes quite a bit later. That comes, and now historians should be better with dates than I am. It's in the 1750s, I think it's the late 1750's. Again, this historian is proving he's getting a very bad grade for forgetting the exact date, but it's in 1750. So that's a different kind of event, which sparks off a great deal of commentary, because it's a terrible earthquake. It destroys most of the city of Lisbon, it destroys other cities throughout Portugal, and it leads a lot of the philosophy to philosophers at the time to be speculating very daringly again on whether there is any kind of real purpose to the universe and whether there's any kind divine purpose. Why would such a terrible thing happen? Why would God do such a thing to his followers? And certainly VoltaireAndrew Keen: Yeah, Votav, of course, comes to mind of questioning.David Bell: And Condit, Voltaire's novel Condit gives a very good description of the earthquake in Lisbon and uses that as a centerpiece. Voltair also read other things about the earthquake, a poem about Lisbon earthquake. But in Condit he gives a lasting, very scathing portrait of the Catholic Church in general and then of what happens in Portugal. And so the Lisbon Earthquake is certainly another one of the events, but it happens considerably later. Really in the middle of the end of life.Andrew Keen: So, David, you believe in this idea of the Enlightenment. I take your point that there are more than one Enlightenment in more than one center, but in broad historical terms, the 18th century could be defined at least in Western and Northern Europe as the period of the Enlightenment, would that be a fair generalization?David Bell: I think it's perfectly fair generalization. Of course, there are historians who say that it never happened. There's a conservative British historian, J.C.D. Clark, who published a book last summer, saying that the Enlightenment is a kind of myth, that there was a lot of intellectual activity in Europe, obviously, but that the idea that it formed a coherent Enlightenment was really invented in the 20th century by a bunch of progressive reformers who wanted to claim a kind of venerable and august pedigree for their own reform, liberal reform plans. I think that's an exaggeration. People in the 18th century defined very clearly what was going on, both people who were in favor of it and people who are against it. And while you can, if you look very closely at it, of course it gets a bit fuzzy. Of course it's gets, there's no single, you can't define a single enlightenment project or a single enlightened ideology. But then, I think people would be hard pressed to define any intellectual movement. You know, in perfect, incoherent terms. So the enlightenment is, you know by compared with almost any other intellectual movement certainly existed.Andrew Keen: In terms of a philosophy of the Enlightenment, the German thinker, Immanuel Kant, seems to be often, and when you describe him as the conscience or the brain or a mixture of the conscience and brain of the enlightenment, why is Kant and Kantian thinking so important in the development of the Enlightenment.David Bell: Well, that's a really interesting question. And one reason is because most of the Enlightenment was not very rigorously philosophical. A lot of the major figures of the enlightenment before Kant tended to be writing for a general public. And they often were writing with a very specific agenda. We look at Voltaire, Diderot, Rousseau. Now you look at Adam Smith in Scotland. We look David Hume or Adam Ferguson. You look at Benjamin Franklin in the United States. These people wrote in all sorts of different genres. They wrote in, they wrote all sorts of different kinds of books. They have many different purposes and very few of them did a lot of what we would call rigorous academic philosophy. And Kant was different. Kant was very much an academic philosopher. Kant was nothing if not rigorous. He came at the end of the enlightenment by most people's measure. He wrote these very, very difficult, very rigorous, very brilliant works, such as The Creek of Pure Reason. And so, it's certainly been the case that people who wanted to describe the Enlightenment as a philosophy have tended to look to Kant. So for example, there's a great German philosopher and intellectual historian of the early 20th century named Ernst Kassirer, who had to leave Germany because of the Nazis. And he wrote a great book called The Philosophy of the Enlightened. And that leads directly to Immanuel Kant. And of course, Casir himself was a Kantian, identified with Kant. And so he wanted to make Kant, in a sense, the telos, the end point, the culmination, the fulfillment of the Enlightenment. But so I think that's why Kant has such a particularly important position. You're defining it both ways.Andrew Keen: I've always struggled to understand what Kant was trying to say. I'm certainly not alone there. Might it be fair to say that he was trying to transform the universe and certainly traditional Christian notions into the Enlightenment, so the entire universe, the world, God, whatever that means, that they were all somehow according to Kant enlightened.David Bell: Well, I think that I'm certainly no expert on Immanuel Kant. And I would say that he is trying to, I mean, his major philosophical works are trying to put together a system of philosophical thinking which will justify why people have to act morally, why people act rationally, without the need for Christian revelation to bolster them. That's a very, very crude and reductionist way of putting it, but that's essentially at the heart of it. At the same time, Kant was very much aware of his own place in history. So Kant didn't simply write these very difficult, thick, dense philosophical works. He also wrote things that were more like journalism or like tablets. He wrote a famous essay called What is Enlightenment? And in that, he said that the 18th century was the period in which humankind was simply beginning to. Reach a period of enlightenment. And he said, he starts the essay by saying, this is the period when humankind is being released from its self-imposed tutelage. And we are still, and he said we do not yet live in the midst of a completely enlightened century, but we are getting there. We are living in a century that is enlightening.Andrew Keen: So the seeds, the seeds of Hegel and maybe even Marx are incant in that German thinking, that historical thinking.David Bell: In some ways, in some ways of course Hegel very much reacts against Kant and so and then Marx reacts against Hegel. So it's not exactly.Andrew Keen: Well, that's the dialectic, isn't it, David?David Bell: A simple easy path from one to the other, no, but Hegel is unimaginable without Kant of course and Marx is unimagineable without Hegel.Andrew Keen: You note that Kant represents a shift in some ways into the university and the walls of the universities were going up, and that some of the other figures associated with the the Enlightenment and Scottish Enlightenment, human and Smith and the French Enlightenment Voltaire and the others, they were more generalist writers. Should we be nostalgic for the pre-university period in the Enlightenment, or? Did things start getting serious once the heavyweights, the academic heavyweighs like Emmanuel Kant got into this thing?David Bell: I think it depends on where we're talking about. I mean, Adam Smith was a professor at Glasgow in Edinburgh, so Smith, the Scottish Enlightenment was definitely at least partly in the universities. The German Enlightenment took place very heavily in universities. Christian Vodafoy I just mentioned was the most important German philosopher of the 18th century before Kant, and he had positions in university. Even the French university system, for a while, what's interesting about the French University system, particularly the Sorbonne, which was the theology faculty, It was that. Throughout the first half of the 18th century, there were very vigorous, very interesting philosophical debates going on there, in which the people there, particularly even Jesuits there, were very open to a lot of the ideas we now call enlightenment. They were reading John Locke, they were reading Mel Pench, they were read Dekalb. What happened though in the French universities was that as more daring stuff was getting published elsewhere. Church, the Catholic Church, started to say, all right, these philosophers, these philosophies, these are our enemies, these are people we have to get at. And so at that point, anybody who was in the university, who was still in dialog with these people was basically purged. And the universities became much less interesting after that. But to come back to your question, I do think that I am very nostalgic for that period. I think that the Enlightenment was an extraordinary period, because if you look between. In the 17th century, not all, but a great deal of the most interesting intellectual work is happening in the so-called Republic of Letters. It's happening in Latin language. It is happening on a very small circle of RUD, of scholars. By the 19th century following Kant and Hegel and then the birth of the research university in Germany, which is copied everywhere, philosophy and the most advanced thinking goes back into the university. And the 18th century, particularly in France, I will say, is a time when the most advanced thought is being written for a general public. It is being in the form of novels, of dialogs, of stories, of reference works, and it is very, very accessible. The most profound thought of the West has never been as accessible overall as in the 18 century.Andrew Keen: Again, excuse this question, it might seem a bit naive, but there's a lot of pre-Enlightenment work, books, thinking that we read now that's very accessible from Erasmus and Thomas More to Machiavelli. Why weren't characters like, or are characters like Erasmuus, More's Utopia, Machiavell's prints and discourses, why aren't they considered part of the Enlightenment? What's the difference between? Enlightened thinkers or the supposedly enlightened thinkers of the 18th century and thinkers and writers of the 16th and 17th centuries.David Bell: That's a good question, you know, I think you have to, you, you know, again, one has to draw a line somewhere. That's not a very good answer, of course. All these people that you just mentioned are, in one way or another, predecessors to the Enlightenment. And of course, there were lots of people. I don't mean to say that nobody wrote in an accessible way before 1700. Obviously, lots of the people you mentioned did. Although a lot of them originally wrote in Latin, Erasmus, also Thomas More. But I think what makes the Enlightened different is that you have, again, you have a sense. These people have have a sense that they are themselves engaged in a collective project, that it is a collective project of enlightenment, of enlightening the world. They believe that they live in a century of progress. And there are certain principles. They don't agree on everything by any means. The philosophy of enlightenment is like nothing more than ripping each other to shreds, like any decent group of intellectuals. But that said, they generally did believe That people needed to have freedom of speech. They believed that you needed to have toleration of different religions. They believed in education and the need for a broadly educated public that could be as broad as possible. They generally believed in keeping religion out of the public sphere as much as possible, so all those principles came together into a program that we can consider at least a kind of... You know, not that everybody read it at every moment by any means, but there is an identifiable enlightenment program there, and in this case an identifiable enlightenment mindset. One other thing, I think, which is crucial to the Enlightenment, is that it was the attention they started to pay to something that we now take almost entirely for granted, which is the idea of society. The word society is so entirely ubiquitous, we assume it's always been there, and in one sense it has, because the word societas is a Latin word. But until... The 18th century, the word society generally had a much narrower meaning. It referred to, you know, particular institution most often, like when we talk about the society of, you know, the American philosophical society or something like that. And the idea that there exists something called society, which is the general sphere of human existence that is separate from religion and is separate from the political sphere, that's actually something which only really emerged at the end of the 1600s. And it became really the focus of you know, much, if not most, of enlightenment thinking. When you look at someone like Montesquieu and you look something, somebody like Rousseau or Voltaire or Adam Smith, probably above all, they were concerned with understanding how society works, not how government works only, but how society, what social interactions are like beginning of what we would now call social science. So that's yet another thing that distinguishes the enlightened from people like Machiavelli, often people like Thomas More, and people like bonuses.Andrew Keen: You noted earlier that the idea of progress is somehow baked in, in part, and certainly when it comes to Kant, certainly the French Enlightenment, although, of course, Rousseau challenged that. I'm not sure whether Rousseaut, as always, is both in and out of the Enlightenment and he seems to be in and out of everything. How did the Enlightement, though, make sense of itself in the context of antiquity, as it was, of Terms, it was the Renaissance that supposedly discovered or rediscovered antiquity. How did many of the leading Enlightenment thinkers, writers, how did they think of their own society in the context of not just antiquity, but even the idea of a European or Western society?David Bell: Well, there was a great book, one of the great histories of the Enlightenment was written about more than 50 years ago by the Yale professor named Peter Gay, and the first part of that book was called The Modern Paganism. So it was about the, you know, it was very much about the relationship between the Enlightenment and the ancient Greek synonyms. And certainly the writers of the enlightenment felt a great deal of kinship with the ancient Greek synonymous. They felt a common bond, particularly in the posing. Christianity and opposing what they believed the Christian Church had wrought on Europe in suppressing freedom and suppressing free thought and suppassing free inquiry. And so they felt that they were both recovering but also going beyond antiquity at the same time. And of course they were all, I mean everybody at the time, every single major figure of the Enlightenment, their education consisted in large part of what we would now call classics, right? I mean, there was an educational reformer in France in the 1760s who said, you know, our educational system is great if the purpose is to train Roman centurions, if it's to train modern people who are not doing both so well. And it's true. I mean they would spend, certainly, you know in Germany, in much of Europe, in the Netherlands, even in France, I mean people were trained not simply to read Latin, but to write in Latin. In Germany, university courses took part in the Latin language. So there's an enormous, you know, so they're certainly very, very conversant with the Greek and Roman classics, and they identify with them to a very great extent. Someone like Rousseau, I mean, and many others, and what's his first reading? How did he learn to read by reading Plutarch? In translation, but he learns to read reading Plutach. He sees from the beginning by this enormous admiration for the ancients that we get from Bhutan.Andrew Keen: Was Socrates relevant here? Was the Enlightenment somehow replacing Aristotle with Socrates and making him and his spirit of Enlightenment, of asking questions rather than answering questions, the symbol of a new way of thinking?David Bell: I would say to a certain extent, so I mean, much of the Enlightenment criticizes scholasticism, medieval scholastic, very, very sharply, and medieval scholasticism is founded philosophically very heavily upon Aristotle, so to that extent. And the spirit of skepticism that Socrates embodied, the idea of taking nothing for granted and asking questions about everything, including questions of oneself, yes, absolutely. That said, while the great figures of the Red Plato, you know, Socrates was generally I mean, it was not all that present as they come. But certainly have people with people with red play-doh in the entire virus.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Benjamin Franklin earlier, David. Most of the Enlightenment, of course, seems to be centered in France and Scotland, Germany, England. But America, many Europeans went to America then as a, what some people would call a settler colonial society, or certainly an offshoot of the European world. Was the settling of America and the American Revolution Was it the quintessential Enlightenment project?David Bell: Another very good question, and again, it depends a bit on who you talk to. I just mentioned this book by Peter Gay, and the last part of his book is called The Science of Freedom, and it's all about the American Revolution. So certainly a lot of interpreters of the Enlightenment have said that, yes, the American revolution represents in a sense the best possible outcome of the American Revolution, it was the best, possible outcome of the enlightened. Certainly there you look at the founding fathers of the United States and there's a great deal that they took from me like Certainly, they took a great great number of political ideas from Obviously Madison was very much inspired and drafting the edifice of the Constitution by Montesquieu to see himself Was happy to admit in addition most of the founding Fathers of the united states were you know had kind of you know We still had we were still definitely Christians, but we're also but we were also very much influenced by deism were very much against the idea of making the United States a kind of confessional country where Christianity was dominant. They wanted to believe in the enlightenment principles of free speech, religious toleration and so on and so forth. So in all those senses and very much the gun was probably more inspired than Franklin was somebody who was very conversant with the European Enlightenment. He spent a large part of his life in London. Where he was in contact with figures of the Enlightenment. He also, during the American Revolution, of course, he was mostly in France, where he is vetted by some of the surviving fellows and were very much in contact for them as well. So yes, I would say the American revolution is certainly... And then the American revolutionary scene, of course by the Europeans, very much as a kind of offshoot of the enlightenment. So one of the great books of the late Enlightenment is by Condor Say, which he wrote while he was hiding actually in the future evolution of the chariot. It's called a historical sketch of the progress of the human spirit, or the human mind, and you know he writes about the American Revolution as being, basically owing its existence to being like...Andrew Keen: Franklin is of course an example of your pre-academic enlightenment, a generalist, inventor, scientist, entrepreneur, political thinker. What about the role of science and indeed economics in the Enlightenment? David, we're going to talk of course about the Marxist interpretation, perhaps the Marxist interpretation which sees The Enlightenment is just a euphemism, perhaps, for exploitative capitalism. How central was the growth and development of the market, of economics, and innovation, and capitalism in your reading of The Enlightened?David Bell: Well, in my reading, it was very important, but not in the way that the Marxists used to say. So Friedrich Engels once said that the Enlightenment was basically the idealized kingdom of the bourgeoisie, and there was whole strain of Marxist thinking that followed the assumption that, and then Karl Marx himself argued that the documents like the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, which obviously were inspired by the Enlightment, were simply kind of the near, or kind of. Way that the bourgeoisie was able to advance itself ideologically, and I don't think that holds much water, which is very little indication that any particular economic class motivated the Enlightenment or was using the Enlightment in any way. That said, I think it's very difficult to imagine the Enlightement without the social and economic changes that come in with the 18th century. To begin with globalization. If you read the great works of the Enlightenment, it's remarkable just how open they are to talking about humanity in general. So one of Voltaire's largest works, one of his most important works, is something called Essay on Customs and the Spirit of Nations, which is actually History of the World, where he talks learnedly not simply about Europe, but about the Americas, about China, about Africa, about India. Montesquieu writes Persian letters. Christian Volpe writes about Chinese philosophy. You know, Rousseau writes about... You know, the earliest days of humankind talks about Africa. All the great figures of the Enlightenment are writing about the rest of the world, and this is a period in which contacts between Europe and the rest the world are exploding along with international trade. So by the end of the 18th century, there are 4,000 to 5,000 ships a year crossing the Atlantic. It's an enormous number. And that's one context in which the enlightenment takes place. Another is what we call the consumer revolution. So in the 18th century, certainly in the major cities of Western Europe, people of a wide range of social classes, including even artisans, sort of somewhat wealthy artisians, shopkeepers, are suddenly able to buy a much larger range of products than they were before. They're able to choose how to basically furnish their own lives, if you will, how they're gonna dress, what they're going to eat, what they gonna put on the walls of their apartments and so on and so forth. And so they become accustomed to exercising a great deal more personal choice than their ancestors have done. And the Enlightenment really develops in tandem with this. Most of the great works of the Enlightment, they're not really written to, they're treatises, they're like Kant, they're written to persuade you to think in a single way. Really written to make you ask questions yourself, to force you to ponder things. They're written in the form of puzzles and riddles. Voltaire had a great line there, he wrote that the best kind of books are the books that readers write half of themselves as they read, and that's sort of the quintessence of the Enlightenment as far as I'm concerned.Andrew Keen: Yeah, Voltaire might have been comfortable on YouTube or Facebook. David, you mentioned all those ships going from Europe across the Atlantic. Of course, many of those ships were filled with African slaves. You mentioned this in your piece. I mean, this is no secret, of course. You also mentioned a couple of times Montesquieu's Persian letters. To what extent is... The enlightenment then perhaps the birth of Western power, of Western colonialism, of going to Africa, seizing people, selling them in North America, the French, the English, Dutch colonization of the rest of the world. Of course, later more sophisticated Marxist thinkers from the Frankfurt School, you mentioned these in your essay, Odorno and Horkheimer in particular, See the Enlightenment as... A project, if you like, of Western domination. I remember reading many years ago when I was in graduate school, Edward Said, his analysis of books like The Persian Letters, which is a form of cultural Western power. How much of this is simply bound up in the profound, perhaps, injustice of the Western achievement? And of course, some of the justice as well. We haven't talked about Jefferson, but perhaps in Jefferson's life and his thinking and his enlightened principles and his... Life as a slave owner, these contradictions are most self-evident.David Bell: Well, there are certainly contradictions, and there's certainly... I think what's remarkable, if you think about it, is that if you read through works of the Enlightenment, you would be hard-pressed to find a justification for slavery. You do find a lot of critiques of slavery, and I think that's something very important to keep in mind. Obviously, the chattel slavery of Africans in the Americas began well before the Enlightment, it began in 1500. The Enlightenment doesn't have the credit for being the first movement to oppose slavery. That really goes back to various religious groups, especially the Fakers. But that said, you have in France, you had in Britain, in America even, you'd have a lot of figures associated with the Enlightenment who were pretty sure of becoming very forceful opponents of slavery very early. Now, when it comes to imperialism, that's a tricky issue. What I think you'd find in these light bulbs, you'd different sorts of tendencies and different sorts of writings. So there are certainly a lot of writers of the Enlightenment who are deeply opposed to European authorities. One of the most popular works of the late Enlightenment was a collective work edited by the man named the Abbe Rinal, which is called The History of the Two Indies. And that is a book which is deeply, deeply critical of European imperialism. At the same time, at the same of the enlightenment, a lot the works of history written during the Enlightment. Tended, such as Voltaire's essay on customs, which I just mentioned, tend to give a kind of very linear version of history. They suggest that all societies follow the same path, from sort of primitive savagery, hunter-gatherers, through early agriculture, feudal stages, and on into sort of modern commercial society and civilization. And so they're basically saying, okay, we, the Europeans, are the most advanced. People like the Africans and the Native Americans are the least advanced, and so perhaps we're justified in going and quote, bringing our civilization to them, what later generations would call the civilizing missions, or possibly just, you know, going over and exploiting them because we are stronger and we are more, and again, we are the best. And then there's another thing that the Enlightenment did. The Enlightenment tended to destroy an older Christian view of humankind, which in some ways militated against modern racism. Christians believed, of course, that everyone was the same from Adam and Eve, which meant that there was an essential similarity in the world. And the Enlightenment challenged this by challenging the biblical kind of creation. The Enlightenment challenges this. Voltaire, for instance, believed that there had actually been several different human species that had different origins, and that can very easily become a justification for racism. Buffon, one of the most Figures of the French Enlightenment, one of the early naturalists, was crucial for trying to show that in fact nature is not static, that nature is always changing, that species are changing, including human beings. And so again, that allowed people to think in terms of human beings at different stages of evolution, and perhaps this would be a justification for privileging the more advanced humans over the less advanced. In the 18th century itself, most of these things remain potential, rather than really being acted upon. But in the 19th century, figures of writers who would draw upon these things certainly went much further, and these became justifications for slavery, imperialism, and other things. So again, the Enlightenment is the source of a great deal of stuff here, and you can't simply put it into one box or more.Andrew Keen: You mentioned earlier, David, that Concorda wrote one of the later classics of the... Condorcet? Sorry, Condorcets, excuse my French. Condorcès wrote one the later Classics of the Enlightenment when he was hiding from the French Revolution. In your mind, was the revolution itself the natural conclusion, climax? Perhaps anti-climax of the Enlightenment. Certainly, it seems as if a lot of the critiques of the French Revolution, particularly the more conservative ones, Burke comes to mind, suggested that perhaps the principles of in the Enlightment inevitably led to the guillotine, or is that an unfair way of thinking of it?David Bell: Well, there are a lot of people who have thought like that. Edmund Burke already, writing in 1790, in his reflections on the revolution in France, he said that everything which was great in the old regime is being dissolved and, quoting, dissolved by this new conquering empire of light and reason. And then he said about the French that in the groves of their academy at the end of every vista, you see nothing but the gallows. Nothing but the Gallows. So there, in 1780, he already seemed to be predicting the reign of terror and blaming it. A certain extent from the Enlightenment. That said, I think, you know, again, the French Revolution is incredibly complicated event. I mean, you certainly have, you know, an explosion of what we could call Enlightenment thinking all over the place. In France, it happened in France. What happened there was that you had a, you know, the collapse of an extraordinarily inefficient government and a very, you know, in a very antiquated, paralyzed system of government kind of collapsed, created a kind of political vacuum. Into that vacuum stepped a lot of figures who were definitely readers of the Enlightenment. Oh so um but again the Enlightment had I said I don't think you can call the Enlightement a single thing so to say that the Enlightiment inspired the French Revolution rather than the There you go.Andrew Keen: Although your essay on liberties is the Enlightenment then and now you probably didn't write is always these lazy editors who come up with inaccurate and inaccurate titles. So for you, there is no such thing as the Enlighten.David Bell: No, there is. There is. But still, it's a complex thing. It contains multitudes.Andrew Keen: So it's the Enlightenment rather than the United States.David Bell: Conflicting tendencies, it has contradictions within it. There's enough unity to refer to it as a singular noun, but it doesn't mean that it all went in one single direction.Andrew Keen: But in historical terms, did the failure of the French Revolution, its descent into Robespierre and then Bonaparte, did it mark the end in historical terms a kind of bookend of history? You began in 1720 by 1820. Was the age of the Enlightenment pretty much over?David Bell: I would say yes. I think that, again, one of the things about the French Revolution is that people who are reading these books and they're reading these ideas and they are discussing things really start to act on them in a very different way from what it did before the French revolution. You have a lot of absolute monarchs who are trying to bring certain enlightenment principles to bear in their form of government, but they're not. But it's difficult to talk about a full-fledged attempt to enact a kind of enlightenment program. Certainly a lot of the people in the French Revolution saw themselves as doing that. But as they did it, they ran into reality, I would say. I mean, now Tocqueville, when he writes his old regime in the revolution, talks about how the French philosophes were full of these abstract ideas that were divorced from reality. And while that's an exaggeration, there was a certain truth to them. And as soon as you start having the age of revolutions, as soon you start people having to devise systems of government that will actually last, and as you have people, democratic representative systems that will last, and as they start revising these systems under the pressure of actual events, then you're not simply talking about an intellectual movement anymore, you're talking about something very different. And so I would say that, well, obviously the ideas of the Enlightenment continue to inspire people, the books continue to be read, debated. They lead on to figures like Kant, and as we talked about earlier, Kant leads to Hegel, Hegel leads to Marx in a certain sense. Nonetheless, by the time you're getting into the 19th century, what you have, you know, has connections to the Enlightenment, but can we really still call it the Enlightment? I would sayAndrew Keen: And Tocqueville, of course, found democracy in America. Is democracy itself? I know it's a big question. But is it? Bound up in the Enlightenment. You've written extensively, David, both for liberties and elsewhere on liberalism. Is the promise of democracy, democratic systems, the one born in the American Revolution, promised in the French Revolution, not realized? Are they products of the Enlightment, or is the 19th century and the democratic systems that in the 19th century, is that just a separate historical track?David Bell: Again, I would say there are certain things in the Enlightenment that do lead in that direction. Certainly, I think most figures in the enlightenment in one general sense or another accepted the idea of a kind of general notion of popular sovereignty. It didn't mean that they always felt that this was going to be something that could necessarily be acted upon or implemented in their own day. And they didn't necessarily associate generalized popular sovereignty with what we would now call democracy with people being able to actually govern themselves. Would be certain figures, certainly Diderot and some of his essays, what we saw very much in the social contract, you know, were sketching out, you knows, models for possible democratic system. Condorcet, who actually lived into the French Revolution, wrote one of the most draft constitutions for France, that's one of most democratic documents ever proposed. But of course there were lots of figures in the Enlightenment, Voltaire, and others who actually believed much more in absolute monarchy, who believed that you just, you know, you should have. Freedom of speech and freedom of discussion, out of which the best ideas would emerge, but then you had to give those ideas to the prince who imposed them by poor sicknesses.Andrew Keen: And of course, Rousseau himself, his social contract, some historians have seen that as the foundations of totalitarian, modern totalitarianism. Finally, David, your wonderful essay in Liberties in the spring quarterly 2025 is The Enlightenment, Then and Now. What about now? You work at Princeton, your president has very bravely stood up to the new presidential regime in the United States, in defense of academic intellectual freedom. Does the word and the movement, does it have any relevance in the 2020s, particularly in an age of neo-authoritarianism around the world?David Bell: I think it does. I think we have to be careful about it. I always get a little nervous when people say, well, we should simply go back to the Enlightenment, because the Enlightenments is history. We don't go back the 18th century. I think what we need to do is to recover certain principles, certain ideals from the 18 century, the ones that matter to us, the ones we think are right, and make our own Enlightenment better. I don't think we need be governed by the 18 century. Thomas Paine once said that no generation should necessarily rule over every generation to come, and I think that's probably right. Unfortunately in the United States, we have a constitution which is now essentially unamendable, so we're doomed to live by a constitution largely from the 18th century. But are there many things in the Enlightenment that we should look back to, absolutely?Andrew Keen: Well, David, I am going to free you for your own French Enlightenment. You can go and have some croissant now in your local cafe in Paris. Thank you so much for a very, I excuse the pun, enlightening conversation on the Enlightenment then and now, Essential Essay in Liberties. I'd love to get you back on the show. Talk more history. Thank you. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

In 1845, a novel pathogen attacked potato fields across Europe, from Spain to Scandinavia—but only in Ireland were the effects apocalyptic. At least one million Irish people died, and millions more scattered across the globe, emigrating to new countries and continents. Less than fifty years after the union of Ireland with the rest of Great Britain, the newly formed United Kingdom—the most powerful country in the nineteenth-century world—failed millions of its own citizens, leading to decades of poverty, ecological ruin, and collective trauma. How did this happen? Today’s guest Padraic Scanlan recontextualizes the disaster’s origins, events, and consequences in his new book “Rot: An Imperial History of the Irish Famine.” We situate the Irish Great Famine in a larger history of economic consolidation and exploitation caused by British policies toward Ireland. The blight that decimated the potato plants was biological, but the Famine itself was manmade, caused by the British government’s structures of land ownership, labor, and rent collection. The real tragedy of the Famine wasn’t that the British maliciously intended and propagated starvation, but that their efforts to address the “Irish Question” only exacerbated the problem.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Hanseatic League was a major player in Northern Europe for centuries, it dominated trade in the North and Baltic Seas, fought wars with rival powers, and dictated terms to princes. But the League was not a state, proto-state, or quasi-state, it was a collection of Merchants, Guilds, and Towns.Time Period Covered: 1143-1441Notable Events/Developments: Founding of Lubeck, Formation of the Hanseatic League, Hanseatic Boycotts of Bruges (1280-1282, 1358-1360, 1388-1391), Danish-Hanseatic War, The Confederation of Cologne, Dutch-Hanseatic War

The Norman Conquest of 1066, culminating in the legendary Battle of Hastings, is perhaps the greatest turning point in the history of the English nation. It was a year that changed the fate of England forever, forging empires, and settling continents. And yet, despite its infamy and significance, the true nature of those totemic events are often forgotten. So what happened in the build up to the Battle of Hastings? The dramas of 1066 were set in motion by a succession crisis in 975 AD, following the death of King Edgar. England by that time was the wealthiest and best run government in Northern Europe, a kingdom of united English speaking peoples, established by Alfred the Great and his successors. Following the mysterious death of Edgar's first son, Edward, his second son, Æthelred - later known as ‘The Unready' - took the throne. For many years his kingdom flourished, until disaster struck: the Vikings returned to reign terror upon the Anglo-Saxon people, under the leadership of the terrifying Olaf Tryggvason, King of Norway. With his coffers straining, his people enslaved, and his lands shrinking, Æthelred, now wed to the foreign Emma of Normandy, finally decided to take drastic action, and weed the Vikings out once and for all. So it was that with the dawning of the millennium, a terrible, bloody massacre began…. Join Tom and Dominic as they set out upon one of greatest narratives in all English history, with the build up to 1066 and the Battle of Hastings. Would England survive the wrath of the Vikings? EXCLUSIVE NordVPN Deal ➼ https://nordvpn.com/restishistory Try it risk-free now with a 30-day money-back guarantee! _______ Twitter: @TheRestHistory @holland_tom @dcsandbrook Producer: Theo Young-Smith Assistant Producer: Tabby Syrett + Aaliyah Akude  Executive Producers: Jack Davenport + Tony Pastor Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In 1698 and 1699, the powers of Northern Europe edged closer to war. The Pirate History Podcast is a member of the Airwave Media Podcast network. For advertising inquiries, please contact sales@advertisingcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week's episode - the final episode of Above Average Intelligence - former Danish Defense Intelligence Service senior officer Jacob Kaarsbo (@jkaarsbo.bsky.social) (@JKaarsbo) joins @mpolymer to discuss “Why Greenland?”, plus how Europe must focus now on a security regime without US leadership. Always great to hear from allied intel pros, given the huge global challenges in 2025. Tune in here. Looking for More from the DSR Network? Click Here: https://linktr.ee/deepstateradio Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices