Podcasts about Rorschach

In Washington's think tank row, a single document has become a kind of political Rorschach test. Project 2025, a more than 900 page “Mandate for Leadership” assembled by the conservative Heritage Foundation and allied groups, is billed by its authors as a roadmap “to advance positive change for America.” According to Heritage's own description, it is a presidential transition project designed so a conservative administration can “take the reins of government” quickly and decisively. Critics see something very different. The American Civil Liberties Union describes Project 2025 as “a blueprint for a radical restructuring of the executive branch,” warning that it would replace long standing legal safeguards with “right wing ideals” across immigration, civil rights, and reproductive freedom. Democracy Forward, a nonpartisan watchdog, calls it “a systemic, ruthless plan” that could undermine the quality of life for millions, from workers and veterans to parents and students. At the heart of the plan is a sweeping reimagining of federal agencies. The Brookings Institution notes that on education alone, Project 2025 recommends dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, eliminating the Head Start program for low income children, and phasing out Title I funds that support schools in poor communities. It also calls for rescinding federal civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ students and weakening enforcement of disability rights. Brookings warns that these moves would “dramatically reshape the federal government's role” in schooling. The same impulse to centralize power runs through the broader agenda. The Heritage playbook urges a president to assert direct control over the civil service, in part by reviving “Schedule F,” a Trump era job classification that would make it easier to fire career officials and replace them with political loyalists. Democracy Forward reports that Project 2025's authors claim many of these changes could be carried out “through executive branch action alone — without new legislation.” Other proposals reach deeply into daily life. The American Civil Liberties Union highlights language urging mass deportations, new limits on asylum, and even ending birthright citizenship for some children of noncitizens, a direct challenge to the Fourteenth Amendment. The Center for American Progress points to recommendations to raise the Social Security full retirement age from 67 to 69, weaken unions by banning public sector bargaining, and reduce veterans' disability eligibility by narrowing covered conditions and automating denials. Supporters argue that these ideas would cut red tape, restore traditional values, and rein in what they describe as an unaccountable “administrative state.” Opponents counter that, taken together, the proposals would concentrate power in the presidency, erode checks and balances, and roll back protections that many listeners may take for granted. As the next campaign season accelerates, key questions loom: which parts of this blueprint will a future administration embrace, what can be done by executive order, and how will courts and Congress respond. Those decision points will determine whether Project 2025 remains a manifesto on a shelf or becomes a governing reality. Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for more. Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3Qs For more check out http://www.quietplease.ai

Si algo nos dice la respuesta de España a los discursos del Papa es que la crisis de nuestra política es fundamentalmente de liderazgos. Ha bastado que llegara un tipo serio, con una posición firme y dirigido a las personas y no a las redes para concitar un entusiasmo generalizado. Ha bastado con elevar el nivel y dejar de tratar a la gente como si fuera idiota para que esa misma gente comenzara a comprender lo que quieren decirle, como si cuanto más complejo fuera el mensaje, más fácil resultara captarlo. Los líderes -todos- tienen una visión, un modelo de sociedad y unos principios. Los explican y el resto les sigue o no les sigue. Esto es exactamente lo contrario de lo que hacen nuestros políticos, que trabajan al revés, como todos los populistas: como su objetivo es que les sigan, piensan primero qué quiere oír la gente y luego se lo dicen, habitualmente de un modo tan facilito y tan mediocre que acaba por parecer morse y ellos morsas. Y no se entiende nada.Yo no tengo la menor idea de en qué creen Sánchez, Feijóo o Abascal, no sabría decirte tres creencias innegociables de cada uno de ellos. Son líquidos y por eso es imposible seguirlos. Autoridad viene de ‘autor', es decir, el que origina, el que crea, el que hace crecer algo. Si no son capaces de hacerlo, no pueden reclamar una autoridad. Y se esté de acuerdo o no con el Papa, es innegable que él sí que tiene esa autoridad y por eso, logra que el que lo escucha valore de sus discursos las coincidencias con él en lugar sus desencuentros. No me parece algo malo: eso exactamente es lo que persigue. Aunque si se trata solo de dejar sacar las obsesiones, en vez de un discurso del Papa, vale con un buen test de Rorschach.

Si algo nos dice la respuesta de España a los discursos del Papa es que la crisis de nuestra política es fundamentalmente de liderazgos. Ha bastado que llegara un tipo serio, con una posición firme y dirigido a las personas y no a las redes para concitar un entusiasmo generalizado. Ha bastado con elevar el nivel y dejar de tratar a la gente como si fuera idiota para que esa misma gente comenzara a comprender lo que quieren decirle, como si cuanto más complejo fuera el mensaje, más fácil resultara captarlo. Los líderes -todos- tienen una visión, un modelo de sociedad y unos principios. Los explican y el resto les sigue o no les sigue. Esto es exactamente lo contrario de lo que hacen nuestros políticos, que trabajan al revés, como todos los populistas: como su objetivo es que les sigan, piensan primero qué quiere oír la gente y luego se lo dicen, habitualmente de un modo tan facilito y tan mediocre que acaba por parecer morse y ellos morsas. Y no se entiende nada.Yo no tengo la menor idea de en qué creen Sánchez, Feijóo o Abascal, no sabría decirte tres creencias innegociables de cada uno de ellos. Son líquidos y por eso es imposible seguirlos. Autoridad viene de ‘autor', es decir, el que origina, el que crea, el que hace crecer algo. Si no son capaces de hacerlo, no pueden reclamar una autoridad. Y se esté de acuerdo o no con el Papa, es innegable que él sí que tiene esa autoridad y por eso, logra que el que lo escucha valore de sus discursos las coincidencias con él en lugar sus desencuentros. No me parece algo malo: eso exactamente es lo que persigue. Aunque si se trata solo de dejar sacar las obsesiones, en vez de un discurso del Papa, vale con un buen test de Rorschach.Conviértete en un supporter de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/mas-noticias--4412383/support.ESCUCHAR RADIO 

https://creators.spotify.com/pod/profile/madmike3/subscribe"Diario di Rorschach, 12 ottobre 1985. Carcassa di cane in un vicolo stamattina, traccia di pneumatico sullo stomaco spappolato. Questa città ha paura di me. Io ho visto il suo vero volto. Le strade sono lunghi rigagnoli, e i rigagnoli sono pieni di sangue e quando alla fine le fogne si ricopriranno di croste... Tutti i parassiti affogheranno, il sesso e i delitti accumulati come sudiciume li sommergeranno fino alla cintola e le puttane e i politici guarderanno verso l'alto e grideranno: «Salvaci!» e io sussurrerò... «No.»"

In einer neuen Weisung regelt der Bundesrat den Umgang mit PFAS-belasteten Lebensmitteln. Produkte über dem Höchstwert dürfen nicht normal verkauft werden. Für drei Jahre soll jetzt aber das Mischen verlaubt sein, wenn das Endprodukt unter dem Grenzwert bleibt. Weitere Themen: · Frauenfelder Stadtrat soll mehr Lohn erhalten · Pädagogische Hochschule St. Gallen legt Didaktikzentren in Gossau und Rorschach zusammen

Si on ne peut pas dire que l'édition 2026 de Comic Con France brillait par son nombre d'invités comics, il y avait tout de même quelques invités de marque, parmi lesquels l'excellent Jorge Fornés. Le dessinateur espagnol était en effet présent via DiableBlanc Comics et Central Comics, et nous avons donc profité de son passage dans notre beau pays pour aller lui poser quelques questions. Collaborateur de Tom King sur Rorscach et Danger Street, le dessinateur opèrera bientôt sur un nouveau Zorro avec Howard Chaykin. Pourtant, Jorge ne se destinait pas à la bande dessinée...Jorge Fornés est sur First Print !Remerciements à Mike de DiableBlanc ComicsVous saurez tout sur le cheminement de Jorge Fornés au fil de cette interview et nous espérons que l'interview vous plaira et vous donnera envie de découvrir ses travaux si ce n'est pas fait !Vous pouvez commander Rorschach (en vo) à ce lien !Mais aussi Danger Street par là !Si vous appréciez notre travail ne manquez pas de le faire savoir ! Vous pouvez partager cet épisode, en parler autour de vous, à toutes les personnes qui aiment la bande dessinée, rejoindre notre Discord, voir nous soutenir via Tipeee !Soutenez First Print - Votre podcast comics (& BD) préféré sur TipeeeHébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

GLP-1 medications can feel like a Rorschach test online: one person calls Ozempic or Wegovy a miracle, another calls it miserable, and almost nobody explains what the “normal middle” looks like. We wanted to fix that with a practical walkthrough of what tends to happen after you start a GLP-1 receptor agonist, especially in those first weeks when you're on a low dose and you're wondering if anything is happening at all. We talk through the early ramp-up, realistic weight loss expectations, and the biggest lived experience change we hear from patients: food noise getting quieter. We break down the difference between normal hunger cues and constant appetite chatter, why cravings often drop, and how that creates a real window of opportunity to build routines that used to be hard. We also get honest about common side effects like nausea, constipation, and feeling overly full, plus simple strategies that can make them more manageable and safer. Then we zoom out to the long game: what it means to treat obesity as a chronic condition, why plateaus don't automatically mean the medication “stopped working,” and how to define success beyond a single scale number using cardiometabolic health wins. After the clinical talk, we lighten things up with some banter about Ollie's pet store obsession and the strange things strangers say on a walk. If this helped you, subscribe, share it with a loved one, and leave a review so more people can find practical, judgment-free education on GLP-1s and healthy weight loss.Send us a (voice ) message with this link, we would love to hear from you. Standard message rates may apply.Support the showProduction and Content: Edward Delesky, MD, DABOM & Nicole Aruffo, RNArtwork Rebrand and Avatars:Vantage Design Works (Vanessa Jones) Website: https://www.vantagedesignworks.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/vantagedesignworks?igsh=aHRuOW93dmxuOG9m&utm_source=qrOriginal Artwork Concept: Olivia Pawlowski

A shocking public shooting at New York City Hall leaves the ambitious, charismatic City Councilman James E. Davis dead, before his assailant is gunned down by a New York City cop. It turns out that Davis had been murdered by his political rival, Niel Askew. And yet all that summer, the two men had been seen around Brooklyn together, been together in James' office, sat side by side at a barbershop. Despite the shock waves this murder sent through New York City in the summer of 2003, the story is now forgotten, along with the mystery of what really happened between these men. RORSCHACH: MURDER AT CITY HALL recounts their final fateful day through eye-witness accounts, and then traces the path that led James Davis and his killer Niel Askew to their deaths.Episodes available here:https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-rorschach-murder-at-city-325726473Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-like-it-s-live--4113802/support.

With Charles Kenney, a graduate student in combinatorics, we explore: - what do intense hatred and food allergies have in common - why to be more like a fox than a hedgehog - how to think about biases - the linguistic Rorschach test   Startovač: https://www.startovac.cz/patron/misto-problemu/ FB stránka: https://www.facebook.com/mistoproblemu Web: https://www.mistoproblemu.cz/   Timestamps:   (0:00) introduction (1:41) equalities and inequalities (5:17) the nature of combinatorics (18:11) the Bayes rule (25:56) handling uncertainty and biases (31:43) collaboration and author order (36:37) academia vs. industry (45:00) opportunity cost and habits (51:38) problem solving strategies   Links:   - foxes and hedgehogs: https://www.historyaccess.com/new/isaiah-berlins-hedgehogs-and-foxes/ - Erdős vs Grothendieck: https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2007/04/the_two_cultures_of_mathematic.html

This episode dives into history with best-selling author Jack El-Hai to follow psychiatrist Douglas Kelley from wartime trauma work to the Nuremberg prison cells where he tested infamous Nazi defendants and walked away with a conclusion that still chills. Our hosts wrestle with what it means to stop believing in “monsters,” how propaganda exploits ordinary minds, and what Kelley thought democracies must do to resist authoritarianism.The most unsettling Nuremberg detail that is shared isn't a single document or confession. It's the possibility that the architects of mass violence can look psychologically ordinary when you put them under the lens of clinical testing. That's where our conversation with El-Hai begins, as we dig into his book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist. Douglas Kelley arrives after World War II as a U.S. Army psychiatrist tasked with a narrow forensic job: determine whether the top Nazi defendants are mentally fit to stand trial. But he can't stop there. Using interviews and tools like the Rorschach, he quietly chases a bigger question in forensic psychiatry and psychology: is there a shared mental illness that explains crimes on this scale? His conclusion flips the comforting story many of us want to tell, and forces a harder look at motivation, opportunism, loyalty, and the ways propaganda and authoritarian movements press upon normal human weaknesses. We also discuss Kelley's volatile rapport with Hermann Göring, a master manipulator who draws Kelley into long conversations and even convinces him to pass letters to his family. From there, the conversation widens into the present: mental health stigma, why “evil” can be a trap word, and Kelley's post-Nuremberg warnings about civic vulnerability, critical thinking education, and voting access. We end with the troubling echo between Göring's cyanide suicide and Kelley's own death, and what that says about control, identity, and despair. Subscribe for more psychology-forward conversations, share this with a friend who loves true history and mental health, and leave a review if you want more episodes that focus on history, like this one.  Please do share what you took away from listening to this edition of MindDive.Follow The Menninger Clinic on Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn to stay up to date on new Mind Dive episodes. To submit a topic for discussion, email podcast@menninger.edu. If you are a new or regular listener, please leave us a review on your favorite listening platform! Visit The Menninger Clinic website to learn more about The Menninger Clinic's research and leadership role in mental health. 

Patrick confronts the tornado swirling around Donald Trump’s public attack against Pope Leo, pressures listeners to declare their true loyalty, and stirs a cauldron of reactions around faith and politics colliding. Callers erupt, some wounded, others defiant, filling the air with anguish over diplomacy, the Pope’s peace pleas, and the blurred lines where Catholic identity fuses with partisan fervor. Questions ricochet, loyalties fracture, and the Rorschach test of belief shatters comfortable silence. Camilla - I am a little sad by what I am hearing from the callers. People are not acknowledging what they are seeing. How can people who are Catholic choose the world over God? (02:03) Sharon - President Trump and the Pope: I am so glad people are calling knowing what Trump is like. Trump thinks he is above everyone. (07:56) Bob - Your conversation is one-sided. I wouldn’t defend the President, but Pope Leo made the first salvo. (10:41) Dennis (email) – There are powerful people behind the scenes who are gleeful that Trump’s words may lead to a fracturing of his own support. (21:32) Kyle (email) - Trump has lost my support, but not my vote. John – (email) - President Trump has been in politics since 2015 and it sad to continue hearing how ill-informed the public continues to be about who he is and how he operates. Grace - It seems to me that Pope Leo started this 'War' against Trump. I am not hearing him going after Russian Orthodox and War in Ukraine. How about Canada and euthanasia? (27:38) Laurie - People need to acknowledge that Iran killed 50,000 of its own people. (35:15) Chris - You are not being fair about framing this issue. The Pope should stay in his lane. (38:49) Joseph - I commend how you are handling this. As Catholics, should we continue to enter into this political debate? Pope Leo has tried very hard to respect dignity of others, including Trump. (47:42)

Mike and Ben Buckingham take a look at Exposure 36, the 2022 film written and directed by Mackenzie G. Mauro. Charles Oudo stars as Cam, a photographer spending the last three days on Earth selling drugs and wandering the streets of New York City, encountering a colorful cast of characters along the way.The apocalypse here is background noise rather than spectacle — a quiet, meditative film that doubles as something of a Rorschach test, with different viewers latching onto entirely different aspects of the story. Mike and Ben dig into the episodic, wandering narrative, the film's mysterious blue figures, its use of photography as a distancing mechanism, and the way the story shifts from meditative sci-fi into neo-noir thriller territory before it's all over. Mauro joins the show to discuss the film.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-projection-booth-podcast--5513239/support.Become a supporter of The Projection Booth at http://www.patreon.com/projectionbooth 

Mike and Ben Buckingham take a look at Exposure 36, the 2022 film written and directed by Mackenzie G. Mauro. Charles Oudo stars as Cam, a photographer spending the last three days on Earth selling drugs and wandering the streets of New York City, encountering a colorful cast of characters along the way.The apocalypse here is background noise rather than spectacle — a quiet, meditative film that doubles as something of a Rorschach test, with different viewers latching onto entirely different aspects of the story. Mike and Ben dig into the episodic, wandering narrative, the film's mysterious blue figures, its use of photography as a distancing mechanism, and the way the story shifts from meditative sci-fi into neo-noir thriller territory before it's all over. Mauro joins the show to discuss the film.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-projection-booth-podcast--5513239/support.Become a supporter of The Projection Booth at http://www.patreon.com/projectionbooth 

A shocking public shooting at New York City Hall leaves the ambitious, charismatic City Councilman James E. Davis dead, before his assailant is gunned down by a New York City cop. It turns out that Davis had been murdered by his political rival, Niel Askew. And yet all that summer, the two men had been seen around Brooklyn together, been together in James’ office, sat side by side at a barbershop. Despite the shock waves this murder sent through New York City in the summer of 2003, the story is now forgotten, along with the mystery of what really happened between these men. RORSCHACH: MURDER AT CITY HALL recounts their final fateful day through eye-witness accounts, and then traces the path that led James Davis and his killer Niel Askew to their deaths. Listen here and subscribe to Rorschach: Murder at City Hall on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A shocking public shooting at New York City Hall leaves the ambitious, charismatic City Councilman James E. Davis dead, before his assailant is gunned down by a New York City cop. It turns out that Davis had been murdered by his political rival, Niel Askew. And yet all that summer, the two men had been seen around Brooklyn together, been together in James’ office, sat side by side at a barbershop. Despite the shock waves this murder sent through New York City in the summer of 2003, the story is now forgotten, along with the mystery of what really happened between these men. RORSCHACH: MURDER AT CITY HALL recounts their final fateful day through eye-witness accounts, and then traces the path that led James Davis and his killer Niel Askew to their deaths. Listen here and subscribe to Rorschach: Murder at City Hall on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A shocking public shooting at New York City Hall leaves the ambitious, charismatic City Councilman James E. Davis dead, before his assailant is gunned down by a New York City cop. It turns out that Davis had been murdered by his political rival, Niel Askew. And yet all that summer, the two men had been seen around Brooklyn together, been together in James’ office, sat side by side at a barbershop. Despite the shock waves this murder sent through New York City in the summer of 2003, the story is now forgotten, along with the mystery of what really happened between these men. RORSCHACH: MURDER AT CITY HALL recounts their final fateful day through eye-witness accounts, and then traces the path that led James Davis and his killer Niel Askew to their deaths. Listen here and subscribe to Rorschach: Murder at City Hall on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A shocking public shooting at New York City Hall leaves the ambitious, charismatic City Councilman James E. Davis dead, before his assailant is gunned down by a New York City cop. It turns out that Davis had been murdered by his political rival, Niel Askew. And yet all that summer, the two men had been seen around Brooklyn together, been together in James’ office, sat side by side at a barbershop. Despite the shock waves this murder sent through New York City in the summer of 2003, the story is now forgotten, along with the mystery of what really happened between these men. RORSCHACH: MURDER AT CITY HALL recounts their final fateful day through eye-witness accounts, and then traces the path that led James Davis and his killer Niel Askew to their deaths. Listen here and subscribe to Rorschach: Murder at City Hall on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In 1945, a young American psychiatrist named Douglas M. Kelley was given an extraordinary assignment: evaluate the 22 most senior Nazis awaiting trial at Nuremberg and determine whether they were mentally fit to face justice. Among his patients was Hermann Göring, Hitler's second-in-command, who was charismatic, manipulative and utterly unrepentant.What Kelley discovered shook him to his core. Using Rorschach tests, IQ assessments and hundreds of hours of interviews, he concluded that these architects of the Holocaust were not clinically insane. They were psychologically normal: intelligent, ambitious opportunists who had made deliberate choices to pursue power at any human cost. There was no "Nazi mind." There was no psychiatric explanation that set them apart from the rest of us.It was a conclusion the post-war world didn't want to hear. And it destroyed the man who reached it.In this episode, Mat McLachlan talks to Jack El-Hai, author of The Nazi and the Psychiatrist, the book behind the 2025 film Nuremberg starring Russell Crowe and Rami Malek. Jack had unique access to Kelley's hidden personal papers: clinical notes, Rorschach results and private correspondence kept secret by the family for decades. He reveals the complex and ultimately fatal relationship between a brilliant psychiatrist and the most powerful Nazi to stand trial, and asks the question Kelley spent the rest of his short life trying to answer: if the men who built the Third Reich weren't monsters, what does that say about the rest of us?Episode Length: 40 minutesFeatures: Jack El-Hai discusses his research into Douglas Kelley's hidden archive, the psychology of the Nuremberg defendants, the Kelley-Göring relationship, the competing theories of the "Nazi mind" and why Kelley's warnings about authoritarianism went unheard until it was too late.Presenter: Mat McLachlanGuest: Jack El-HaiProducer: Jess StebnickiSail through history with Mat McLachlan! Join a 2027 history cruise: https://battlefields.com.au/history-cruises-2027Find out everything Mat is doing with books, tours and media at https://linktr.ee/matmclachlanFor more great history content, visit www.LivingHistoryTV.com, or subscribe to our YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/@MatMcLachlanHistory Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Next month, tech giant Apple will turn 50, marking five decades since Steve Jobs and his co-founders set out to put powerful technology in the hands of everyday people. David Pogue joined NPR's Michel Martin for a conversation about his new book Apple: The First 50 Years – and said he sees the company's story as one of “focus.” In today's episode, Martin and the CBS News correspondent discuss Steve Jobs as a Rorschach test, Jobs' relationship with Steve Wozniak and Apple's lesser-known third founder, Ronald Wayne, and a time when the company faced bankruptcy.To listen to Book of the Day sponsor-free and support NPR's book coverage, sign up for Book of the Day+ at plus.npr.org/bookofthedayTo manage podcast ad preferences, review the links below:See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

“Whether you like Amodei or not, at least he's a leader.” — Andrew KeenDario Amodei is the most interesting man in America right now. Not because he runs a $500 billion company or because he's suing the Trump administration or because Anthropic's Claude topped the iPhone charts. But because he's doing something nobody else in Silicon Valley has the balls to do: he's acting like a human being in public. He has principles, he states them, and he accepts the consequences. That's leadership. It shouldn't be remarkable. In 2026, it is.This week's That Was The Week is about how America both loves and hates AI. An NBC poll found 60–70% of Americans are concerned about AI — making it even less popular than the Democratic Party (quite an achievement). A hundred planned data centers have been cancelled because of local protests. 10,000 authors published an anti AI manifesto at the London Book Fair this week. Each week, in contrast, a billion people used ChatGPT, but these users often seem oblivious to its weaknesses. So Keith's AI-generated video for the show was, by universal agreement (including his own), not going to win an Oscar tomorrow. Except for Most Sloppy AI generated video.Every road this week led back to Amodei who is anything but sloppy. He's become a Rorschach test for the entire industry. Tech progressives Kara Swisher and Scott Galloway are lauding him. The MAGA crowd — including David Sacks, Trump's AI czar — on the All In podcast are doing the opposite. Keith thinks Dario is a naive CEO making bad business decisions — comparing him to his own doomed battle in the late Nineties against Microsoft's Steve Ballmer. It's a fair point. Should a tech CEO really be setting AI policy? Keith's answer is no — that's for people like David Sacks appointed by executive, legislative, and judicial branches. I'm not so sure. In an America defined by its dysfunctional political system, we need leaders like Amodei to take ethical stands. If not, then who?The IPO race this year between Anthropic, OpenAI and xAI makes this particularly interesting. I wonder whether Amodei might use the IPO itself to force a public debate that nobody in government is willing to have. Not just about guardrails or weapons — but about what kind of society AI is building and who gets to decide what does and doesn't get used. Musk, by publicly embracing white racists and other groups of hate, is making his politics clear. Sam Altman, as always, is wearing every hat simultaneously. Amodei, in contrast, knows his hat. Rather than MAGA, it should say: The Most Interesting Man in America. He's got my vote. Even if he's not running for office. Five Takeaways•       AI Is Less Popular Than the Democrats: An NBC poll found 60–70% of Americans are concerned about AI. A hundred data centres have been cancelled due to local protests. 10,000 authors published an anti-AI manifesto at the London Book Fair. Close to a billion people use ChatGPT each week — but the haters are the non-users, and they outnumber the lovers by a wide margin.•       Amodei Is the 21st Century's First Real Leader: He's suing the Trump administration. He's refusing to let Claude be used for autonomous weapons. He's accepting the business consequences. Keith thinks he's naive. I think he's the only person in Silicon Valley acting like a human being in public. The debate between us is the show.•       Keith Compares Amodei to His Own Doomed Battle Against Ballmer: In the late Nineties, Keith fought Microsoft with RealNames and lost. He sees Amodei on the same trajectory — noble, principled, already finished. I compared Keith to Pete Hegseth declaring the Iranian regime defeated. The MAGA crowd on All In, including Trump's AI czar David Sacks, agree with Keith. That alone should give him pause.•       The IPO Race Will Force the Debate: Anthropic, OpenAI and xAI are all expected to go public this year. Amodei could use the IPO to force a conversation about what kind of society AI is building — a conversation nobody in government is willing to have. Musk is making his politics clear by embracing white racists. Altman is wearing every hat. Amodei knows his.•       In the Absence of Leadership, Fear Thrives: Keith's best point of the week. Nobody is setting AI policy. The politicians are clowns. The tech CEOs are children. In the vacuum, fear wins. Amodei is trying to fill it. Whether he succeeds or not, at least he's trying. That's more than anyone else can say. About the GuestKeith Teare is the publisher of That Was The Week and co-founder of SignalRank. He is a serial entrepreneur, former CEO of RealNames, and a regular sparring partner on Keen On America.References:•       That Was The Week: AI Loved and Hated — Keith Teare's editorial.•       Rex Woodbury, “Why Does Everybody Hate AI?” — Digital Native.•       Josh Dzieza, The Verge — on lawyers, PhDs, and scientists in the AI gig economy.•       Noah Smith — “Something Feels Weird About This Economy.”•       Meta's acquisition of Moltbook — the AI agent social network.About Keen On AmericaNobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,800 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting.WebsiteSubstackYouTubeApple PodcastsSpotify Chapters:(00:00) - Introduction: AI loved and hated (01:17) - NBC poll: AI less popular than the Democrats (03:10) - Rex Woodbury and the haters: is it really AI people hate? (04:21) - AI slop and Keith's terrible video (07:28) - The adoption curve: AI companies are isolated from mainstream opinion (07:51) - Dario Amodei as the answer to both lovers and haters (10:14) - Keith vs Ballmer redux: why Amodei has already lost (12:09) - OpenAI and Google employees rush to Anthropic's defense (14:24) - Woodbury, The Verge, and AI taking jobs (16:51) - Keith's Apple TV app: vibe coded in a weekend (19:29) - AI will destroy universities: cheating at apocalyptic levels (21:41) - Noah Smith: something feels weird about this economy (27:00) - The IPO race: Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceX (30:42) - Could Amodei blow up the IPO proce...

Greetings from SXSW, where I'm learning, recording, and eating... You'll hear all about it soon... For now, enjoy this short, sweet, and geeky bonus episode.Have you seen that weird graph about all the jobs that AI is going to kill? It looks like an ink blot or a Rorschach test... It's from an Anthropic report and it's really making the rounds. If you follow tech stuff on social media you've probably seen it. The report is interested, but I'm convinced people are only sharing it because the graph looks cool and people will think they're smart if they share this inscrutable data visualization... Anyway, here's a very short excerpt of my upcoming interview with Paul Ford (@ftrain), one of my favorite tech writers and the founder of Aboard. He and I took a break from talking AI and such to geek out on this data visualization and why it's so bad, plus I told him about how I used AI to make my own version of a radar graph (about how many, and which kinds of, tacos I will and could theoretically eat in Austin). ---Subscribe to the Future Around & Find Out newsletter!

As black rain falls from the smoke-choked skies of Tehran, the US and Israel continue their war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. From the start, Trump officials have seemed only to disagree on both the murky rationale and the objectives of their mission. Meanwhile, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has been flooded with reports of commanding officers rallying their troops with apocalyptic pep talks in which Trump has been anointed by Jesus to kick-off Armageddon. This should come as no surprise, given that Sec of Def Pete Hegseth, has been holding Christian Nationalist prayer and worship services in the Pentagon since last May. Beyond the obviousness of this religious politics, Matthew looks at how Canadian PM, Mark Carney, supports Trump, and this war, while pretending not to, using deceptive language tricks that borrow from religion to blur the line between strength and values, power and principle. But, hey, if you want to distract yourself from all this, Polymarket is a wonderful place to bet on who's going to be bombed next. Derek breaks down how prediction markets have become a massively lucrative Rorschach-portrait of our times. Show Notes Troops Told Iran War is “Armageddon” Hegseth Joined Drollinger's White House Bible Study Hegseth Hosts Christian Nationalist Doug Wilson at Pentagon Religious Service The History of Prediction Markets: From Ancient Oracles to Blockchain Forecasting A brief history of prediction markets: from papal elections to Polymarket Three economists grabbed a beer. A multibillion-dollar industry was born. A Primer on Prediction Markets Prediction markets are booming. Why are their ads banned from the Super Bowl? Scandals, prediction markets: Is 2025 a turning point for sports betting? An Analysis Just Found Something Extremely Unflattering About What Happens to Users of Prediction Markets Trump administration backs Kalshi and Polymarket as states move to ban prediction markets Trump's CFTC Tries to Stop States From Regulating Prediction Markets Iran Bets on Prediction Markets Draw Scrutiny: ‘Suspected Insiders' Polymarket Pulls Bet on Nuclear Detonation in 2026 Trump to meet arms executives Friday in push to boost weapon supplies  Trump Privately Dreams of Iran Regime Change Glory as Democrats Cynically Weigh Political Benefits of War  “Principled and pragmatic: Canada's path” Prime Minister Carney addresses the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Philosophy of Translation (Yale UP, 2024) is a fresh, approachable, and convincing account of what translation really is and what translators actually do. As the translator of sixty books from multiple languages, Damion Searls has spent decades grappling with words on the most granular level: nouns and verbs, accents on people's names, rhymes, rhythm, “untranslatable” cultural nuances. In this book, he connects a wealth of specific examples to larger philosophical issues of reading and perception. Translation, he argues, is fundamentally a way of reading—but reading is much more than taking in information, and translating is far from a mechanical process of converting one word to another. This sharp and inviting exploration of the theory and practice of translation is for anyone who has ever marveled at the beauty, force, and movement of language. In this episode, Ibrahim Fawzy sat down with Damion Searls to discuss The Philosophy of Translation, exploring what it truly means to read as a translator, how grammar shapes worldview, and where creativity lives in the space between languages. Damion Searls studied philosophy at Harvard and is a prominent translator from German, Norwegian, French, and Dutch, including books by Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Rilke, Proust, Kielland, Jelinek, Schwitters, Mann, Modiano, and Fosse. His own books include the novel Analog Days, the poetry volume The Mariner's Mirror, and The Inkblots, a history of the Rorschach test and biography of its creator. Ibrahim Fawzy is an Egyptian literary translator and writer. He is the translator of Hassan Akram's A Plan to Save the World (Sandorf Passage, 2026). His interests include translation studies, Arabic literature, ecocriticism, disability studies, and migration literature. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Philosophy of Translation (Yale UP, 2024) is a fresh, approachable, and convincing account of what translation really is and what translators actually do. As the translator of sixty books from multiple languages, Damion Searls has spent decades grappling with words on the most granular level: nouns and verbs, accents on people's names, rhymes, rhythm, “untranslatable” cultural nuances. In this book, he connects a wealth of specific examples to larger philosophical issues of reading and perception. Translation, he argues, is fundamentally a way of reading—but reading is much more than taking in information, and translating is far from a mechanical process of converting one word to another. This sharp and inviting exploration of the theory and practice of translation is for anyone who has ever marveled at the beauty, force, and movement of language. In this episode, Ibrahim Fawzy sat down with Damion Searls to discuss The Philosophy of Translation, exploring what it truly means to read as a translator, how grammar shapes worldview, and where creativity lives in the space between languages. Damion Searls studied philosophy at Harvard and is a prominent translator from German, Norwegian, French, and Dutch, including books by Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Rilke, Proust, Kielland, Jelinek, Schwitters, Mann, Modiano, and Fosse. His own books include the novel Analog Days, the poetry volume The Mariner's Mirror, and The Inkblots, a history of the Rorschach test and biography of its creator. Ibrahim Fawzy is an Egyptian literary translator and writer. He is the translator of Hassan Akram's A Plan to Save the World (Sandorf Passage, 2026). His interests include translation studies, Arabic literature, ecocriticism, disability studies, and migration literature. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

The Philosophy of Translation (Yale UP, 2024) is a fresh, approachable, and convincing account of what translation really is and what translators actually do. As the translator of sixty books from multiple languages, Damion Searls has spent decades grappling with words on the most granular level: nouns and verbs, accents on people's names, rhymes, rhythm, “untranslatable” cultural nuances. In this book, he connects a wealth of specific examples to larger philosophical issues of reading and perception. Translation, he argues, is fundamentally a way of reading—but reading is much more than taking in information, and translating is far from a mechanical process of converting one word to another. This sharp and inviting exploration of the theory and practice of translation is for anyone who has ever marveled at the beauty, force, and movement of language. In this episode, Ibrahim Fawzy sat down with Damion Searls to discuss The Philosophy of Translation, exploring what it truly means to read as a translator, how grammar shapes worldview, and where creativity lives in the space between languages. Damion Searls studied philosophy at Harvard and is a prominent translator from German, Norwegian, French, and Dutch, including books by Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Rilke, Proust, Kielland, Jelinek, Schwitters, Mann, Modiano, and Fosse. His own books include the novel Analog Days, the poetry volume The Mariner's Mirror, and The Inkblots, a history of the Rorschach test and biography of its creator. Ibrahim Fawzy is an Egyptian literary translator and writer. He is the translator of Hassan Akram's A Plan to Save the World (Sandorf Passage, 2026). His interests include translation studies, Arabic literature, ecocriticism, disability studies, and migration literature. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

The Philosophy of Translation (Yale UP, 2024) is a fresh, approachable, and convincing account of what translation really is and what translators actually do. As the translator of sixty books from multiple languages, Damion Searls has spent decades grappling with words on the most granular level: nouns and verbs, accents on people's names, rhymes, rhythm, “untranslatable” cultural nuances. In this book, he connects a wealth of specific examples to larger philosophical issues of reading and perception. Translation, he argues, is fundamentally a way of reading—but reading is much more than taking in information, and translating is far from a mechanical process of converting one word to another. This sharp and inviting exploration of the theory and practice of translation is for anyone who has ever marveled at the beauty, force, and movement of language. In this episode, Ibrahim Fawzy sat down with Damion Searls to discuss The Philosophy of Translation, exploring what it truly means to read as a translator, how grammar shapes worldview, and where creativity lives in the space between languages. Damion Searls studied philosophy at Harvard and is a prominent translator from German, Norwegian, French, and Dutch, including books by Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Rilke, Proust, Kielland, Jelinek, Schwitters, Mann, Modiano, and Fosse. His own books include the novel Analog Days, the poetry volume The Mariner's Mirror, and The Inkblots, a history of the Rorschach test and biography of its creator. Ibrahim Fawzy is an Egyptian literary translator and writer. He is the translator of Hassan Akram's A Plan to Save the World (Sandorf Passage, 2026). His interests include translation studies, Arabic literature, ecocriticism, disability studies, and migration literature. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/language

Adam Fox, the Rorschach test for knowing puck. Follow us on social media to get notified when we go live: Twitch: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠h⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ttps://www.twitch.tv/libertybluepod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/LibertyBluePod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: @LibertyBluePod YouTube (with video!): ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgUlZMmyl9mzR7wOMzt2gQg⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow the hosts: Andrew Chelney: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/ChelneyAndrew⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Nick Zararis: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/NickZararis⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Thanks to Jake Albi for creating the show open: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/everyNYRgoal⁠⁠ Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Asim, Amrita, and Sujoy revisit Kyun Ki — Priyadarshan's 2005 “romantic tragedy” starring Salman Khan, Kareena Kapoor, Jackie Shroff and Om Puri — and try to figure out what on earth happened. Is this a misunderstood melodrama? A chaotic remake experiment? Or peak mid-2000s Bollywood madness? From mental asylum tropes and questionable Rorschach tests to lobotomies, disco flashbacks, and one very tragic swimming pool, we unpack the film's wild tonal swings and that infamous ending. Expect the usual Khandaan mix of nostalgia, sharp side-eyes, soundtrack detours (hello Kunal Ganjawala), and a deep dive into Salman's mid-2000s era — plus a comparison to the original Malayalam version that Asim heroically watched for research. Referenced in this episode:• Salman Khan press conference clip: https://youtu.be/PSRteZ3LW3o?si=SA4hyjWfCy6FPGU-• Rediff article discussed: https://im.rediff.com/movies/2005/oct/31khan.htm ⏱️ 3. Optional Timestamps / Segments00:00 – Catch-ups & Salman's chaotic era05:10 – What even is Kyun Ki? Plot breakdown20:30 – Mental health, masala-fication & Priyadarshan remakes33:45 – The ending (yes, we spoil it)44:00 – Patreon picks & what's next

Ministry Monday is back with new episodes, new topics, and a new video intro and outro! If you haven't seen our podcast in its video form, check it out. The links are in the show notes of this episode at ministrymonday.org and at our YouTube page, youtube.com/npmlivestream. It's been a true joy to take a few weeks off of the podcast to gather these new conversations for upcoming episodes. I think you're going to like it. I'd also like to thank those who reached out asking why we hadn't returned yet from our Christmas break! It shows that you listen and enjoy the podcast, which is great news to us. We hope you keep listening this spring.Today we begin season 9 of the podcast. Our season begins with a conversation with Fr. Roc O'Connor, a Jesuit priest and founding member of the St. Louis Jesuits. Since October 2021, he has served as a staff member at the Bellarmine Jesuit Retreat House in Barrington, Illinois. Our conversation today centers around the Word of God. Fr. Roc's initial reflections to start our interview best reflect where we begin: "The Word is spoken. It can elicit feelings from attraction to aversion. These locate adults in relation to God, to Christ in the moment. It's how we become present to the Word." Fr. Roc joins us today from Barrington, Illinois.

Dale Smothers says this week has been haunted by the “AI Angel of Death” as software, financial services, and trucking & freight each got hit on AI-related worries. He thinks it's an overreaction, saying the incumbents will remain, and probably buy some of these AI startups and integrate them going forward. He likens the market to a Rorschach test, arguing investors are seeing the market through politicized angles. Dale goes over the latest jobs data and if rate cuts will actually be the stimulus the market hopes for.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Options involve risks and are not suitable for all investors. Before trading, read the Options Disclosure Document. http://bit.ly/2v9tH6DSubscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Connect With Us: ⁠Patreon⁠ | ⁠@yourdietsuckspod on instagramThe wellness industry wants you to believe your body is on fire. Tired? Inflamed. Bloated? Inflamed. Sad? Believe it or not, inflamed. But what does inflammation actually mean, and should athletes be worried about it?In this episode, we trace how inflammation went from a specific biological process to a wellness Rorschach test that can sell you anything from turmeric lattes to $200 supplement stacks. Zoë covers the history, from 1970s eicosanoid research to the glucose goddess's empire of banana fear, while Kylee breaks down what the research actually shows about anti-inflammatory diets.We cover the Mediterranean diet, elimination protocols like AIP, why sugar isn't the devil, why most inflammation claims come from rodent studies using absurd doses, and why under-fueling might be more inflammatory than anything in your pantry. Plus: why nightshades sound like a goth stripper.This Episode's Sponsors:rabbit — Code YDSFEB for 10% offOsmia — Code YDS20 for 20% offTailwind — Code YOURDIET20 for 20% offMicrocosm Coaching — Book a free consultationFull references, episode archive, and our advertising ethics policy at yourdietsuckspodcast.comHosted by: Zoë Rom & Kylee Van Horn, RDN

On this, our 311th Evolutionary Lens livestream, we discuss what is happening in Minneapolis. First: research finds that on average, men and women experience empathy differently: men do not have empathy for people who have done wrong; women have empathy for people regardless of context. Then: Was the Alex Pretti shooting by ICE officers in Minneapolis a cold-blooded murder, or a justified homicide? How would we know? Few of us were actual eye-witnesses to the scene, but our modern media environment tricks us into believing, unconsciously, that we know more than we do. This feels like Portland in 2020. We are being manipulated into disjunct narratives, taught to distrust and fear one another, at ever greater distance from simply being good neighbors and fellow citizens. Finally: an invitation to submit Covid Era Stories.*****Our sponsors:Xlear: Xylitol nasal spray that acts as prophylaxis against respiratory illnesses by reducing the stickiness of bacteria and viruses. Find Xlear online, or at your local pharmacy, grocery store, or natural products store.Caraway: Non-toxic, highly functional & beautiful cookware and bakeware. Save with Caraway's cookware set, and visit Carawayhome.com/DH10 to for an additional 10% off your next purchase.Masa Chips: Delicious chips made with corn, salt, and beef tallow—nothing else—in loads of great flavors. Go to masachips.com/DarkHorse, use code DarkHorse, for 25% off.*****Join us on Locals! Get access to our Discord server, exclusive live streams, live chats for all streams, and early access to many podcasts: https://darkhorse.locals.comHeather's newsletter, Natural Selections (subscribe to get free weekly essays in your inbox): https://naturalselections.substack.comOur book, A Hunter-Gatherer's Guide to the 21st Century, is available everywhere books are sold, including from Amazon: https://amzn.to/3AGANGg (commission earned)Check out our store! Epic tabby, digital book burning, saddle up the dire wolves, and more: https://darkhorsestore.org*****Mentioned in this episode:Singer et al 2006. Empathic neural responses are modulated by the perceived fairness of others. Nature, 439(7075): 466-469. Draft pdf: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2636868/pdf/ukmss-3669.pdfTucker Carlson and Tim Walz: https://x.com/tcnetwork/status/2016539262230184357Fox on Pretti: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX9y3612RloCNN on Pretti: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FR-fz57PEUCovid Era Stories: https://naturalselections.substack.com/p/covid-era-storiesSupport the show

Episode 88 Occupied by Tim Rich   Tim Rich reads ‘Occupied' and discusses the poem with Mark McGuinness. https://media.blubrry.com/amouthfulofair/media.blubrry.com/amouthfulofair/content.blubrry.com/amouthfulofair/88_Occupied_by_Tim_Rich.mp3 This poem is from: Dark Angels: Three Contemporary Poets Available from: Dark Angels is available from: The publisher: Paekakariki Press Amazon: UK   Occupied by Tim Rich We buttered the cat's pawsand baked bread in borrowed tinsto make the unfamiliar speak of pleasureand our intentions to remain All that first daythe house talked to itselfabout us Later than I expected, light withdrew across our table, unopened cratesback through thin glasstowards tomorrow So the room released its formand we sat among one anothergiving our ears to the conversation:inner doorways muttering behind flat hands; oak floors—masonic in their black treacle gloss—deciding whether to settleunder our presence Later still, in bed, I stared sideways into an unlit universe, absentlymindwalking the bounds,relocking iron door-bolts like an old rifle, drawingdrawn curtains a little closer,charting the evaporating pathbehind that plane's descent In time, each stray thought went to its home, leaving this accommodation to take place: the air held here sighing gently,like contented tortoise breaths; the softening percussion of bodies sleeping; the punctuating crack and hiss as fresh eggs are brokeninto a smoking pan; someoneopening a window   Interview transcript Mark: Tim, where did this poem come from? Tim: So, almost always for me, poems just emerge out of some sort of inner dusk. I'm not someone that can go to their desk with a plan to write about a particular message or topic or piece of content. The poem just presents itself to me. And actually I don't really have any choice in the matter. I'm sort of just forced to be a transcriber in that moment. And I was looking at the sea the other day, and I had this moment when I just thought my poems are a bit like strange sea creatures that live on the seabed. And at a particular point in their life, they decide that they just want to go to the light and they start floating up through the murky water and explode in bubbles on the surface. And, you know, hopefully I'm there sitting in the poet's boat ready to haul them on board. So, that's almost always how poems start for me. And this poem very much began that way. I was at home on a winter's evening, and it just began to come through me, as it were. And the context for that was that after many years of living in the same house, my wife and I were starting to think about the possibility of moving. And, you know, it was a really exciting prospect but also it definitely was stirring up the sediment of my unconscious. I'm someone that really feels the need for a settled home, a settled place, and this unsettled me. So, I think that that was what was giving the raw energy to the content. And there was something else, which is what informed the scenery of the poem, if you like, which is this idea of light withdrawing from a space and what that does within the space. And when I was 11, I was living just with my dad, and he would come home from work later than I would get home from school. So, for the first year or so, he arranged for me to go to some elderly neighbours on the way home from school. So I was, sort of, watched, and we would sit in their front room, and they would load up their coal fire. And through the windows, the sun would set slowly, and they were so calm. They would hardly speak. When they did speak, it was about these, kind of, wonderful domestic details like, you know, what needs to be chopped for dinner, or are there any windfalls in the garden that we can harvest tomorrow? It was very, very calm. And, you know, the coals in the fire were glowing red, but the rest of the room just lost its light. And I remember the shape of their very heavy old furniture, and the picture frames, and the curtains all began to disappear. And that must have just lodged somewhere deep within me, because that's very much, as the poem came out, where I was also taken to in my mind. Mark: So, I like this. So, I mean, to put it bluntly, it's not like you moved into a house and then you wrote this. You were thinking about moving and then a house emerged from your unconscious, from memories of other houses and so on. Tim: Yeah, yeah. Absolutely. Mark: And I think that's kind of a salutary thing to hear because… And this is a poem that really you read it and you totally believe it. It feels like a first-hand account of, well, we did this and this is what happened. And yet you're, kind of, pulling the rug from under our feet here, which is a nice thing in poetry. I think that you can't necessarily take it literally or face value. Tim: Well, we moved house… Yeah, we moved house about six months after I wrote the poem. So, I went through the experience of living the poem, which seems to be quite a good way around. Mark: Did you conjure the house, Tim? Tim: Actually, it was wonderful because it confirmed to me part of what motivated the poem, which is that I think we can all become a little bit… I don't know. Complacent seems to be too loaded a term, but we get so used to how our houses speak that we stop hearing them. And actually, there's this kind of wonderful symphony going on the whole time, you know, radiators making those strange percussive noises, and the way that the door squeaks, or suddenly, you know, how your staircase gets to a particular temperature in the middle of the night and decides to squeak. And they're constantly making these noises. And when you're living there, you stop hearing them. But when you move to somewhere for the first time, or sometimes if you go and stay in a haunted Airbnb in the woods, that first night particularly, everything's coming to you fresh. So, I think there's a strong sense of what's it like when a person moves into a space for the first time and that space has a character, and an energy, and a being of its own. Mark: So, really it's that state of heightened awareness, isn't it? You know, apparently this is how the mind works. If you've got a constant stimulus, the mind will tune it out. It's that Heaney line, you know, ‘The refrigerator whinnied into silence,' which is just that moment of… You only hear the fridge when it stops. Tim: Yeah. Mark: And what you're describing is the reverse of that. When you're in the house for the first time and everything is new and you're on hyperalert for the voices of the house. Tim: Yeah. And we're listening to our houses right now because there's a 1066 Line train from Hastings that's just gone into the tunnel over there. But we probably can't quite hear it on the microphones, but it's in the air and it's just touching elements of the house. And we're surrounded by this the whole time. And I think it's important to say, as soon as the poem had laid itself out on the page for the first time, it was clear to me that this poem was about people moving into a home for the first time, but it is also quite a vivid description, I think, of what was going through me at the time in terms of that unsettled nature. You know, I was quite surprised by the nature of the metaphors that my unconscious had presented me with. I mean, it's quite a portrait of anxiety to double-check the curtains, to lock a bolt as if it's an old rifle. You know, this is partly a portrait of an unsettled, anxious mind, which is, I think, something that I was going through at the time. Mark: And you've got some great similes, you know, the iron door bolts like an old rifle. And there's this lovely bit where you talk about ‘drawing drawn curtains'. And if you look on the website, then you can see that there's a line break after drawing, so it's drawing, line break, drawn curtains, which really just emphasises it's already drawn. You don't need to do it. This is the OCD kicking in, which really speaks to that anxiety you're describing. And I really love the second section where you say, ‘All that first day, the house talked to itself about us,' which is just a wonderfully unsettling idea that we are the intruders and the house has an opinion. Tim: Yeah, I definitely wasn't being sort of whimsically mystical about infrastructure and materials. It was definitely the feeling that there is an exchange when animals, human and other, come into a space. There's a change in energies and temperatures and sound and smells. And, you know, the dynamism of creatures come into a space that has been unoccupied, which is what generally most houses are, you know, sometimes for days, sometimes for months, and years before the new occupants come in. And I was just really taken with that idea that the house also needs to find its way of settling under these new occupants. And that seemed like a moment of 24 hours of the two parties eyeing each other and listening to each other and wondering about, ‘Who is this that I need to live with for these next years?' Mark: And it's quite a humbling poem, isn't it? Because, you know, when you think of owning the house or occupying the house, it's like you're the one in charge. But this poem just kind of subverts that idea that it's the house that's weighing us up, as in the people in the poem. It made me think of that TV series David Olusoga does, A House Through Time, where he gets an old house, and he goes through the records, and he looks at all the people who lived in the house and tells their story. And there's quite a lot of them, like, much more than I would have expected. You know, each episode goes on and on and on, and you just realise the house is staying there. The house is constant. These people, they're temporary. They might think they're the owners, but we're just passing through. Tim: We are passing through. It is a reminder of our mortality and our houses often way outlive us. Also, in recent years and decades, there's been an increase in the way in which people work from home, but that isn't a new thing. So, I wrote this poem in the house we lived in before, which was built to be a weaver's cottage, a live/work weaver's cottage. And, you know, they would find their living accommodation in quite modest corners of the house because a lot of it, at different times in the process, was given to equipment and storing material and a very intense version of live/work and working from home. And, you know, I think that part of when people suddenly a whole generation through particularly lockdowns but also just this change in working habits are spending much more of their life within the home quite often and what that means in terms of their relationship to the space and how the house relates to that. Tim: I think, just as I'm speaking, it occurs to me that perhaps also part of the influence of the atmosphere in the poem is around some of the fiction that I enjoy. And I haven't thought about this until we were talking now, but I like an M. R. James novel, or, you know, The Haunting of Hill House has just come to mind, and buildings and atmospheres that speak, as sort of some of the atmospheres you get in a Robert Aickman type horror novel. So, some of the classic British horror novels and that type of fiction. And just as we were talking about that, and I was also casting my eyes down the poem, there's some of the dusk that you get with those places, which is in this poem. And it's great, isn't it, coming back to one of your own poems quite a while after you wrote it, and you perhaps see some of the reasons for its being in a slightly different way. Mark: I mean, that's the basic premise of the haunted house is that the house is alive. I mean, you've not gone full Hammer Horror with this one. It's maybe a little more subtle, but you've definitely got some really wonderfully suggestive details. I loved ‘inner doorways muttering behind / flat hands, oak floors – masonic / in their black treacle gloss'. And that's so true. There are so many of these old houses. It's like, what happens to the wood? How does it get to be like treacle? And there's that heaviness and that opacity about it that you convey really well. Tim: Yeah. I was taken with the idea of the house being almost quite an august figure in some ways. It would be wrong to say it's proud of itself, but deciding whether to settle under our presence is quite… Mark: It's not aiming to please, is it? Tim: It's not. It's not easily won over. I mean, you know… Yeah, let's see what these new occupants are like. You know, what do they get up to? What are their tastes? What do we think of the prints that they put up on the wall? Mark: Yeah. Will they get it? Will they behave themselves? So you've got this lovely line in the third paragraph, ‘So the room released its form / and we sat among one another.' Well, thinking about the form of the poem, how close is this to, say, the first draft when you were hauling the sea creature out from the depths over the side of your poetic boat? Tim: Yeah, when the poem came out onto the page, it actually made a demand of me. It said, ‘I don't want you to put me into very organised type measures. I don't want to be sorted into regular stanzas. And also, I want you to be quite careful about any linguistic bells and whistles.' It just was a bit like the house. It had almost a sort of slightly stern feeling to it as a poem. It was very clear, and it was saying each of these stanzas, or scenes maybe, has to be as long as it wants to be. ‘I don't want you to spend time evening things up or creating consistency.' And there are many other poems that I've written where, of course, I'm deliberately very measured, very consistent. At the moment, a lot of the poems I'm writing have a lot of half rhymes but particularly a lot of internal rhymes. And, goodness, audaciously, you know, I even have a rhyming couplet in a poem that I'm working on at the moment. But this poem just said, ‘I don't want any of that.' Now, that's not to say that there aren't some half rhymes or suggestions of rhymes, and certainly some lovely withholding with words at the end of the line that only resolve as you move through into the next line, the enjambment of the word and the meaning falling over into the next line. Definitely that happens. But I tried to edit this into different shapes. I probably tried it five different ways, and each time it just felt wrong quite quickly actually. I tried to give it a consistent number of lines per stanza, and it repulsed me as a poem. It just said, ‘No, I need to be this free form.' And also, I had to accept that it's probably a little bit messier than I normally feel comfortable with. And it was good. I was like, ‘Actually, you know, just stop fighting. Just stop fighting it.' Sometimes your poems can be more irregular, more free, less obviously organised. And I think it has its rhythms that hold it together. It does for me. And listeners will decide, when they hear it, whether those rhythms are actually holding it together. Mark: Well, for me, it feels a bit like one of those old houses where you go in and there's not a right angle in sight. You know, the floors are sloping. The doors have to be a kind of trapezium to open and close, which I think is obviously true to the spirit of the thing. And it's like the house itself. It's not trying too hard. You can read it quite quickly, and it seems quite plain-spoken and spartan. But when you look, you notice the little details. Like, you know, there's the door bolts like a rifle, and the ‘nasonic', a wonderful adjective. And I've just noticed now, as we were talking, in the final verse, ‘In time, each stray thought / went to its home, leaving this / accommodation to take place'. And that's a lovely reframing of ‘accommodation', because the everyday sense is a place where you go and live, but it's an accommodation in the sense of a mutual alignment, almost like a negotiation or getting used to each other, which I think is really delightful. Mark: Okay, Tim, so I have to ask, looking again at the poem, what on earth is going on with buttering the cat's paws at the beginning? Tim: So, buttering the cat's paws is a bit of folk wisdom. And the idea is that when you move to a new house, if you have a cat or cats, that you actually put lovely, creamy butter on their paws and that they, you know, as cats do, will then spend time licking and licking and licking. And it means that more of their scent is put into the floor and the grounds of the place so they feel at home quicker and sooner. So they're sensing the place much more actively sooner. Now, I don't think there's any scientific evidence to suggest it works. But, you know, if anyone has any experience with this, I would love to hear it. But I don't really care, because the whole image of spreading beautiful, creamy butter onto the paws of the cat and that somehow just inviting them to feel that this place is home is more than enough for me. And I'd heard the phrase years and years and years before. And again, I think it was just the very first phrase that came out as the poem emerged. I think it was opening the doorway to the poem, and it felt very natural for it to be the beginning of the poem. I wonder now, looking back, whether there's something to do with the eye opened with an animal spirit. And so much of this poem really has come up from the unconscious. And I'm not starting with a very measured, conscious human, you know, activity or… I'm not saying, you know, ‘we made the decision to move'. It's not a person-led piece in the sense that, okay, we're doing the buttering, but it's the cat that's front and centre in that open line. And that's not something that I particularly thought about consciously at the time. But looking back, I think there's a hint there that we're not just talking about a straightforward human, rational response to living in a place. There are animal spirits too. Mark: Yeah, and it feels like a wonderful piece of folk magic. I mean, cats are magical creatures like witches' familiars. And, you know, maybe there's a magical aspect to that. It's a little ritual, isn't it? Tim: It is. I had a question for you, but it just came out of part of my experience of this poem going out into the world, which is that I've just been surprised, in a wonderful way, by how diverse and often surprising people's responses are to poems, how I can never really tell what it is about a poem someone's going to pick up and come back to you about. You know, for example, someone has given copies of this poem to friends when they move house. Mark: Oh, lovely. Tim: …as a housewarming present, a printed letterpress, which is very, very beautiful. Someone else said that they really loved sort of, what did they say, the soft absurdity around the house being almost this grand piece. And others have responded in different ways. And I think it's one of the wonders of poetry, maybe something that doesn't get talked about quite so much, which is that we interrogate the meaning for ourselves. And if you work with your editor and sometimes reviewers, meaning is discussed. But actually, my experience, when poems go out into the world, is it's just incredible how broad the range of response is and what people pick up on. And I suddenly think, well, is that just my experience? So what's it like for you? Are you constantly surprised by what people pick up and come back to and focus on with your poems? Mark: Yeah, it's a little bit like a Rorschach test, isn't it? People see themselves in it to a degree, or they see something that will resonate for them. And to me, it's the sign of a real poem if it can do that, if different people see different things in it. If it was too obvious and too, you know, two-dimensional, then that's fine, but it's not really a poem. And I think this is part of the magic of why poems can persist over time. Society is shifting all around them. Maybe a few of the houses are constant, but the poem still inhabits the space, and people still relate to it for decades or hundreds or even thousands of years sometimes. Tim: Yeah, I think there's an important point for poets that you have to maintain your confidence in ambiguity and what might feel like potential confusion. Of course, you need to think through how you're writing it and avoid unintended, poor consequences. But there's also a point in which I think you have to protect some of the messiness of meaning and not try to pin things down too much. Of course, there are different types of poets, and some poets need to be very clear and very message-driven. But I'm thinking, for me, there are sometimes moments when I think, ‘Am I just leaving this hanging and ambiguous and a bit dusky in terms of meaning?' And that's the point at which I think, ‘No, quite often just trust that people will find their own way into the poem.' Mark: Yeah, absolutely. And this is something I've seen a lot in classes, and it certainly happened to me very often. You know, the teacher will say you can cut the last line because we already get it. You don't need to underline the message of the poem. Sometimes we feel a bit nervous just leaving it hanging. And you've absolutely had the confidence to do that with the wonderful ending of this, where you talk about ‘the punctuating crack and hiss / as fresh eggs are broken / into a smoking pan. Someone / opening a window' – and that's it. I mean, tell me about that ending. How did you arrive at that? And did you go back and forth? Did you think, ‘Can I leave that window open, that line?' And by the way, listener, there is no full stop either to hang on to at that point! Tim: Yeah. I have to say, I do find myself clearing away more and more of the furniture of the poems. And there is a very deliberate lack of a full stop there. It was all there in the first draft that came out. It wasn't a constructed or reconstructed ending later on. Again, the poem seemed to want to open into something rather than close itself down and make a point. I think that in the action of the poem, we've moved through this dusky night, including a sort of bout of insomnia, of staring into the darkness. And then morning is coming, and it's full of new things. And there is something about that morning of waking up in a new house. What a moment in someone's life that is. Mark: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Tim: It's just extraordinary. And there's a natural link there into the egg as a symbol. Something new, something is being born. And yeah, there may be many reasons why that window needed to be open. The smoke from the pan is one thing, which is all about the… Mark: Right, right. Setting the smoke alarm off! Tim: Yeah, it goes off in our kitchen quite often. And of course, the cooking is, again, this thing of humans being in a house and occupying it and all of the energy and dynamics. And how are you most going to make a new home your own? You're going to get out and start cooking and making a mess and eating together and getting things moving. I have no idea who the someone is, and I don't know what their motivation is for opening a window. And I like that. Mark: Okay. Well, let's have another listen to the poem and maybe, you know, each of us, as we listen to this this time, just see what associations come up for you. You know, houses you've lived in, places you've been, memories it conjures up. Thank you very much, Tim. What a lovely space to explore with this poem.   Occupied by Tim Rich We buttered the cat's pawsand baked bread in borrowed tinsto make the unfamiliar speak of pleasureand our intentions to remain All that first daythe house talked to itselfabout us Later than I expected, light withdrew across our table, unopened cratesback through thin glasstowards tomorrow So the room released its formand we sat among one anothergiving our ears to the conversation:inner doorways muttering behind flat hands; oak floors—masonic in their black treacle gloss—deciding whether to settleunder our presence Later still, in bed, I stared sideways into an unlit universe, absentlymindwalking the bounds,relocking iron door-bolts like an old rifle, drawingdrawn curtains a little closer,charting the evaporating pathbehind that plane's descent In time, each stray thought went to its home, leaving this accommodation to take place: the air held here sighing gently,like contented tortoise breaths; the softening percussion of bodies sleeping; the punctuating crack and hiss as fresh eggs are brokeninto a smoking pan; someoneopening a window   Dark Angels: Three Contemporary Poets ‘Occupied' is from Dark Angels: Three Contemporary Poets, published by Paekakariki Press. Available from: Dark Angels is available from: The publisher: Paekakariki Press Amazon: UK     Tim Rich Tim Rich grew up in the woods of Sussex and now lives and writes by the sea in Hastings. His poems have been published in numerous anthologies and journals, including Dark Angels: Three Contemporary Poets (Paekakariki Press) and Poet Town (Moth Light Press). The Landfall series – exhibited at the Bloomsbury Festival, London — brought together his poetry and photography. He has five poems in the anthology Family Matters, a collection of poetry about family, to be published in 2026. Alongside poetry, Tim writes, edits and ghostwrites books.  timrich.com Photograph by Maxine Silver   A Mouthful of Air – the podcast This is a transcript of an episode of A Mouthful of Air – a poetry podcast hosted by Mark McGuinness. New episodes are released every other Tuesday. You can hear every episode of the podcast via Apple, Spotify, Google Podcasts or your favourite app. You can have a full transcript of every new episode sent to you via email. The music and soundscapes for the show are created by Javier Weyler. Sound production is by Breaking Waves and visual identity by Irene Hoffman. A Mouthful of Air is produced by The 21st Century Creative, with support from Arts Council England via a National Lottery Project Grant. Listen to the show You can listen and subscribe to A Mouthful of Air on all the main podcast platforms Related Episodes Occupied by Tim Rich Episode 88 Occupied by Tim Rich  Tim Rich reads ‘Occupied' and discusses the poem with Mark McGuinness.This poem is from: Dark Angels: Three Contemporary PoetsAvailable from: Dark Angels is available from: The publisher: Paekakariki Press Amazon: UK... Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold Episode 87 Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold  Mark McGuinness reads and discusses ‘Dover Beach' by Matthew Arnold.Poet Matthew ArnoldReading and commentary by Mark McGuinnessDover Beach By Matthew Arnold The sea is calm tonight.The tide is full, the moon lies... Recalling Brigid by Orna Ross Orna Ross reads and discusses ‘Recalling Brigid’ from Poet Town.

On episode 249, we welcome Jack El-Hai to discuss the Nuremberg trials and the recent film about them, the psychiatrist who analyzed Hermann Göring, Dr. Douglas Kelley's motivations for doing so, whether Nazis were monsters and if being human makes them scarier, how the results of Göring's Rorschach test reveled a narcissistic personality, the foundation of evil, Kelley's stifled ambitions and why his social contributions make his work meaningful, and the warnings in 'Nuremberg' about our political future. Jack El-Hai is an acclaimed author and journalist whose writing has appeared in The Atlantic, Smithsonian, GQ, Wired, Scientific American, Discover, and many other publications. He has written several acclaimed books — including The Lobotomist, The Lost Brothers, and Face in the Mirror — translated into more than twenty languages worldwide. His book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist inspired the major motion picture Nuremberg, which explores the psychological dimensions of the Nuremberg Trials. | Jack El-Hai | ► Website | https://www.el-hai.com  ► Twitter | https://x.com/Jack_ElHai  ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/jackelhai1 ► Bluesky | https://bsky.app/profile/jackelhai.bsky.social ► Linkedin | https://www.linkedin.com/in/jackelhai ► The Nazi and the Psychiatrist Book | https://amzn.to/4bBoBqf Where you can find us: | Seize The Moment Podcast | ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/SeizeTheMoment ► Twitter | https://twitter.com/seize_podcast ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/seizethemoment ► TikTok | https://www.tiktok.com/@seizethemomentpodcast

Please SUBSCRIBE to this channel!  Follow Slater on Instagram + TikTok: @investigatorslater  Join our Patreon family! (www.Patreon.com/PsychopediaPod) On Patreon, you'll get AD FREE episodes, Girl On Gore Season 2 episodes, merch discounts, exclusive content, extra true crime cases, pop quizzes, behind-the-scenes pics/vids, private group chats, and much more!  Trigger warning: This episode discusses the very difficult subject of child sexual abuse. Please listen with caution.Description: In 2016, Jason Vukovich decided the justice system wasn't doing its job — so, he took over. Jason launched a violent, one-man campaign against convicted pedophiles in Alaska, attacking his targets with fists, hammers, and years of unresolved pain and anger.  As a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, Jason openly framed his actions as punishment the justice system failed to deliver.  To supporters, he is a vigilante hero known as “The Alaskan Avenger.”  To law enforcement, he is a dangerous criminal and serial attacker who belongs behind bars.  To the public? A Rorschach test.  This explosive case collides trauma, rage, and moral certainty - and leaves us with one brutal question: when justice fails and revenge feels necessary, who's actually at fault? To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week, the shooting of 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Minneapolis has drawn new scrutiny of President Donald Trump's aggressive immigration enforcement push, and reactions have become something of a political Rorschach test. Meanwhile, Democrats such as Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. Mark Kelly (Arizona) are facing new challenges as they navigate attacks from Republican leaders. And the Trump administration continues to project defiance in the aftermath of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro's removal.“This is just one expression of raw American power after another,” says White House reporter Michael Birnbaum on this week's “Post Reports” politics roundtable.Michael spoke with host Colby Itkowitz and Dan Merica, co-anchor of the Early Brief newsletter, to unpack a jam-packed week of political news. Today's show was produced by Thomas Lu and Josh Carroll. It was edited by Martine Powers with help from Reena Flores and mixed by Sean Carter. Subscribe to The Washington Post here. And watch us on YouTube here.

The most consequential story remains Iran, where protests appear to be growing despite the regime shutting down the internet, a move that historically precedes lethal force. The scale of the demonstrations is difficult to verify, but the videos that do emerge suggest a population no longer content to absorb repression quietly. It is hard to separate this moment from the cascading effects of October 7, the regional dismantling of Hamas and Hezbollah, the fall of Syria, and the degradation of Iran's military capacity. Whether this becomes a true regime crisis is unknown, but it is unquestionably the most important story in the world right now.A Fatal ICE Encounter and a Nation Watching the Same Video DifferentlyDomestically, the killing of a 37 year old mother during an ICE operation in Minnesota has become a political Rorschach test. She was ordered out of her car, did not comply, put the vehicle in motion, and was shot by an ICE officer. Federal authorities have shut down any investigation, with Vice President J.D. Vance asserting absolute immunity. What is striking is not just the tragedy itself, but how confidently people draw opposite conclusions from the same footage. To Republicans, this is law enforcement under siege. To Democrats, it is evidence of authoritarian overreach. The incident hardens beliefs rather than persuading anyone new, which is precisely why it is politically potent.Texas Democrats and a Brutal Primary RealityThe Texas Senate race continues to clarify in uncomfortable ways for Democrats. Reporting suggests Republican maneuvering helped nudge Jasmine Crockett into the race, and the stylistic contrast with James Talarico could not be sharper. Crockett is relentless and confrontational. Talarico's first ad, by contrast, feels staged and overly polite. In a Texas Democratic primary, that is a problem. Style matters, and beating Crockett will require more than reasonableness. It will require a moment, a line, or a conflict that reframes the race entirely.Affordability, Power, and Trump UnfilteredDonald Trump's affordability push continued with a pledge to direct the purchase of mortgage bonds to drive down rates, paired with earlier proposals to restrict large institutional buyers from the housing market. Whether these ideas work is secondary to the political intent. Trump wants to be seen doing something on costs. His two hour interview with The New York Times reinforced that worldview. He openly dismissed international law as a constraint, embraced coercive diplomacy, and framed power as its own justification. It was Trump without the volume turned all the way up, which may be the most revealing version of him.Chapters:00:00:00 - Intro00:01:50 - Iran00:04:20 - ICEf00:11:59 - Texas Races00:16:11 - Interview with Reese Gorman00:52:23 - Update00:52:46 - Mortgages00:54:34 - Trump's NYT Interview00:56:54 - Tariffs00:59:00 - Interview with Stella Tsantekidou01:32:50 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

In Minneapolis, the ICE shooting of Renee Good is a Rorschach test. The Bible speaks of the “rabble” from the "mixed multitude" of Numbers, craving comfort and stirring grievance, to the mob in Acts 17 whose fury drives them to a different city to cause trouble. Let us learn to beware the "rabble" of the Old and New Testaments.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Minneapolis, the ICE shooting of Renee Good is a Rorschach test. The Bible speaks of the “rabble” from the "mixed multitude" of Numbers, craving comfort and stirring grievance, to the mob in Acts 17 whose fury drives them to a different city to cause trouble. Let us learn to beware the "rabble" of the Old and New Testaments.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Minneapolis, the ICE shooting of Renee Good is a Rorschach test. The Bible speaks of the “rabble” from the "mixed multitude" of Numbers, craving comfort and stirring grievance, to the mob in Acts 17 whose fury drives them to a different city to cause trouble. Let us learn to beware the "rabble" of the Old and New Testaments.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Minneapolis, the ICE shooting of Renee Good is a Rorschach test. The Bible speaks of the “rabble” from the "mixed multitude" of Numbers, craving comfort and stirring grievance, to the mob in Acts 17 whose fury drives them to a different city to cause trouble. Let us learn to beware the "rabble" of the Old and New Testaments.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Epstein files keep coming out, and instead of clarity, they are producing something far messier: suspicion without resolution and outrage without proof.What we are seeing now is not the mythical document many people imagine, a clean list pairing powerful men with specific criminal acts. That list does not exist. What exists are FBI files and grand jury materials filled with allegations, some credible, some vague, many never fully investigated. The result is a widening cloud of suspicion over a long list of names, with no clear answers about who did what or why prosecutors failed to act when they had the chance.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.That ambiguity is why this release satisfies no one. New documents, like the bizarre and possibly fake letter to Larry Nassar attributed to Epstein after his death, only deepen confusion rather than resolve it. If the Trump administration delayed releasing these files out of fear of what they contained, that decision backfired badly. The slow drip has turned the Epstein case into a permanent Rorschach test, where everyone sees what they already believe. Until the Justice Department explains what it has, what it does not, and why accountability failed for so long, the Epstein story will remain unresolved and corrosive.Chapters00:00 - Intro01:39 - Epstein05:16 - Tevi Troy on Lame Duck Presidents49:41 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

This week, Shat The Movies dives headfirst into early-2000s suburban dread with Donnie Darko, the cult classic that launched a thousand dorm-room debates and taught a generation to fear jet engines and men in bunny suits. Commissioned by listeners Wes and Fernando, this episode tackles Richard Kelly's time-bending, angst-soaked sci-fi drama that somehow feels even more relevant today. Gene and Big D unpack Jake Gyllenhaal's star-making performance, the film's iconic '80s soundtrack, and whether Donnie Darko is a brilliant meditation on fate and free will—or just an elaborate emo Rorschach test. Along the way, they debate self-help gurus, creepy motivational speakers, suburban hypocrisy, and why this movie hits differently depending on when you first saw it. Is Donnie Darko a misunderstood masterpiece or a pretentious puzzle box that gets more credit than it deserves? Grab your Philosophy of Time Travel and find out. Subscribe Now Android: https://www.shatpod.com/android Apple/iTunes: https://www.shatpod.com/apple Help Support the Podcast Contact Us: https://www.shatpod.com/contact Commission Movie: https://www.shatpod.com/support Support with Paypal: https://www.shatpod.com/paypal Support With Venmo: https://www.shatpod.com/venmo Shop Merchandise: https://www.shatpod.com/shop Theme Song - Die Hard by Guyz Nite: https://www.facebook.com/guyznite

Jared is joined by comedian and longtime friend Greg Stone for a classic Chit Chat Wednesday full of derailments, dad life, and perfectly unhinged takes. They spiral from a broken sponsor e-bike into NDAs, Hollywood rumors, and why Greg absolutely cannot be trusted with secrets. The conversation jumps to toys, parenting, Christmas gifts, and Greg's very intense opinions on action figures, trains, and ruining his own kids' expectations. Then they play a rapid-fire 2025 Rorschach test, breaking down viral moments like the Coldplay kiss cam, Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce, Katy Perry in space, and the mysterious 6-7 trend. It's loose, chaotic, and exactly what happens when two comedians let each other cook.Jared is on tour!

Aristocratic chaos agent Hedda Gabler isn't a character. She's a Rorschach test, and has been for over a century now. Since first appearing in 1891 as the puzzling eponymous protagonist of a play by Henrick Ibsen, audiences have stared into at this recently married woman, driven by domestic suffocation into acts of destruction, and found different meanings, reflective of who they are, reflective of their politics and personal struggles. Is she a beacon of feminist freedom, lashing out at the restraints forced upon her by a misogynistic upper class? Is she a tragic figure, numbed then maddened by the spiritual emptiness of a bourgeois life? Or is she more simply put, a monster - someone so bored, she seeks entertainment in the destruction of others?In writer-director Nia DaCosta's new take on the character, starring frequent collaborator Tessa Thompson, she's perhaps all of the above and more – this is a queer retelling that fizzes with intrigue and nuance and a kinda Brat Summer-era celebration of feminine messiness. Today on Script Apart, a podcast about the first draft secrets of great movies and TV shows, Nia joins me to talk about the thematic through line in her work, connecting Hedda with her 2018 thriller Little Woods and her 2023 foray into superhero cinema, The Marvels. We get into her fascination with unconventional women on-screen, the literature in her childhood that led her to Hedda and every important spoiler plot point from this new adaptation.Script Apart is hosted by Al Horner and produced by Kamil Dymek. Follow us on Instagram, or email us on thescriptapartpodcast@gmail.com.To get ad-free episodes and exclusive content, join us on Patreon.Get coverage on your screenplay by visiting ScriptApart.com/coverage. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We're joined this week by Brandon Sheffield — director at Necrosoft Games and cohost of the fantastic Insert credit podcast — for a conversation about making games, making Demonschool specifically, and making a version of Rorschach who is somehow even worse than the original. Afterwards, we have a conversation about the highs and lows of Metroid Prime 4: Beyond, a game we are deeply conflicted about.Discussed: Demonschool, Metroid Prime 4: BeyondFind us everywhere: https://intothecast.onlineBuy some merch, if you'd like: https://shop.intothecast.onlineJoin the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/intothecast---Follow Stephen Hilger: https://bsky.app/profile/stephenhilger.bsky.social Follow Brendon Bigley: https://bsky.app/profile/bb.wavelengths.onlineProduced by AJ Fillari: https://bsky.app/profile/ajfillari.bsky.social---Season 8 cover art by Scout Wilkinson: https://scoutwilkinson.myportfolio.com/Theme song by Will LaPorte: https://ghostdown.online/---Timecodes:(00:00) - Intro (00:14) - Demonschool | Brandon Sheffield is here! (01:05:04) - Break (01:05:05) - Metroid Prime 4: Beyond | I will not make a Myles joke. I will not make a Myles joke. I will not make a Myles joke. I will not make a Myles joke. (01:57:34) - Wrapping up ---Thanks to all of our amazing patrons, including our Eternal Gratitude members:Ed AJ-RockSamantha DNorth HeroSam HSnzznBertitoJ-RockGregory Mark SCmndr BiscuiticemanChristian HRydan BCaleb HArden FEye of the DuckKaleNathan EJ. H. AjoelchronoMellowMatthew BRobin LPSeekingSeakingJimmerszoey!Vinny MMattKerry KBrian MNoah DZach DChristopher TDHugo WToddChris BLukerfuffleStephen YDaniel GEric FTaran WBrendan OChris ZClayton MZach RGriffinDylan NFederico VTigerz RevengeLogan HAlan RJohn AMike LmattjanzzDavid MHeavyPixelsKaleb HTyler JCorey ZSusan HBarry TRobert RChris JBrett Allen HDan SJack SGarrett CjimiiboJohn HDirch FJim EJim WTristan LEvan BAwfulHanzomin2Aaron GJean HTodd Nred_wagonNeilPeter BJohn VvErik MRedmage77Joshua JTony LDanny KGibson GKate Duncan BRichard MDaniel NSeth MJamesAndy HDemoEmmaLyn ECorey TCaleb WJake LJesse WMike TCodesMatt BWesleymebezacAlex LSergio LninjadeathdogRory BA42PoundMooseRobert MMichael WAndrewthis_JUSTINRyan O14.3 billion yearsBrendan KMegan BSecretAgentKoalaNoah OArcturusAndrew WhepaheChase ALoveDiesNick QChris MRBKaren HAdam FScott HAlexander SMatt HMurrayDavid PJason KMicah OKamrin HAndrew DKyle SPhilip N ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Mohanad Elshieky joins Funny You Should Mention with stories that make Benghazi feel less like a political Rorschach test and more like the small town where he learned comedy by roasting his siblings and dodging unlicensed militias. He walks us through the dictatorship-era silence around politics, the sudden rise of ISIS-adjacent checkpoints, and the knife-wielding "helper" who hijacked his car only to request a future hangout. We also dig into the Greyhound incident that vaulted him into national headlines, why clapter makes his skin crawl, and how Portland's well-meaning curiosity can feel like its own border crossing. Produced by Corey Wara Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠thegist@mikepesca.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ To advertise on the show, contact ⁠⁠⁠⁠ad-sales@libsyn.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ or visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://advertising.libsyn.com/TheGist⁠⁠⁠⁠ Subscribe to The Gist: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠ Subscribe to The Gist Youtube Page: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4_bh0wHgk2YfpKf4rg40_g⁠⁠⁠⁠ Subscribe to The Gist Instagram Page: ⁠⁠⁠⁠GIST INSTAGRAM⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow The Gist List at: ⁠⁠⁠⁠Pesca⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Profundities | Mike Pesca | Substack⁠⁠⁠⁠

This week on Sinica, I speak with Zhong Na, a novelist and essayist whose new piece, "Murder House," appears in the inaugural issue of Equator — a striking new magazine devoted to longform writing that crosses borders, disciplines, and cultures. In January 2024, a young couple, both Tsinghua-educated Google engineers living in a $2.5 million Silicon Valley home, became the center of a tragedy that captivated Chinese social media far more than American outlets. Zhong Na explores how the case became a collective Rorschach test — a mirror held up to contemporary Chinese society, exposing cracks in the myths of meritocracy, the prestige of global tech firms, and shifting notions of gender, class, and the Chinese dream itself. We discuss the gendered reactions online, the dimming of America's appeal, the emotional costs of the immigrant success story, and the craft of writing about tragedy with compassion but without sentimentality.5:06 – How the story first reached Zhong Na, and the Luigi Mangione comparison 7:05 – Discovering she attended the same Chengdu high school as the alleged murderer Chen Liren 8:10 – The collaboration with Equator and Joan Didion's influence 10:30 – Education, class, and the cracks in China's meritocracy myth 16:01 – Tiger mothers vs. lying flat: two responses to a rigged system 19:12 – The pandemic and the dimming of the American dream 22:49 – Chinese men as perpetrators: immigrant stress and the loss of patriarchal privilege 25:56 – The gender war online: moral autopsy and victim-blaming 30:25 – The obsession with the ex-girlfriend and attraction to the accused 34:37 – The murder house, Chinese numerology, and the rise of Gen Z metaphysics 37:08 – Geopolitics, the China Initiative, and rethinking America as a destination 39:42 – Craft and moral compass: learning from Didion and Janet Malcolm 42:31 – Zhong Na's fiction: writing Chinese experiences without catering to Western expectationsPaying it forward: Gavin Jacobson and the editorial team at EquatorRecommendations: Zhong Na: Elsewhere by Yan Ge Kaiser: Made in Ethiopia, documentary by Xinyan Yu and Max Duncan (available on PBS)See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Monday's selloff rattled the entire market—Bitcoin, equities, commodities, you name it. But beneath the volatility, something more structural may be happening. In this week's Bits + Bips, Austin Campbell, Ram Ahluwalia, Chris Perkins, and B+B OG previous host Alex Kruger break down one of the most confusing macro weeks of the year. They debate why high-beta assets snapped, whether a rotation into quality is underway, why institutions seem unfazed even as retail stays skittish, and share initial thoughts on Vanguard finally allowing clients to buy crypto. The crew also unpacks Strategy's chaotic comments about selling BTC, the Clarity Act's political hurdles, the CME outage that exposed systemic fragility, and the never-ending debate over Tether—profitability, reserves, and what institutions actually want from a stablecoin issuer. Sponsors: Uniswap Mantle Hosts: Ram Ahluwalia, CFA, CEO and Founder of Lumida Austin Campbell, NYU Stern professor and founder and managing partner of Zero Knowledge Consulting Christopher Perkins, Managing Partner and President of CoinFund Guest: Alex Kruger, founder of Asgard   Timestamps: