Podcasts about rousseau

För många historieintresserade är 1700-talet nära förknippat med den europeiska upplysningstiden. Det var då, menar många, som människor började vända vidskepelse och okunnighet ryggen och i stället sätta sin tro till förnuft, vetenskap och framtidstro. Upplysningens centrala gestalter – tänkare som Montesquieu, Voltaire och Rousseau – har därför blivit självklara inslag i den historiska allmänbildningen.Men vad var egentligen upplysningen? Här går meningarna isär. Vissa forskare betraktar den som en i huvudsak fransk elitkultur, förankrad i Paris salonger och utan djupare folklig påverkan. Andra ser upplysningen som en bred intellektuell rörelse som genomsyrade hela Europa, med inflytande långt utanför aristokratin – inte minst i borgerliga kretsar i England, Sverige och andra delar av kontinenten.Begreppet upplysning omfattar dessutom en rad samtidiga fenomen: religionskritik och begynnande sekularisering, jordbruksreformer, liberalismens första uttryck, den vetenskapliga revolutionen, naturvetenskapliga upptäckter, politiska idéer om maktdelning och samhällsomvandling – från reformistiska envåldshärskare till utopiska socialister – samt en stark vilja att sprida kunskap, bildning och folkbildning.I detta avsnitt av Harrisons dramatiska historia samtalar historikern Dick Harrison och fackboksförfattaren Katarina Harrison Lindbergh om upplysningstidens komplexitet och mångfacetterade arv – en idérevolution som fortfarande präglar vårt samhälle.Bildtext: Les salons au XVIIIe siècle, målad av Anicet Charles Gabriel Lemonnier, visar en litterär salong i upplysningstidens Frankrike där intellektuella och aristokrater samlas för samtal och idéutbyte. Salongerna spelade en central roll i spridningen av upplysningsidéer och formandet av den offentliga opinionen under 1700-talet. Wikipedia (Public Domain).Klippare: Emanuel Lehtonen Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nous recevonsJacques Legros et Carole Rousseau pour l'émission : « Plein les yeux #2 », mercredi 4 mars sur RMC Story.Les vendredi et samedi à 20h sur France 5, Mohammed Bouhafsi et toute son équipe accueillent les personnalités qui font l'actualité.

Building a Business with Heart (and Chocolate!!!): Nathalie Rousseau of Rousseau ChocolatierThis week on Overflow, I'm so excited to welcome Nathalie Rousseau, co-founder of ROUSSEAU Chocolatier — a woman whose story blends artistry, discipline, leadership, and heart in the most delicious way.ROUSSEAU Chocolatier is a four-time Silver winner at the International Academy of Chocolate Awards in London, and their creations have been part of moments of diplomacy and national celebration — including the Coronation of King Charles, where their chocolates were opened live on television. Today, their collections are carried by luxury hotels and five-star properties across Canada, and they collaborate with celebrated wineries and local producers across the country.What I love most? ROUSSEAU is a women-owned, WBE-certified business, and Nathalie is scaling it with vision — nationally and internationally.Truly, this conversation is about more than chocolate.It's about building a business with soul.It's about leading as a woman without abandoning yourself.It's about scaling success without sacrificing lifestyle.Nathalie shares her journey from living and working in France to building a family-run chocolate company in Nova Scotia. Truly, grounded in land, story, and artistry. Nathalie shares what it truly means to live and lead in your Overflow — where business growth meets personal alignment.From France to Founding.Scaling without selling your soul, love and values.marriage and business partnership. Truly collaboration. Clear roles and shared vision.Leading with heart. Learning and following the nudge!This conversation celebrates a woman who is not hustling for validation — she is building from alignment. From land. From love. From legacy. .... and I believe, THAT is Overflow.If this episode resonates, please share it with a woman entrepreneur who is building boldly and beautifully.And as always, ask yourself:Where am I growing — and where am I overflowing?

Wird das die verzwickteste Podcastfolge aller Zeiten Jonoir_fragrance und RiotScents haben zweifellos ein feines Näschen – doch reicht das aus, um in dieser Folge zu bestehen? Ich habe den beiden Duftdetektiven sechs knifflige Dufträtsel gestellt, die es in sich haben. Sollten sie einmal nicht weiterwissen, wartet zu jedem Rätsel ein passendes Sample als zusätzliche Spur. Doch wird das genügen? Schaffen es Jona und Riot, alle Düfte zu entlarven oder scheitern sie kläglich an den ausgeklügelten Rätseln, die Luke für sie vorbereitet hat? Und auch ihr seid gefragt!Die Community darf natürlich fleißig miträtseln – und für den/die Klügsten und Schnellsten unter euch gibt es sogar eine Belohnung. Also knobelt mit, stellt eure Vermutungen an und findet den gesuchten Duft.Viel Spaß bei der wohl rätselhaftesten Folge der Parfümwelt!Account von Parfümwelt (aka Luke):https://wonderl.ink/@parfuemweltZum Account von Jona:https://wonderl.ink/@jonoir_fragranceAccount von RiotScents:https://wonderl.ink/@riotscentsDie Rätsel:Den Namen des Duftes, das sei euch klar,verrate ich nur zum Teil – sonst wär die Lösung zu nah.Ich bin ein kleines Land, doch meine orange Krone steht heute fern, vor einem großen Festland liege ich, dem Meer sehr nah und gern. Von Wasser umgeben, doch Regen ist rar,Sonne und Sand bestimmen mein Jahr.Mein großer Nachbar, erst überfallen,um sich die Ressourcen gänzlich zu krallen.Wisst ihr nicht, wer ich bin? Sucht mich auf den Karten, das macht doch Sinn! Nicht von der Schönheit geformt, wie oft benannt, sondern von Pilkington, dem original jGangster und geübter Meisterhand.Es ist nicht ihrer, auch nicht seiner,also ist es …?Quelle est la solution? Doch das Rätsel ist hier nicht zu Ende,doch lesen müsst ihr nur dies hier – keine ganzen Bände.Ich komme aus Indonesien, Indien oder Haiti,nicht jeder findet, dass ich rieche sehr pretty.Ein bis zwei Meter meine Länge,doch die wahre Power steckt –wie beim Manne – im Gehänge.Trockne mich und mach mich heiß,so wie es schon die Urväter machten einst.Holzig, rauchig, erdig, schön,kannst du mich in vielen grundlegenden Düften sehn.Mein Vater Poseidon, mein Bruder Krisaor,meine Heimat die Erde – und zwar überall dort.Ich stehe für Freiheit, hoch oben im Licht,die Amazonen einst liebte ich nicht.Wenn es heute Nacht wird, dann blicke nach oben,dort trug ich die Blitze von Götternund wurde zum Dank in den Himmel gehoben.Rousseau, Voltaire und Victor Hugo kenne ich gut,denn durch sie fließt ein ähnliches Blut.Auch aus dem Lande, da komme ich her,nur ein Mensch bin ich nicht, jetzt wird das Rätsel gar schwer.Ich stelle den Menschen in mein Zentrum hinein,Vernunft ist mein Maßstab, mein Denken, mein Sein.Ich wähle die Freiheit, nicht blindes Gesetz,und trage Verantwortung – bewusst bis zuletzt.Mein Haus ist ein großes, im Lande bekannt,brannten erst Cognacs, bevor Parfüm hier entstand.Ich bin kein Acker und auch kein Feld,doch kennt ihr mich gut, denn euch gefällt's.Für Mensch, Tier und Natur bin ich wichtig und breit,mehr als nur Fläche – voll Dauer und Zeit.Ich bin nicht einer, ich bin sehr viele,mein Alter liest man in den Zuwachslinien.Was jedes Kind schon früh versteht:Hier ist man leis, wenn man mich betritt.Kein Rufen, Brüllen oder Kreischen,Achtsamkeit müsst ihr hier leisten.Nun sprecht die beiden, die euch bekannt,leise in Sprache, die euch wohlbekannt.Gesucht ist ein konzentrierter Auszug aus der Substanz,doch riecht er für euch sehr intensiv mit viel Glanz.Kommt ihr nicht drauf, was ich wohl meine,dann schließt eure Augen – das Gesehene notiere ich als das Zweite, Feine.Manchmal hilft es, ein Stück zurückzugehen,um Erisile schließlich auch zu verstehen.Werbung | TransparenzhinweisIn dieser Folge werden Marken genannt und Produkte vorgestellt. Es können Kooperationen mit genannten Marken oder Unternehmen bestehen oder bestanden haben. Die Kennzeichnung erfolgt vorsorglich und aus Gründen der Transparenz.

Cuando Rousseau hizo su propuesta filosófica, negó la naturaleza caída del hombre y habló de una bondad sofocada por la sociedad. Ese fue el inicio del “hombre psicológico” de hoy, que sospecha de toda institución que limite sus deseos y cuya autenticidad reside en expresar su interior.SÍGUENOSSitio web: http://biteproject.com​​​x: https://twitter.com/biteproject​​​Podcast: https://anchor.fm/biteprojectTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@biteprojectInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/biteproject/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/biteproject/​​​Créditos:Producido por: Giovanny Gómez Pérez y Pilar PrietoMúsica: Envato Elements Generación de voces: Daniel ÁngelEdición de sonido y música: Jhon Montaña

“Face au ciel” Paul Huet en son tempsau Musée de la Vie romantique, Parisdu 14 février au 30 août 2026Entretien avec Gaëlle Rio, conservatrice générale du Patrimoine, directrice du Musée de la Vie Romantique, et co-commissaire de l'exposition,par Anne-Frédérique Fer, à Paris, le 24 février 2026, durée 40'22,© FranceFineArt.https://francefineart.com/2026/02/25/3693_paul-huet_musee-de-la-vie-romantique/Communiqué de presseCommissariat :Gaëlle Rio, conservatrice générale du patrimoine, directrice du musée de la Vie romantiqueDominique Lobstein, commissaire scientifique de l'exposition« Face au ciel, Paul Huet en son temps » présente l'œuvre de l'artiste Paul Huet (1803-1869) à travers le motif pictural du ciel. Peintre encore peu connu du grand public, ce proche d'Ary Scheffer est souvent considéré comme l'un des précurseurs du paysage romantique en France. Inspiré par les grands maîtres anglais comme Constable et Turner, il exprime dans ses œuvres les émotions et la puissance de la nature en rompant avec la tradition classique.Qualifié de « pré-impressionniste », Paul Huet a marqué son temps et influencé de nombreux artistes paysagistes comme Camille Corot. Son œuvre et son expérience de la peinture de ciel sont mises en regard de celles de ses contemporains afin de mieux apprécier sa singularité et son rôle dans cette époque foisonnante. Grâce à de nombreux prêts issus des collections publiques françaises, ses ciels sont ainsi présentés aux côtés de ceux de Paul Flandrin, Eugène Delacroix, Théodore Rousseau, Georges Michel, Eugène Isabey ou Eugène Boudin.À la découverte du paysageLongtemps, la peinture de paysage a été considérée comme un genre mineur, simple décor dépourvu de véritable sujet. À la fin du XVIIIe siècle, sous l'impulsion du peintre Pierre-Henri de Valenciennes et de ses publications, la pratique du paysage évolue et attire l'attention d'un nombre croissant d'artistes. En 1816, grâce à son influence, l'Académie des beaux-arts crée le prix de Rome de paysage historique. Organisé tous les quatre ans, ce concours reflète l'enseignement de l'École des beaux-arts et les traités alors en vigueur, qui imposent des compositions très codifiées. Ces règles strictes – intégration obligatoire d'un sujet historique ou mythologique, structure du paysage normée, usage des couleurs défini – sont de plus en plus perçues comme un frein à l'invention. Jugé trop rigide, le prix est finalement supprimé en 1863. Plusieurs événements contribuent également à faire évoluer la peinture de paysage. Les artistes découvrent d'abord la peinture anglaise – celle de Constable, Turner ou Bonington –, admirée pour sa lumière et sa spontanéité bien avant sa présentation remarquée au Salon de 1824. Par ailleurs, les artistes dits « réalistes » s'éloignent des traditions académiques et proposent une nouvelle approche de la représentation de la nature. Ils travaillent sur le motif, directement face au paysage, et s'inspirent des observations scientifiques sur la lumière et les phénomènes atmosphériques.[...]Réouverture du Musée de la Vie RomantiqueAprès 17 mois de travaux, le musée de la Vie romantique s'apprête à rouvrir ses portes au public le 14 février prochain. Depuis septembre 2024, le musée — accompagné par Basalt Architecture et l'atelier àkiko Designers — mène une opération majeure de restauration de la maison et des ateliers du peintre Ary Scheffer.[...] Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Apparenté à la Commedia dell'arte, le dramaturge Carlo Goldoni a toujours voulu s'en affranchir. Parcours d'un doux rebelle, de Venise à Paris, qui veut susciter « le sourire dans l'âme » pour combattre sa mélancolie.Plongez dans l'histoire des grands personnages et des évènements marquants qui ont façonné notre monde ! Avec enthousiasme et talent, Franck Ferrand vous révèle les coulisses de l'histoire avec un grand H, entre mystères, secrets et épisodes méconnus : un cadeau pour les amoureux du passé, de la préhistoire à l'histoire contemporaine.Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Is Edmund Burke really the founder of modern conservatism? What do his insights into prejudice, natural law, and divine providence mean for us today? Was he justified in opposing the French Revolution so strongly? Find out as we discuss Chapter 2 of Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind!Follow us on X!Give us your opinions here!

Hello Interactors,Watching all the transnational love at the Olympics has been inspiring. We're all forced to think about nationalities, borders, ethnicities, and all the flavors of behavioral geography it entails. After all, these athletes are all there representing their so-called “homeland.” And in the case of Alysa Liu, her father's escape from his. Between the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and the fall of the Berlin wall, “homeland” took on new meaning for many immigrants. This all took me back to that time and the start of my own journey at Microsoft at the dawn of a new global reality.HOMELAND HATCHED HEREWith all the focus on Olympics and immigration recently, I've found myself reflecting on my days at Microsoft in the 90s. As the company was growing (really fast), teams were filling up with people recruited from around the world. There were new accents in meetings, new holidays to celebrate, and yummy new foods and funny new words being introduced. This thickening of transnational ties made Redmond feel as connected the rest of the world as the globalized software we were building. By 2000 users around the world could switch between over 60 languages in Windows and Office. In behavioral geography terms, working on the product and using the product made “here” feel more connected to “elsewhere.”This influx of new talent was all enabled by the Immigration Act of 1990. Signed by George H. W. Bush, it increased and stabilized legal pathways for highly skilled immigrants. This continued with Clinton era decisions to expand H-1B visa allocations that fed the tech hiring boom. I took full advantage of this allotment recruiting and hiring interaction designers and user researchers from around the world. In the same decade the federal government expanded access to the United States, it also tightened security. Terrorism threats, especially after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, spooked everyone. Despite this threat, there was more domestic initiated terrorism than outside foreign attacks. The decade saw deadly incidents like the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 by radicalized by white supremacist anti-government terrorists, which killed 168 and injured hundreds, making it the deadliest terrorist attack in U.S. history before 9/11.A year later, the Atlanta Olympic bombing and related bombings by anti-government Christian extremists caused multiple deaths and injuries. Clinic bombings and shootings by anti-abortion extremists began in 1994 with the Brookline clinic shootings and continued through the 1998 Birmingham clinic bombing. These inspired more arsons, bombings, and shootings tied to white supremacist, anti-abortion, and other extreme ideologies.Still, haven been shocked by Islamist extremists in 1993 (and growing Islamic jihadist plots outside the U.S.) the federal government adopted new security language centered on protecting the “homeland” from outside incursions. In 1998, Clinton signed Presidential Decision Directive 62, titled “Protection Against Unconventional Threats to the Homeland and Americans Overseas,” a serious counterterrorism document whose title quietly normalized the term homeland inside executive governance.But there was at least one critical voice. Steven Simon, Clinton's senior director for counterterrorism on the National Security Council, didn't think “Defense of the Homeland” belonged in a presidential directive.Simon's retrospective argument is that “homeland” did more than name a policy, it brought a territorial logic of legitimacy that the American constitution had historically resisted. He recalls the phrase “Defense of the Homeland” felt “faintly illiberal, even un-American.” The United States historically grounded constitutional legitimacy in civic and legal abstractions (people, union, republic, human rights) rather than blood rights or rights to soil. Membership was to be mediated by institutions, employment, and law rather than ancestry.“Homeland” serves as a powerful cue that suggests a mental model of ‘home' and expands it to encompass a nation. This model is accompanied by a set of spatial inferences that evoke familiarity, appeal, and even an intuitive sense. However, it also creates a sense of a confined interior that can be breached by someone from outside.This is rooted in place attachment that can be defined as an affective bond between people and places — an emotional tie that can anchor identity and responsibility. But attachment is not the same thing as ownership. Research on collective psychological ownership shows how groups can come to experience a territory as “ours.” This creates a sense of ownership that can be linked to a perceived determination right. Here, the ingroup is entitled to decide what happens in that place while sometimes feeding a desire to exclude outsiders. When the word “homeland” was placed at the center of statecraft it primed public reasoning from attachment of place through care, stewardship, and shared fate toward property ownership through control, gatekeeping, and exclusion. It turns belonging into something closer to a property claim.What makes the 1990s especially instructive from a geography perspective is that “access” itself was being administered through institutions that are intensely spatial: consulates, ports of entry, employer locations, housing markets, and the micro-geographies of office life. The H-1B expansions was not simply generosity, but a form of managed throughput in a system designed to meet labor demand. And it was paired with political assurances about enforcement and domestic worker protections.Mid-decade legal reforms strengthened enforcement by authorities in significant ways. Mechanisms for faster removals and stricter interior enforcement reinforced the idea that the state could act more decisively within the national space. The federal government found ways to expand legal channels that served economic objectives while also building a governance style increasingly comfortable with interior control. “Homeland” helped supply the conceptual bridge that made that socioeconomic coexistence feel coherent.It continues to encourage a politics of boundary maintenance that determines who counts as inside, what kinds of movement are legible as normal, and which bodies are perpetually “out of place.” If the defended object is a republic, the default language justification is legal and civic. If the defended object is a homeland, the language jurisdiction becomes territorial and affective. That shift changes what restrictions, surveillance practices, and membership tests become thinkable and tolerable over time. HOMELAND'S HOHFELDIAN HARNESSIf “homeland” structures a place of belonging, then “rights” are the legal grammar that tells us what may be done in that place. The trouble is that “rights” are often treated as moral abstract objects floating above context. Legally, they are structured relations among people, institutions, and things. But “rights” can take on a variety of meanings.Wesley Hohfeld, the Yale law professor who pioneered analytical jurisprudence in the early 20th century, argued that many legal disputes persist because the word “right” is used ambiguously.He distinguished four basic “incidents” for rights: claim, privilege (liberty), power, and immunity. Each is paired with a position correlating to another party: duty, no-claim (no-right), liability, and disability. When the police pull you over for speeding you hold a privilege to drive at or below the speed limit (say, 40 mph). The state has no-right to demand you stop for going exactly 40 mph. But if you're clocked at 50 mph, the officer enforces your no-right to exceed the limit which correlates to the state's claim-right. You have a duty to comply by pulling over. If the officer then has power to issue a ticket, you face a liability to have your driving privilege altered (e.g., fined). But you also enjoy an immunity from arbitrary arrest without probable cause.Let's apply that to “homeland” security.If a politician says we must “defend the homeland,” it can mean at least four different things legally:* Claim-Rights: Citizens can demand that the government protect them (e.g., from attacks). Officials have the duty to act — think TSA screening or border patrol.​* Privileges: Federal Agents get freedoms to act without legal blocks, such as stopping and questioning people in so-called high-risk zones, while bystanders have no-right to interfere.​* Powers: Federal Agencies hold authority to change your legal status. For example, they can label you a watchlist risk (e.g., you become a liability). This can then lead to loss of liberties like travel bans, detentions, or asset freezes.​* Immunities: Federal Officials or programs shield themselves from lawsuits (via qualified immunity or classified data rules), effectively blocking citizens' ability to sue.Forget whether these are legitimate or illegitimate, Hohfeld's point is they are different forms of rights — and each has distinct costs. Once “homeland” is the object, the system tends to grow powers and privileges (capacity for overt or covert operations), and to seek immunities (resistance to challenge), often at the expense of others' claim-rights and liberties.Rights are not only relational, but they are also often spatially conditional. The same person can move through zones of legality experiencing different practical rights. Consider border checkpoints, airports, perimeters of government buildings, protest cites, or regions declared “emergency” zones. Government institutions operationalize these spaces as “behavioral geographies” which determines who gets stopped, where scrutiny concentrates, and which movements count as suspicious.The state looks past the abstract bearer of unalienable liberties and due process to see only a physical entity whose movements through space dissolve their Constitutional immunities into a series of observable, trackable traces. Those traces become inputs to enforcement. This is what makes surveillance so powerful. “Homeland” governance is especially trace-hungry because it imagines safety as a property of space that must be continuously maintained.But these traces are behavioral cues and human behavior is never neutral. They are interpreted through normalized cultural and institutional schemas about who “belongs” in which places. Place attachment and territorial belonging can become gatekeeping mechanisms. Empirical work on homeland/place attachment links it to identity processes and self-categorization. Related work suggests that collective psychological ownership — “this place is ours” — can predict exclusionary attitudes toward immigrants and outsiders. In legal terms, those social attitudes can translate into pressure to expand state powers and narrow outsiders' claim-rights.A vocabulary rooted in a ‘republic' tends to emphasize rights as universal claims against the state. This is where we get due process, equal protection, and rights to speech and assembly. A homeland vocabulary tends to emphasize rights as statused permissions tied to membership and territory. Here we find rights of citizens, rights at the border, rights in “emergencies”, and rights conditioned on “lawful presence.” The shift makes some restrictions feel like a kind of protecting of the home. Hence the unaffable phrase, “Get off my lawn.”HOMELAND HIERARCHIES HUMBLEDIf the “homeland” is framed as a place-of-belonging and rights are the grammar of that place, then the current crisis of American democracy boils down to a dispute over the nature of equality. This tension is best understood through the long-standing constitutional debate between anticlassification and antisubordination, which dates back to the Reconstruction era. Anticlassification, often called the “colorblind” or “status-blind” approach, holds that the state's duty is simply to avoid explicit categories in its laws. Antisubordination, by contrast, insists that the law must actively dismantle structured group hierarchies and the “caste-like” systems they produce. When the state embraces a “homeland” logic, it leans heavily on anticlassification to mask a deeper reality of spatial subordination.In what we might call the “Theater of Defense,” agencies like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) increasingly rely on anticlassification principles to justify aggressive interior crackdowns. They frame enforcement as a territorial necessity by protecting the sanctity of the soil itself. A workplace raid or roving patrol, in this view, does not target any specific group. Instead, it simply maintains the “integrity” of the homeland. This reflects what law professor Bradley Areheart and others have described as the “anticlassification turn,” where formal attempts to embody equality end up legitimizing structural inequality.Put differently, the state exercises a Hohfeldian Power to alter individuals' legal status based on their geographic location or “lawful presence.” At the same time, it shields itself from legal challenge by insisting that the law applies equally to everyone who is “out of place.” This claim of territorial neutrality is a dangerous legal fiction. As scholars Solon Barocas and Andrew Selbst have shown in their work on algorithmic systems, attempts at neutral criteria often replicate entrenched biases. Triggers like “proximity to a border” or “behavioral traces” in a transit hub do not produce blind justice. They enable targeted scrutiny and the erosion of immunity for those whose identities fail to match the “belonging” model of the “homeland.” The state circumvents its Hohfeldian Disability, avoiding the creation of second-class statuses, by pretending to manage space rather than discriminate against persons.This shift from a civic Republic to a territorial “homeland” is the primary driver of democratic backsliding. Political scientist Jacob Grumbach captured this dynamic in his 2022 paper, Laboratories of Democratic Backsliding. Analyzing 51 indicators of electoral democracy across U.S. states from 2000 to 2018, Grumbach developed the State Democracy Index. His findings reveal how American federalism has morphed from “laboratories of democracy” into sites of subnational authoritarianism. States with low scores on the index — often under unified Republican control — have pioneered police powers that insulate partisan dominance. We see this in the rise of state-level immigration enforcement units, the criminalization of movement for marginalized groups, and the expansion of a “right to exclude.”These states are not just enforcing the law. They are forging what Yale legal scholar Owen Fiss would recognize as a new caste system. By fixating on “defending” state soil against “infiltrators,” legislatures dismantle the public rights of the Reconstruction era — the right to participate in community life without indignity. Today's backsliding policies transform the nation's interior into a permanent enforcement zone. They reject the Enlightenment ideals of America, rooted in beliefs like liberty, equality, democracy, individual rights, and the rule of law. To fully understand Constitutional history, we best acknowledge that America's universalist creedal definition wasn't solely European. David Graeber and David Wengrow's The Dawn of Everything shows how Enlightenment values of liberty and equality arose from intellectual exchanges with Indigenous North American thinkers. Kandiaronk, a Huron statesman, traveled to Europe in the late 17th century and debated French aristocrats. His critiques were published and circulated widely among European intellectuals, including Voltaire, Diderot, and Rousseau. Graeber and Wengrow point out that before the widely popular publication of these dialogues in 1703, the concept of "Equality" as a primary political value was almost entirely absent from European philosophy. By the time Rousseau wrote his Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men in 1754, it was the central question of the age.Kandiaronk criticized European society's subservience to kings and obsession with property. He contrasted it with the consensual governance and individual agency of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy embodied in their Great Law of Peace — a political order prioritizing the public right to exist without state-sanctioned indignity.The writers of the U.S. Constitution codified a Republic of “unalienable rights,” synthesizing Indigenous/European-inspired liberty with Hohfeldian Disabilities that legally restrained the state from territorial monarchy. Backsliding erases this profound philosophical endeavor. Reclaiming the Republic means honoring the Indigenous critique that a nation's legitimacy rests on its people's freedom, not its fences.We seem to be moving from governance by the governed to protecting an ingroup. In Hohfeldian terms, the state expands its privileges while shrinking the claim-rights of the vulnerable to move and exist safely. This leads to “spatial subordination,” managed through adiaphorization — a concept from social theorist Zygmunt Bauman's 1989 Modernity and the Holocaust. Bauman, a Polish-Jewish survivor who escaped the Nazis' grip on his early life, drew “adiaphora” from the Greek for matters outside moral evaluation. Modern bureaucracies make horrific actions morally neutral by framing them as technical duties, enabling atrocities like the Holocaust without personal ethical torment.As territorial belonging takes precedence, non-belongers are excluded from moral and legal obligations. They become “non-spaces” or “human waste” in the eyes of ICE and DHS. This betrays antisubordination, the “core and conscience” of America's civil rights tradition, as Yale constitutional scholars Jack Balkin and Reva Siegel called it. A democracy can't endure if it permanently relegates any group to legal impossibility. In the “homeland”, immigrants may live, work, and raise families for decades, yet remain mere “traces” to expunge. Weaponized place attachment turns affective bonds into property claims. This empowers the state to “cleanse” those deemed to be “out of place.” Rights become statused permissions, not universal ideals. If immunity from search depends on territorial status, the Republic of laws has yielded to a Heimat — a term the Nazis' usurped for their blood-and-soil homeland…that they then bloodied and soiled.Reversing this demands confronting the linguistic and legal architecture that rendered it conceivable. It's time to rethink the “homeland” frame and its anticlassification crutch. A truer and fairer Republic would commit to antisubordination and the state would be disabled from wielding space for hierarchy. A person's immunity from arbitrary power should be closer to an inalienable right to be “secure in one's person” that holds firm beyond checkpoints or workplace doors…or your front door.Steven Simon was right to feel uneasy with Clinton's wording. “Homeland” planted a seed that sprouted into hedgerows of exceptional powers and curtailed liberties. Are we going to cling to a “homeland” secured by fear and exclusion, forever unstable, or finally become a Republic revered for securing universal law and rights? As long as our rights remain geographically conditional, we all dwell in liability. Reclaiming the Republic, and our freedoms within it, may require transforming the Constitution from a Hohfeldian map of perimeters into a boundless plane of human dignity it aspires to be. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

Intrattenimento e informazione, musica, cultura, i fatti del giorno e la rassegna stampa con i vostri messaggi in diretta: tutto questo è Radio Vaticana con Voi! Anche oggi insieme per iniziare la giornata con numerosi ospiti! Come ogni giorno, protagonisti gli ascoltatori! Intervieni in diretta tramite WhatsApp al numero 3351243722. Con il nostro responsabile, Massimiliano Menichetti, siamo tornati alla giornata di ieri di Papa Leone: dal forte appello alla pace in Ucraina lanciato da Piazza San Pietro alla visita pastorale nella Basilica del Sacro Cuore di Gesù. Alla vigilia del quarto anniversario dell'invasione russa dell'Ucraina, il collegamento in diretta con il nostro inviato a Leopoli, Mario Galgano. Per la radiovisione in studio le testimonianze di due membri della comunità parrocchiale della Basilica di Santa Sofia, la chiesa nazionale degli ucraini greco-cattolici a Roma. La rubrica Spigolature di Gabriele Nicolò ci parla dell'arte del camminare in letteratura, con aneddoti che partono da Balzac e Rousseau per arrivare a Kant e Manzoni. La scorsa settimana per la prima volta dal 1967, il governo israeliano ha approvato l'apertura del processo di registrazione di terreni in Cisgiordania. Ne parliamo con Serena Baldini, presidente della ONG Vento di terra presente nell'Area C, in Cisgiordania. Gisella Molina, consigliere Nazionale e responsabile della comunicazione Unitalsi, ci racconta l'annuale incontro Nazionale formativo degli animatori tenutosi nella fine settimana ad Assisi, dedicato al tema del pellegrinaggio come esperienza spirituale, pastorale e di vita associativa, in preparazione al cammino verso Lourdes 2026. Debutterà ad Assisi il prossimo 5 marzo, nell'ambito delle celebrazioni per l'ottavo centenario della morte di San Francesco, "Fratello Sole Sorella Luna" messa in scena dalla sceneggiatura originale di Franco Zeffirelli per la regia di Piero Maccarinelli, nostro ospite quest'oggi. Autori e conduttori Andrea De Angelis e Stefania Ferretti Tecnici del suono Damiano Caprio e Daniele Giorgi

A brilliant physician risks his own life to force open the border between body and soul, determined to correct what he believes nature has failed to complete. When the experiment ends and only one flame returns, his assistant must decide whether to protect a dangerous legacy—or let it rise again in a new form. The Ultimate Problem by Victor Rousseau. That's next on The Lost Sci-Fi Podcast.Victor Rousseau joins us on The Lost Sci-Fi Podcast for the first time today.Born in Belgium in 1879, Rousseau was educated in Europe before emigrating to the United States as a young man. He eventually settled in New York, where he moved from journalism and translation work into fiction. Like many early pulp writers, he didn't begin in science fiction alone. He wrote adventure stories, historical fiction, and romances, building a reputation for fast-paced storytelling long before the science fiction boom fully took shape.Rousseau became a regular presence in magazines, Adventure, Argosy, and later Weird Tales. Over the course of his career, Rousseau wrote dozens of novels and a large body of short fiction across multiple genres. In science fiction alone, he produced almost 100 short stories and several novels, most of them in the 1920s and 30s.The Ultimate Problem appeared in U.S. newspapers in 1911. We found it in the Stevens Point Journal of Stevens Point, Wisconsin, on Friday, March 3, 1911, published under Victor Rousseau's H. M. Egbert byline.Sixteen years later it was published in the July 1927 issue of Weird Tales Magazine on page 77, The Ultimate Problem by Victor Rousseau…Next on The Lost Sci-Fi Podcast, He wanted to look beyond time and prove that history was still alive, waiting in hidden dimensions. What answered him from those angles was patient, hungry, and already on his scent. The Hounds of Tindalos by Frank Belknap Long.===========================☕ Buy Me a Coffee - https://lostscifi.com/coffee

POUR COMMANDER MA BANDE DESSINÉE PHILORAMA : Sur Amazon : https://amzn.to/4sVjMyxSur Fnac.com : https://tidd.ly/3NSSUyVChez Cultura : https://tidd.ly/4raBhcgDisponible aussi dans toutes les bonnes librairies à partir du 4 mars !Platon était anti-démocrate. Car, pour lui, la démocratie est un régime qui s'écarte de l'ordre universel. En quoi consiste cet ordre universel ? En quoi la démocratie s'en écarte-t-elle ? Et quelles leçons pouvons-nous tirer de la vision politique de Platon ? C'est ce que nous allons voir dans cet épisode.---Envie d'aller plus loin ? Rejoignez-moi sur Patreon pour accéder à tout mon contenu supplémentaire.

Ray O'Leary joins Dan, James and Andy to discuss Rousseau, rays, receptionists and remarkable royalties. Visit nosuchthingasafish.com for news about live shows, merchandise and more episodes. Join Club Fish for ad-free episodes and exclusive bonus content at apple.co/nosuchthingasafish or nosuchthingasafish.com/patreonGet an exclusive 15% discount on Saily data plans! Use code [fish] at checkout. Download Saily app or go to https://saily.com/fish

La série israélienne « Betipul » dans sa première version a été adaptée sur le petit écran français avec Frédéric Pierrot, « En thérapie », et c'est désormais sur les planches du Théâtre Antoine à Paris qu'on découvre Francis Huster dans le rôle du thérapeute. Comme à l'écran, les histoires personnelles se croisent, 3 patients en thérapie, et le psy lui-même renvoyé à sa propre vie privée, au point qu'on ne sait plus vraiment à la fin qui soigne qui. Charles Templon, metteur en scène ; Yann Gaël, comédien et Raphaëlle Rousseau, comédienne étaient les invités de Nathalie Amar sur RFI. La pièce « En thérapie » est à retrouver au Théâtre Antoine.   ► Chronique : Café Polar Catherine Fruchon-Toussaint a rencontré Mabrouk Racheri pour « La Chouette a sept jours pour sauver le monde » (Actes Sud), un polar décalé et hilarant sur fond de téléportation dans le passé pour éviter une guerre nucléaire.   ► Playlist du jour - Emma Peters - Juliette - Luiza - Manhã de Carnava - Yael Naim - Solaire.

La série israélienne « Betipul » dans sa première version a été adaptée sur le petit écran français avec Frédéric Pierrot, « En thérapie », et c'est désormais sur les planches du Théâtre Antoine à Paris qu'on découvre Francis Huster dans le rôle du thérapeute. Comme à l'écran, les histoires personnelles se croisent, 3 patients en thérapie, et le psy lui-même renvoyé à sa propre vie privée, au point qu'on ne sait plus vraiment à la fin qui soigne qui. Charles Templon, metteur en scène ; Yann Gaël, comédien et Raphaëlle Rousseau, comédienne étaient les invités de Nathalie Amar sur RFI. La pièce « En thérapie » est à retrouver au Théâtre Antoine.   ► Chronique : Café Polar Catherine Fruchon-Toussaint a rencontré Mabrouk Racheri pour « La Chouette a sept jours pour sauver le monde » (Actes Sud), un polar décalé et hilarant sur fond de téléportation dans le passé pour éviter une guerre nucléaire.   ► Playlist du jour - Emma Peters - Juliette - Luiza - Manhã de Carnava - Yael Naim - Solaire.

Stéphane Rousseau nous parle à quel point le rire est communicatif! Neev nous parle des chansons problématiques que son fils de 3 ans ADORE Anne-Élisabeth Bossé fait un retour sur son voyage au Japon! Bonne écoute !

durée : 00:05:16 - Tanguy Pastureau maltraite l'info - par : Tanguy Pastureau - Dans toute la violence politique du moment, Tanguy se demande comment se portent les politiques dits "modérés". Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

durée : 00:23:52 - 8h30 franceinfo - La députée écologiste de Paris était l'invitée du "8h30 franceinfo", lundi 16 février. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

"How can you not be a populist in this day and age?" — Hélène LandemoreIn February 2020, The New Yorker profiled a Yale professor making the case for citizen rule. Six years later, that political scientist, Hélène Landemore, has a new book entitled Politics Without Politicians arguing that politics should be "an amateur sport instead of an expert's job" and that randomly selected citizen assemblies should replace representative democracy. Landemore calls it "jury duty on steroids."Landemore draws on her experience observing France's Citizens' Conventions on both climate and end-of-life issues to now direct Connecticut's first state-level citizen assembly. We discuss why the Greeks used lotteries instead of elections, what G.K. Chesterton meant by imagining democracy as a "jolly hostess," and why she has sympathy for the anti-Federalists who lost the argument about the best form of American government to Madison. When I ask if she's comfortable being called a populist, she doesn't flinch: "If the choice is between populist and elitist, I don't know how you can not be a populist." From the Damon Wells'58 Professor of Political Science at Yale, this might sound a tad suicidal. At least professionally. But Landemore's jolly argument for a politics without politicians is the type of message that will win elections in our populist age.About the GuestHélène Landemore is the Damon Wells'58 Professor of Political Science at Yale University. She is the author of Politics Without Politicians: The Case for Citizen Rule (2026) and Open Democracy: Reinventing Popular Rule for the Twenty-First Century (2020).ReferencesThinkers discussed:●      G.K. Chesterton was the British essayist who defined democracy as an "attempt, like that of a jolly hostess, to bring the shy people out"—a vision Landemore finds more inspiring than technical definitions about elite selection.●      James Madison and the Federalists designed a republic meant to filter popular passions through elected representatives; Landemore has sympathy for their anti-Federalist opponents who wanted legislatures that looked like "a mini-portrait of the people."●      Alexis de Tocqueville warned about the dangers of trusting ordinary people—a caution Landemore pushes back against, arguing that voters respond to the limited choices they're given.●      Max Weber wrote "Politics as a Vocation" (1919), arguing that politics requires a special calling; Landemore questions whether it should be a profession at all.●      Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his concept of the general will has been blamed for totalitarian impulses; Landemore rejects the comparison, insisting her vision preserves liberal constitutional frameworks.●      Joseph Schumpeter defined democracy as "a method for elite selection"—precisely the technocratic framing Landemore wants to overturn.Citizen assembly experiments mentioned:●      The Irish Citizens' Assembly on abortion (2016-2017) is often cited as proof that randomly selected citizens can deliberate on divisive issues and reach workable conclusions.●      The French Citizens' Convention on End-of-Life (2022-2023) found common ground between pro- and anti-euthanasia factions by focusing on palliative care—a case Landemore observed firsthand.●      The French Citizens' Convention for Climate (2019-2020) brought 150 randomly selected citizens together to propose climate policy; participants were paid 84-95 Euros per day.●      The Connecticut citizen assembly on local public services, planned for summer 2026, will be the first state-level citizen assembly in the United States. Landemore is directing its design.Also mentioned:●      Zephyr Teachout is the left-wing populist who called Landemore a "reluctant populist."●      Oliver Hart (Harvard) and Luigi Zingales (Chicago) are economists working with Landemore to apply the citizen assembly model to corporate governance reform.●      The Council of 500 was the Athenian deliberative body whose members were selected by lottery, with a rotating chair appointed daily.●      John Stuart Mill is the liberal theorist whose emphasis on minority rights raises the question of whether Landemore's majoritarianism is illiberal. She says no.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 PodcastsSpotifyChapters:(00:00) - Chapter 1 (00:00) - Six years from New Yorker profile to book (01:14) - Politics as amateur sport (02:08) - What the Greeks got right (04:03) - Citizen assemblies: jury duty on steroids (06:21) - The Yale professor who speaks for ordinary people (07:11) - Rousseau and the age of innocence (08:41) - The gerontocracy problem (09:33) - Do we need a communitarian impulse? (11:30) - Experts on tap, not on top (15:15) - The reluctant populist (17:01) - Can we trust ordinary people? (19:11) - How it works at scale (23:14) - Why professional politicians are failing (26:15) - Max Weber and politics as vocation (29:08) - Leaders who emerge organically (30:04) - Rejecting Madison and the Federalists (32:26) - Finding common intere...

When did society change from matriarchal to patriarchal, and why? What was the advice on fatherhood from Plato and Aristotle, and how did other writers on the subject put one philosophy of fatherhood on the page but live a very different one in practice?Augustine Sedgewick is the author of two books: Fatherhood: A History of Love and Power and Coffeeland: One Man's Dark Empire and the Making of Our Favorite Drug.Greg and Augustine start by discussing the lesser-explored history of fatherhood. Their conversation get into why the history of fatherhood may be understudied, the societal and cultural shifts impacting the role of fathers, and how historical figures like Saint Augustine, Rousseau, Jefferson, and even Thoreau have shaped modern perceptions of fatherhood. They also touch on Augustine's first book, Coffeeland, for the economic and social structures underpinning the coffee industry, emphasizing the role of capitalism in shaping labor conditions, and Augustine reflects on his own personal journey through fatherhood and the influence of his historical research on his understanding of the subject.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:Patriarchy is not a loss for men05:48: Obviously there has been some really great work on patriarchy. A lot of that has come from feminist historians. As a result, I think a lot of the greatest work on the history of patriarchy has been the history of the consequences of patriarchy for women, much fewer, much less work on the history of patriarchy and its consequences for men. I have come to believe that that is, we are in a moment where we hear often about the crisis of men and boys. And I actually think it is the best thing that men could do for themselves, be to learn something about the history of patriarchy and masculinity. Like, that would not be a loss for men. That would be an incredible gain if we could begin to understand where those ideas originate, how they have changed over time, and what they have cost us. I will say.Fatherhood as a system of power05:24: I think you could argue that fatherhood is the most widespread and arguably enduring form of social inequality and metaphor for power that we have in human societies.Why father knows best was never humanly possible18:22 There is almost plasticity built into that God-like mandate of father knows best, I will protect and provide, if you do what I say. Because I think what is interesting about that set of edicts and mandates is that it is impossible for human beings to fulfill. No one always knows best. No one can always protect; no one can always provide God-like jobs because they cannot be fulfilled by actual human beings. And so the process of fatherhood, historically, has been exactly negotiating the distance between those promises and the reality. Plasticity has been the required element there.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Simone de BeauvoirPatriarchyPater familiasPlatoAristotleAugustine of HippoJean-Jacques RousseauThomas JeffersonGreat Father and Great MotherSally HemingsHenry David ThoreauSigmund FreudGuest Profile:AugustineSedgewick.workGuest Work:Amazon Author PageFatherhood: A History of Love and PowerCoffeeland: One Man's Dark Empire and the Making of Our Favorite Drug Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

If you're not happy, it means something is wrong ... right?  Dr. Loretta Breuning is a PhD researcher & author. Since becoming unconvinced by prevailing theories on human behavior, she has researched everything from monkeys to the mafia. Now she's not only helping people hack their brain, she's shedding light on how the altruistic outlook may be popular, but ultimately damaging. In this episode, she explains WHY we believe that if we are unhappy something is wrong, how simply “getting back to nature” can backfire, the problem with happiness studies & (this is important) how to start your own happiness plan. This episode originally aired March 7, 2024. If you like this episode, you'll also like episode 275: IS AMBITION ANTI-HAPPINESS? REASONABLE HAPPINESS & FETISHIZING WEALTH Guest:https://innermammalinstitute.org/https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-happy-brain/id1377502232 https://www.instagram.com/inner.mammal.inst/https://innermammalinstitute.org/course/  https://www.facebook.com/LorettaBreuningPhD https://twitter.com/lbreuning   Host:  https://www.meredithforreal.com/  https://www.instagram.com/meredithforreal/ meredith@meredithforreal.comhttps://www.youtube.com/meredithforreal  https://www.facebook.com/meredithforrealthecuriousintrovert  Sponsors: https://www.jordanharbinger.com/starterpacks/ https://www.historicpensacola.org/about-us/  02:05 — Rousseau's “nature is happy” legacy02:48 — Why academia spreads the meme03:36 — The medical model of unhappiness04:18 — Blaming society vs building skills07:24 — Hunter-gatherer reality check09:58 — Culture shapes how we report happiness10:32 — Why Americans hesitate to say “I'm happy”11:32 — Cortisol: when expectations miss13:42 — Childhood culture becomes adult politics14:06 — Status envy in academia15:10 — Moral superiority as serotonin15:48 — The “I did it the right way” trap16:38 — Everyone thinks they're the overlooked underdog18:06 — Popularity: the motivator no one admits19:02 — How biology gets politicized23:18 — Why therapy and religion sell unhappiness24:08 — The media and your happy chemicals25:02 — News as a brain-chemical cocktail31:04 — How not to throw the baby out with the bathwater34:08 — Reward yourself like animal training34:42 — Train your inner mammalRequest to join my private Facebook Group, MFR Curious Insiders https://www.facebook.com/share/g/1BAt3bpwJC/

'The strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must'. So claimed the powerful Athenians, according to the Ancient Greek historian Thucydides. Plato tried to demonstrate that might does not make right, and thinkers ever since, from Hobbes and Rousseau to Kant and Carl Schmitt, have placed the idea that might is right at the centre of their political philosophies, for better or worse. Matthew Sweet traces the intellectual history of the idea, with Angie Hobbs, Margaret MacMillan, Lea Ypi, and Hugo Drochon. Angie Hobbs' book Why Plato Matters Now, and Lea Ypi's book Indignity, are both out now, Hugo Drochon's book Elites And Democracy is published in March Producer: Luke Mulhall

Une belle grande chire sur la gourde de Jojo, on parlait d'entrainement et ça dérapé ! Gracieuseté de Stéphane Rousseau, Ève Côté et Pierre Hébert.

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. 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

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/french-studies

Ève Côté se demande si c’est un bon ou mauvais signe d’être racké après l’entrainement ? Stéphane Rousseau nous parle des inventions les plus ridicules de l’histoire Pierre Hébert parle des activités qui sont une bonne idée ou pas, à faire en couple, pour la St-Valentin. Bonne écoute !

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

What can the deep past of Ukrainian lands reveal about the global story of humanity? Six thousand years ago, "mega-sites" flourished in what is now central Ukraine—but can these be considered the world's first cities? How were they organized without central authorities, and how do they challenge everything we thought we knew about early social life? *** This is Thinking in Dark Times, a podcast by UkraineWorld, an English-language multimedia project about Ukraine. Host: Volodymyr Yermolenko, a Ukrainian philosopher, editor-in-chief of UkraineWorld, and president of PEN Ukraine. Guest: David Wengrow, a renowned British archaeologist and Professor of Comparative Archaeology at University College London. He is the co-author, alongside David Graeber, of the international bestseller "The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity". *** Thinking in Dark Times is produced by UkraineWorld and brought to you by Internews Ukraine. It is supported by the International Renaissance Foundation and Politeia, a Ukrainian NGO. *** SUPPORT: You can support our work on https://www.patreon.com/c/ukraineworld Your help is crucial, as we rely heavily on crowdfunding. You can also contribute to our volunteer missions to frontline areas in Ukraine, where we deliver aid to both soldiers and civilians. Donations are welcome via PayPal at: ukraine.resisting@gmail.com. *** CONTENTS: 00:00 - Intro. What can the deep past of Ukraine reveal about the global story of humanity? 00:14 - Were the world's first cities actually built in what is now Ukraine? 02:51 - Why does the Ukrainian soil play a key role in rethinking the origins of cities and states? 03:55 - Why are standard narratives of human history fundamentally wrong? 09:15 - What were the Cucuteni-Trypillia megasites? 17:23 - Why does the existence of egalitarian cities overturn political history itself? 20:35 - What does a circular city say about how people imagined the world? 21:27 - How did thousands of people govern themselves without rulers? 26:36 - Did democracy exist thousands of years before ancient Greece? 28:29 - Were Hobbes and Rousseau both wrong about human nature? 42:29 - Is Ukrainian history shaped by a tension between freedom and vulnerability? 47:22 - What do burning rituals reveal about cyclical views of life and nature? 50:51 - Why does Ukraine's past matter for the future of humanity?

durée : 00:58:14 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann, Nassim El Kabli - Des préoccupations communes, des références et des lectures relient la Révolution française de 1789 et la Révolution américaine de 1776. De Montesquieu à Thomas Jefferson, de Rousseau à Benjamin Franklin, retour sur les figures essentielles de deux révolutions démocratiques de la fin du 18ᵉ siècle. - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Philippe Raynaud Professeur émérite de science politique à l'université Panthéon-Assas, membre de l'Institut universitaire de France; Jean-Yves Pranchère Professeur de théorie politique à l'Université libre de Bruxelles

Every Nation Helderberg - The Mission - Sermon Series - Week 3 - Mario Rousseau 25/01/2026 CCLI License Streaming Number 95796 View the Video on our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/EveryNationHelderberg

Nous sommes dans la deuxième moitié des années 1770. C'est à cette période que le philosophe genevois, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, se consacre à ce qui sera son dernier ouvrage « Les Rêveries du promeneur solitaire », un ouvrage inachevé, qui sera publié à titre posthume. C'est à Paris puis chez son ami, le paysagiste René-Louis de Girardin, au château d'Ermenonville, dans l'Oise, que Rousseau travaille à ce qu'il présente comme « un informe journal des rêveries », aussi bien autobiographie que réflexion philosophique. L'auteur du «Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes », « Julie ou la Nouvelle Héloïse », « Du contrat social », « Les Confessions » se confie. Il écrit : « La même honte qui me retint m'a souvent empêché de faire de bonnes actions, qui m'auraient comblé de joie, et dont je ne me suis abstenu qu'en déplorant mon imbécillité. » Dans son essai « Emile ou de l'éducation », le philosophe avait avancé que c'est la honte qui avait été le frein grâce auquel Emile ne s'était pas livré entièrement à lui-même et à ses désirs. La honte, une émotion ambivalente, stigmatisante, provoquant la souffrance, que les historiens ont du mal à analyser. La honte ou le doigt du collectif pointé sur l'individu. La honte de soi, de son corps, des abus subis, des crimes commis, du non-dit, des origines, d'une identité… La honte qui étrangle les victimes et plus rarement les bourreaux ? Quelle place la honte a-t-elle occupée à travers les siècles ? Quelle rôle joue-t-elle depuis le décisif « #metoo » ? Une histoire de la honte … Avec nous : Laurence Rosier, professeure de linguistique, d'analyse du discours et de didactique du français à l'Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB) et Valérie Piette, professeure d'histoire contemporaine à l'Université Libre de Bruxelles(ULB). Merci pour votre écoute Un Jour dans l'Histoire, c'est également en direct tous les jours de la semaine de 13h15 à 14h30 sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes d'Un Jour dans l'Histoire sur notre plateforme Auvio.be :https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/5936 Intéressés par l'histoire ? Vous pourriez également aimer nos autres podcasts : L'Histoire Continue: https://audmns.com/kSbpELwL'heure H : https://audmns.com/YagLLiKEt sa version à écouter en famille : La Mini Heure H https://audmns.com/YagLLiKAinsi que nos séries historiques :Chili, le Pays de mes Histoires : https://audmns.com/XHbnevhD-Day : https://audmns.com/JWRdPYIJoséphine Baker : https://audmns.com/wCfhoEwLa folle histoire de l'aviation : https://audmns.com/xAWjyWCLes Jeux Olympiques, l'étonnant miroir de notre Histoire : https://audmns.com/ZEIihzZMarguerite, la Voix d'une Résistante : https://audmns.com/zFDehnENapoléon, le crépuscule de l'Aigle : https://audmns.com/DcdnIUnUn Jour dans le Sport : https://audmns.com/xXlkHMHSous le sable des Pyramides : https://audmns.com/rXfVppvN'oubliez pas de vous y abonner pour ne rien manquer.Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

01-18 Greg Rousseau end-of-season full 87 Sun, 18 Jan 2026 16:00:00 +0000 NEMZf0EPWtNvEQozahPSq4wNgu0qfJhh nfl,football,buffalo bills,greg rousseau,sports Bills Football nfl,football,buffalo bills,greg rousseau,sports 01-18 Greg Rousseau end-of-season Every Play, every game right here on WGR Sports Radio 550, WGR550.com. The official voice of the Buffalo Bills! Football On-Demand Audio Presented by Northwest Bank, For What's Next. 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. Sports False https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A%2

durée : 00:58:43 - Mauvais genres - par : François Angelier - Mêlant faste impérial et culture populaire, objets du quotidien et rites sacrés, une exposition, visible au musée du Quai Branly, à Paris, jusqu'au 1er mars, nous offre de découvrir la figure mythique du dragon chinois. - réalisation : Laurent Paulré - invités : Julien Rousseau Responsable de l'unité patrimoniale Asie du musée du quai Branly – Jacques Chirac

Nous sommes en 1757, chez le duc d'Ayen à Saint-Germain-en-Laye, à une vingtaine de kilomètres, à l'ouest de Paris. Ce jour-là a lieu la première représentation du « Fils naturel, ou Les épreuves de la vertu ». Il s'agit d'un drame en cinq actes et en prose écrit par Denis Diderot. L'histoire est celle de deux amis dont l'un demande à l'autre de plaider sa cause auprès d'une jeune fille qu'il adore. Le texte contient un phrase qui va faire bouillir Jean-Jacques Rousseau, ami de Diderot. « Il n'y a que le méchant qui soit seul ». Rousseau prendra pour lui cette critique et s'en ouvrira dans « Les Confessions », son autobiographie. Un peu moins d'un siècle plus tard, dans son poème intitulé « La fin de Satan », Victor Hugo écrit à propos de la solitude : « L'enfer est tout entier dans ce mot » , alors qu'en 1903, Rainer Maria Rilke, dans une de ses « Lettres à un jeune poète » rêve à « Être seul, seul comme l'enfant est seul ». Silencieuse, inquiétante, sournoise, la solitude a longtemps, et peut-être encore toujours, été connotée négativement, provoquant la méfiance et même le rejet. Elle s'abat sur les plus faibles, pense-t-on : les malades, les pauvres, les veuves, les célibataires, les fous, les victimes de guerres ou de famines. Mais vint un temps où la solitude s'est imposée comme une condition nécessaire à l'accomplissement de soi. Un long processus qui s'étend sur tant de siècles… Revenons sur quelques étapes essentielles pour comprendre… Avec nous : Sabine Melchior-Bonnet « Histoire de la solitude – de l'ermite à la célibattante » ; PUF. Merci pour votre écoute Un Jour dans l'Histoire, c'est également en direct tous les jours de la semaine de 13h15 à 14h30 sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes d'Un Jour dans l'Histoire sur notre plateforme Auvio.be :https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/5936 Intéressés par l'histoire ? Vous pourriez également aimer nos autres podcasts : L'Histoire Continue: https://audmns.com/kSbpELwL'heure H : https://audmns.com/YagLLiKEt sa version à écouter en famille : La Mini Heure H https://audmns.com/YagLLiKAinsi que nos séries historiques :Chili, le Pays de mes Histoires : https://audmns.com/XHbnevhD-Day : https://audmns.com/JWRdPYIJoséphine Baker : https://audmns.com/wCfhoEwLa folle histoire de l'aviation : https://audmns.com/xAWjyWCLes Jeux Olympiques, l'étonnant miroir de notre Histoire : https://audmns.com/ZEIihzZMarguerite, la Voix d'une Résistante : https://audmns.com/zFDehnENapoléon, le crépuscule de l'Aigle : https://audmns.com/DcdnIUnUn Jour dans le Sport : https://audmns.com/xXlkHMHSous le sable des Pyramides : https://audmns.com/rXfVppvN'oubliez pas de vous y abonner pour ne rien manquer.Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

durée : 00:58:43 - Mauvais genres - par : François Angelier - Mêlant faste impérial et culture populaire, objets du quotidien et rites sacrés, une exposition, visible au musée du Quai Branly, à Paris, jusqu'au 1er mars, nous offre de découvrir la figure mythique du dragon chinois. - réalisation : Laurent Paulré - invités : Julien Rousseau Responsable de l'unité patrimoniale Asie du musée du quai Branly – Jacques Chirac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTl2m5StrvQ Podcast audio: The crimes of the French Revolution have long been regarded as indicting Enlightenment ideals. Its Reign of Terror has been seen as the product of an overconfident belief in reason, liberty, and human perfectibility. The American Revolution, by contrast, is said to have succeeded only because it was more moderate and traditional. In his 2025 OCON talk, “Enlightenment on Trial: The Real Lessons of the American and French Revolutions,” Don Watkins challenges this narrative. What history shows, Watkins contends, is that Enlightenment ideals in France were largely confined to intellectual elites within a rigid, hierarchical society. French culture was also shaped by powerful anti-Enlightenment currents — notably Rousseau's elevation of passion and the collective over reason and the individual. These ideas later fueled the Terror. By contrast, many American colonists read thinkers such as Locke, Montesquieu, and Franklin and had long practiced self-government, giving Enlightenment ideals real cultural depth. Watkins highlights a further, crucial difference between the two revolutions. The French were fundamentally motivated by hatred towards the ancien régime. French mob violence was widespread and brutal, since it sought, above all else, to eradicate the nobility, the clergy, and every other symbol of the past. Similar unrest was relatively limited and contained in America, where Americans resisted British rule with a positive aim: to establish a government that protected individual rights. Among the topics covered: Narratives about the French Revolution; The rise and fall of the Revolution; Two Revolutions compared; Contrasting motivations. This talk was recorded live on July 5th in Boston, MA, as part of the 2025 Objectivist Summer Conference, and is available on The Ayn Rand Institute Podcast stream. Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Watch archived podcasts here.

Nous sommes le 10 juillet 1895, à Paris. Henri Rousseau, dit le douanier Rousseau, a vent d'un projet d'ouvrage biographique consacré aux peintres et sculpteurs de l'époque. Un ouvrage dû à l'initiative du poète et éditeur Edmond Girard, qui a déjà consacré un premier tome aux hommes de lettres. Rousseau décide de se rendre à l'atelier typographique où le livre est en préparation. L'artiste a apporté son autoportrait, fait à la plume : il s'y est représenté dans une expression grave, le visage mangé par sa barbe abondante. Il s'est également chargé de rédiger son autobiographie. Il a écrit : « Henri Rousseau, peintre. Né à Laval en l'année 1844. Vu le manque de fortune de ses parents, fut obligé de suivre tout d'abord une autre carrière que celle où ses goûts artistiques l'appelaient. Ce ne fut donc qu'en l'année 1885 qu'il fit ses débuts dans l'art, après bien des déboires, seul, sans autre maître que la nature, et quelques conseils reçus de Gérome et de Clément. Ses deux premières créations exposées furent envoyées au Salon des Champs-Élysées (…) C'est après de bien dures épreuves qu'il arriva à se faire connaître du nombre d'artistes qui l'environnent. Il s'est perfectionné de plus en plus dans le genre original qu'il a adopté, et est en passe de devenir l'un de nos meilleurs peintres réalistes. Comme signe caractéristique, il porte la barbe broussaillante, et fait partie des Indépendants depuis longtemps déjà, pensant que toute liberté de produire doit être laissée à l'initiateur dont la pensée s'élève dans le beau et le bien. Il n'oubliera jamais les membres de la Presse qui ont su le comprendre, et qui l'ont soutenu dans ses moments de découragement, et qui l'auront aidé à devenir ce qu'il doit être. » Malheureusement, le second tome des « Portraits du prochain siècle » ne parut pas. Ce qui ne va pas nous empêcher de partir sur les traces du Douanier Rousseau et de nous plonger dans son réalisme magique… Invitée : Anne Hustache, historienne de l'art. Sujets traités : Douanier, Rousseau ,réalisme, magique, peintres, sculpteurs Merci pour votre écoute Un Jour dans l'Histoire, c'est également en direct tous les jours de la semaine de 13h15 à 14h30 sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes d'Un Jour dans l'Histoire sur notre plateforme Auvio.be :https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/5936 Intéressés par l'histoire ? Vous pourriez également aimer nos autres podcasts : L'Histoire Continue: https://audmns.com/kSbpELwL'heure H : https://audmns.com/YagLLiKEt sa version à écouter en famille : La Mini Heure H https://audmns.com/YagLLiKAinsi que nos séries historiques :Chili, le Pays de mes Histoires : https://audmns.com/XHbnevhD-Day : https://audmns.com/JWRdPYIJoséphine Baker : https://audmns.com/wCfhoEwLa folle histoire de l'aviation : https://audmns.com/xAWjyWCLes Jeux Olympiques, l'étonnant miroir de notre Histoire : https://audmns.com/ZEIihzZMarguerite, la Voix d'une Résistante : https://audmns.com/zFDehnENapoléon, le crépuscule de l'Aigle : https://audmns.com/DcdnIUnUn Jour dans le Sport : https://audmns.com/xXlkHMHSous le sable des Pyramides : https://audmns.com/rXfVppvN'oubliez pas de vous y abonner pour ne rien manquer.Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

What does Pope Leo's own former classmate think of the Church's current direction? In this explosive interview, Professor William A. Thomas—a longtime colleague of the pontiff—delivers a shocking indictment: “This is not the Catholic Church.” He explains how senior cardinals, bishops, and Vatican officials have deliberately engineered a crisis of faith, replacing Scripture and Tradition with Anglican politics, Rousseau's sentimentalism, and emotional manipulation.Thomas warns that the entire “synodal” experiment is a politically manufactured system designed to silence dissent, empower ideological actors, and weaken the Church's Christ-centered identity. He names corruption, cowardice, and ambition as the driving forces behind the collapse of doctrine and governance.HELP SUPPORT WORK LIKE THIS: https://give.lifesitenews.com/?utm_source=SOCIAL U.S. residents! Create a will with LifeSiteNews: https://www.mylegacywill.com/lifesitenews ****PROTECT Your Wealth with gold, silver, and precious metals: https://sjp.stjosephpartners.com/lifesitenews +++SHOP ALL YOUR FUN AND FAVORITE LIFESITE MERCH! https://shop.lifesitenews.com/ ****Download the all-new LSNTV App now, available on iPhone and Android!LSNTV Apple Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/lsntv/id6469105564 LSNTV Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.lifesitenews.app +++Connect with John-Henry Westen and all of LifeSiteNews on social media:LifeSite: https://linktr.ee/lifesitenewsJohn-Henry Westen: https://linktr.ee/jhwesten Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

01-07 Greg Rousseau full 132 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 19:00:00 +0000 rRQ1QK2dBTXvfmeEVVfCvIVsCMJDPugd nfl,football,buffalo bills,greg rousseau,sports Bills Football nfl,football,buffalo bills,greg rousseau,sports 01-07 Greg Rousseau Every Play, every game right here on WGR Sports Radio 550, WGR550.com. The official voice of the Buffalo Bills! Football On-Demand Audio Presented by Northwest Bank, For What's Next. 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. Sports False https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A%2F%2Frss.amperw

durée : 00:58:54 - Le Cours de l'histoire - par : Xavier Mauduit, Maïwenn Guiziou, Anne-Toscane Viudes - Au 18ᵉ siècle, l'essor de la célébrité est lié au développement d'un espace public. Voltaire, Rousseau, et Marie-Antoinette deviennent des figures publiques connues jusque dans le détail de leur vie privée. Portraits, bustes, et tasses à leur effigie deviennent des objets de consommation populaire. - réalisation : Thomas Beau - invités : Antoine Lilti Historien spécialiste de l'époque moderne et des Lumières, professeur au Collège de France; Guillaume Mazeau Historien spécialiste de la Révolution française, maître de conférences en histoire moderne à l'Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comLaura Field is a writer and political theorist who specializes in far-right populist intellectualism in the US. She's currently a Scholar in Residence at American University, a Senior Advisor for the Illiberalism Studies Program at GW, and a nonresident fellow with Brookings. Her new book is Furious Minds: The Making of the MAGA New Right. We bonded over some of the right's wackier innovations, and differed over how far the left has also slid into illiberalism.An auto-transcript is available above (just click “Transcript” while logged into Substack). For two clips of our convo — on the New Right's “post-constitutional moment,” and the war on the civil service — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: growing up in Alberta; losing a parent at a very young age; Plato an early inspiration; growing tired of the Straussians; the decline of religion under liberalism; Locke; Rousseau; Nietzsche; Fukuyama; the resurgence of the illiberal left and illiberal right; the Claremont Institute and Harry Jaffa; Jaffa's extreme homophobia and hatred of divorce; Allan Bloom; Lincoln fulfilling the Founding; Hobbes; the role of virtue in a republic; Machiavelli; Michael Anton's “Flight 93 Election”; John Eastman and “Stop the Steal”; Curtis Yarvin and The Cathedral; Adrian Vermeule's Common Good Constitutionalism; Catholic conversion; Pope Leo; Obergefell, debating Harvey Mansfield over marriage; Woodrow Wilson's expansion of the state; Thatcher and Reagan slimming it down; the pros and cons of technocratic experts; DOGE vs federal workers; “queer” curricula and the 1619 Project; edge-lords; Bronze Age Pervert and pagan masculinity; Fuentes and Carlson; and debating the dangers of wokeness.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Coming up: Claire Berlinski on America's retreat from global hegemony, Jason Willick on trade and conservatism, and Vivek Ramaswamy on the right's future. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

The Buffalo Bills picked up their fourth straight win by besting the Cleveland Browns, 23-20, on the road Sunday. What were the big performances, and what popped up that is an immediate concern? Matt Parrino and Ryan Talbot break it all down on SHOUT! Love SHOUT? Want to buy some swag to support the show and get decked out in our official gear? Check out the brand new "SHOUT!" store for apparel, headwear and much more! ⁠https://sportslocker.chipply.com/SHOUT/store.aspx?eid=405259&action=viewall What is the "SHOUT!" Bills text insiders? Want to join? You can get analysis from Matt and Ryan right to your phone and send texts directly to them both! Text 716-528-6727 or Click here: https://joinsubtext.com/c/shoutbuffalobills Sign up for the NYUP Bills newsletter! Don't miss all the Bills coverage. Head over to www.Syracuse.com/newsletters to start getting your Bills stories and the podcast delivered right to your inbox. The "SHOUT!" Buffalo Bills football podcast is available on Apple, Spotify, Google, Stitcher, and wherever you listen to podcasts Follow @MattParrino (⁠https://x.com/MattParrino⁠) and @RyanTalbotBills (⁠https://x.com/RyanTalbotBills⁠) on X Find our Bills coverage whenever you consume social media Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/buffalobillsnyup Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/buffalobillsnyup⁠ X: ⁠https://x.com/billsupdates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices