Podcasts about salafist

In dieser Episode von „Akte Rheinland“ beschäftigen wir uns mit den dramatischen Ereignissen vom 5. Mai 2012 in Bonn-Lannesdorf: Ein Messerangriff eines Salafisten auf Polizisten während einer Pro-NRW-Kundgebung führte zu schweren Verletzungen und löste eine breite Debatte über Radikalisierung aus. Unser Gast, Islamismus-Experte Rüdiger Franz, schildert seine Erinnerungen an den Tag, ordnet die Hintergründe ein und erklärt, wie aus einem Jugendlichen aus Hessen ein gewalttätiger Salafist wurde. Wir besprechen den ersten Gerichtsprozess im Oktober 2012, die erfolgreiche Revision sowie das endgültige Urteil 2014, und beleuchten die jurischen und gesellschaftlichen Folgen. Außerdem klären wir, welche Lehren die Behörden aus dem Einsatz zogen und wie die rechtliche Aufarbeitung den Umgang mit religiösem Extremismus in Deutschland beeinflusst hat. Vom Gangstarapper zum IS-Kämpfer - Denis Cuspert alias Deso Dogg (Staffel 4, Episode 10): https://akte-rheinland-42.blogs.audiorella.com/s4e10-new-episode Terror am Hauptbahnhof - Wie Bonn nur knapp einem islamistischen Bombenanschlag entging (Staffel 3, Episode 2): https://akte-rheinland-42.blogs.audiorella.com/s3e2-new-episode Mehr zum Thema: https://ga-story.de/fanal-der-dschihadisten Feedback, Themenvorschläge und Fragen an podcast@ga.de oder via Instagram-DM an @akterheinland. Unser Podcast zum Fall Michael Winterhoff: https://cdn.audiorella.com/podcasts/1465-akte-winterhoff/feed.rss Akte Rheinland bei YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxR-1mH7nhxNVq2lgMresq3FpSykqAID General-Anzeiger Bonn: https://ga.de/

Völlig ratlos und aufgelöst sitzen die Eltern von "Maik" vor Hans Reinhardt. Ihr Sohn wurde im englischen Dover festgenommen, weil sich bei ihm und seinem Kumpel "Robert" islamistische Schriften im Gepäck gefunden haben. Maiks Eltern wissen: Ihr Sohn hat sich radikalisiert. Und sie kommen nicht mehr an ihn ran.

French academic Fabrice Balanche, who has written extensively on Syria and just returned from a ten-day -long trip there, believes Turkey is paying a high stakes poker game in Syria through its backing of a Salafist group that has made stunning advances against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Marcel Krass ist eine der einflussreichsten und gleichzeitig umstrittensten Persönlichkeiten der muslimischen Community in Deutschland. Geliebt von vielen, kritisch beobachtet vom Verfassungsschutz und mit einer Vergangenheit, die reichlich Fragen aufwirft.  Er hatte Verbindungen zu einem der Attentäter vom 11. September und stand selbst lange radikalen Ansichten nahe. Doch heute geht er auf Distanz zu seinen alten Positionen und spricht offen darüber, wie es dazu kam. Marcel war schon mal bei mir im Podcast und ich habe ihm heute die Fragen gestellt, die ich mich letztes Mal vielleicht nicht getraut habe zu stellen. Ist der Islam gefährlich? Was wusste Marcel wirklich? Und was hat ihn dazu bewegt, seine Perspektive zu ändern? Sponsoren: (WERBUNG) https://linktr.ee/ungeskriptet_werbepartner KAPITEL: (00:00:00) - Intro (00:01:50) - Ich habe viele meiner früheren Ansichten geändert (00:12:30) - Was bedeutet „JIHADI"? (00:36:28) - Wie gings damals bei dir weiter? (01:07:21) - Wie war das für dich nach dem 11.09? (01:13:52) - Was von damals siehst du heute anders? (01:30:07) - Wie ist der IS entstanden? (01:34:06) - Wo ist Marcel in der ganzen Konstellation? (01:50:20) - Wie passt das mit "Der Staat will dem Islam schaden" zusammen? (02:05:44) - Vergleich mit evangelischer und katholischer Kirche (02:24:02) - Polizei-Aufmarsch und Helikopter in Krefeld (02:30:33) - Hast du in deiner Vergangenheit Böses in die Welt getragen? Ben: Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/ungeskriptetbyben?sub_confirmation=1 TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ungeskriptet Instagram: https://instagram.com/ben_ungeskriptet Marcel: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/marcelkrass/?hl=de Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@islamischeunion {ungeskriptet} gibt's hier bei YouTube und überall, wo es Podcasts gibt. Alle weiteren Links: https://www.ungeskriptet.com Mein Ziel ist, der beste Podcast Host Deutschlands zu werden. Ich verspreche dir, die spannendsten Gäste an meinen Tisch zu holen. 100% Realtalk. No Bullshit. #besterpodcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Al-Shabaab emerged as a force after the Ethiopian incursion into Somalia in support of the UN-recognized government in 2006. The militant, Salafist group later formalized a relationship with Al-Qaeda and has been described as the most active and dangerous Al-Qaeda affiliate in the world. In 2024, African Union troops are set to leave Somalia and turn control over to the national government. But will this be a repeat of the Afghanistan situation or can Somalia -- as their government claims -- eradicate Al-Shabaab by the end of the year?   In this episode, I speak with US State Department veteran Professor Tricia Bacon, author of Terror in Transition: Leadership and Succession in Terrorist Organizations, about the present situation in Somalia, its origins, and prospects for the future. Music: Pixabay

The recent killing by Ayman al-Zawahiri, erstwhile leader of al-Qaeda, brought many Americans back to awareness of an era that has been fading, the decade of the “War on Terror” that dominated geopolitics after the 9/11 terrorism attack. The World Trade Center bombings galvanized Americans, setting the stage for our disastrous invasion of Iraq and American meddling in Muslim nations worldwide. But while 9/11 drove a closing of ranks against radicalism across much of the West, a small minority drew different lessons. A radical faction of European and American Muslims, converts and those raised in the faith, instead made common cause with al-Qaeda, and its later offshoot, ISIS. Jason Walters is one of those young men who reacted to 9/11 very differently from the rest of us. Raised in the Dutch Bible Belt by a Netherlands-born mother and an African American father, Walters was raised nominally Christian but later converted to Islam. Sixteen years old when 9/11 occurred, Walter's faith moved in a radical direction, and in November of 2004 he was involved in a terror attack in The Hague. Imprisoned shortly after that, Walters emerged a free man in 2013, having shed his Muslim identity. In this episode, Walters joins Razib to discuss his cultural and racial background and how that might have fueled his radicalization. Though Walters avers that racial issues had little importance to him growing up, it is clear his mixed and cosmopolitan origins left him more attracted to an ideology that eventually alienated him from the rest of Dutch society. He talks about his discovery of Nietzsche, Plato and Heidegger in prison and how philosophy brought him out of Islam, giving him a new understanding of himself and his place in the universe. Razib and Walters also probe the importance of ‘system thinking' and ‘rationality' in the religious orientation of Salafist converts in the West.

V převážně muslimské Bosně a Hercegovině žijí vedle sebe také katolíci a pravoslavní křesťané. O svém pobytu v multináboženském Sarajevu a především o vlivu Saúdské Arábie a rozšiřování salafismu mluvila v Hergot!u redaktorka Českého rozhlasu Plus Magdalena Fajtová.Všechny díly podcastu Hergot! můžete pohodlně poslouchat v mobilní aplikaci mujRozhlas pro Android a iOS nebo na webu mujRozhlas.cz.

Heute bin ich im Gespräch mit Marvin Dell.

This week got a little taboo. There's been a lot of stuff in the media lately about porn - including the resuscitation of the feminist/evangelical alliance against porn - so it made me think about porn in the military. I bounced the idea off of Charlie and Ben Varlese and Chris Otero came on the show to discuss porn in the military. The pros, the cons, the unintended consequences and the way porn intersects with wartime service. Before you ask, yes, we really wanted to have at least one female from the Havok family come on the show, because we felt like it would be a valuable perspective, but we couldn't pull it off in time. But it was a good roundtable nonetheless. And I'm sure we'll revisit a lot of issues raised in the months to come, so plenty of opportunities to get more perspectives.  Have a listen here. Show Alibis So what's with joshing Ben about his cyber certificate from Colorado State? The last time he was on, he had everything go wrong with his connection that could happen - from not being able to get on to interference to jets flying overhead. When a graduate certificate in cyber is on your resume, you know you're going to take a few rounds if you're the one struggling to connect to a podcast. So that's what that's about. There were also a host of issues that Chris and Ben wanted to talk about. They made the tactical mistake of throwing them into the podcast chat assuming I would see them. Since I'm the one that drew their attention to the chat, that was a reasonable assumption. But then I didn't check it until the show was over and I saw all their hand raising and footnotes and suggestions. I can't cover all that ground in these alibis, so I'll highlight just one. Chris had a good point about erotica in Islamic culture - certainly there is no lack of representation in many classical Islamic texts. It is the relatively recent Salafist fundamentalism that has mandated a more repressed sexuality in Islamic countries (which, hypocritically, is frequently - though privately - ignored by its adherents). This deserves its own discussion. Ben wanted to clarify his comments regarding revenge porn. “I am on the fence with the criminality aspect of revenge porn; however, I support civil actions in the matter. The reason is the legal precedents are still tumultuous and divided on the issue. Several cases are being overturned on appeal over expectation of privacy of shared images and over 1st Amendment rights to share content freely given.” Show Notes I Love My Rifle More Than You by Kayla Williams Learn more about Operation Underground Railroad Havok Journal Savage Wonder Veterans Repertory Theater  

With the Taliban now in power in Afghanistan, many are now wondering how they'll govern and whether the country will once again become a safe haven for terrorist groups like ISIS-K and al-Qaeda.On Thursday, US Army General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, even said that it's “possible” the US could seek to coordinate with the Taliban on counterterrorism strikes against ISIS and other militants.Related: Chaos in Afghanistan creates power vacuum for ISIS, al-Qaeda to reorganize, counterterrorism expert saysAnd President Joe Biden vowed to continue airstrikes against ISIS after it conducted a suicide bombing at the Kabul airport last week, killing scores of Afghans and 13 American service members.Related: Afghans mourn the loss of young lives in ISIS attacksFor a look at how the different groups are likely to interact in the new Afghanistan, The World's host Marco Werman spoke with Ibraheem Bahiss, a consultant with the International Crisis Group's Asia program, where he focuses on Afghanistan.Marco Werman: Ibraheem, let's start with a question that we all seem to be asking. How different is the Taliban that's taken control in Afghanistan now from the one that ruled Afghanistan from the mid-'90s until they were pushed out of power following the 9/11 attacks?Ibraheem Bahiss: Well, like most political movements, it has learned, adapted and changed over the years. Part of that lesson-learning was that some of the restrictive policies in the 1990s turned them into a pariah state where other countries were unwilling to recognize it or provided with any type of aid. Now, the Taliban is very cognizant of the fact that they need international recognition, as well, as at least investment, if not aid. So, what could all this mean for how the Taliban interact with terror groups operating in Afghanistan? Let's start with ISIS-K, the group that took responsibility for the bombings near the airport that killed the US service members and many Afghans. Who are ISIS-K? What is their goal?ISIS-K, or ISIS Khorasan Province, is the local branch of ISIS. And the moment they emerged, they declared the Taliban to be apostates and foreign spies that were working for the Pakistani intelligence agency. And a brutal war started between the two groups from the get-go. Over the years, due to being pressured, not only by the Taliban, but also by the Afghan government and the US forces and NATO forces that were present in the country, ISIS-K has lost all the little territory it did control at one point in time. But now it still retains significant numbers of sleeper cells in various urban centers, including Kabul, and they are able to activate them to take actions such as they did [at] Kabul airport last week.Right, and the Taliban have said they will not accept this kind of violence. I mean, how will the Taliban's rise to power affect how ISIS-K operates now?Well, even in 2015, when the group first emerged, the Taliban's deputy at the time sent a letter to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who was the supposed caliph of ISIS, warning them that, "Look, Afghanistan's a no-go zone. You guys need to stay out of it." So, I expect the Taliban will continue with that approach. Even recently, when the Taliban broke prisons, they released all their own prisoners — they also released common criminals — but they actually killed the former head of ISIS-K in Afghanistan, Abu Omar Khorasani, who was in one of the main prisons in Afghanistan. So, I assume they will continue the same kind of repressive approach when it comes to ISIS-K.How about al-Qaeda? I mean, they did have support from the Taliban. Do al-Qaeda still have a presence in Afghanistan?The relationship between al-Qaeda and [the] Taliban was, I would argue, quite by accident, because the Taliban were a rural movement and al-Qaeda was a Salafist movement. Al-Qaeda harbored global ambitions and the Taliban had always been more confined to national borders. But in the 1990s, as the international community shunned them and they imposed sanctions on them, the Taliban became more and more dependent on some of these militant groups, including al-Qaeda. Right now, they seem to want to do things differently. But again, a lot will depend on how the international community interacts with the new Taliban.The big concern, of course, is that Afghanistan once again becomes a safe haven for these groups to operate, but also to recruit people from outside the country and train them in Afghanistan. Based on what you know today, how likely is that?I would venture a guess and say that the prospects of such a scenario are unlikely for a number of reasons. First of all, al-Qaeda, which is the biggest, rather globally focused organization, has decentralized to a large extent over the last 20 years. They are no longer that group which had a big presence in Afghanistan. Now, their leaders are all over the world. Their number two is presently in Iran. Some of their strongest branches are present in Yemen, for example, in northern Africa. And these are the top leaders of the organization. So the organization is a lot more decentralized and it has had to adopt that posture because of the global "war on terror" and the pressure that the US military has put on the organization. I see it unlikely that they would have incentive to refocus and rebuild in Afghanistan. Even if they did, I would say that the Taliban would be unlikely to welcome such a move. The Taliban have paid quite a heavy cost for their support for al-Qaeda in the 1990s, and I don't think they will be willing to take such a decision very likely this time around.This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. AP contributed to this report.

In this segment of By Any Means Necessary, hosts Sean Blackmon and Jacquie Luqman are joined by independent journalist and photographer Vanessa Beeley to discuss her new article in Dissident Voice, “Syrian Civilians Attacked by Terrorists Using American Weapons,” how US-manufactured arms continue to make their way into the hands of internationally-designated terrorist organizations, and the efforts to provide “humanitarian aid” to Syrian territories currently controlled by Salafist jihadist factions.

Progressive Muslim vs. Shaykh Uthman - What is a Salafist?

Dominic ist 17 Jahre alt und fühlt sich komplett lost. Er kifft täglich. Als er einen alten Freund trifft, der jetzt Salafist ist, entscheidet er sich, zum Islam zu konvertieren. Im Glauben findet Dominic Halt und Frieden. Doch die extremistischen Brüder wollen mehr. Dominic beginnt Hasspredigten zu verbreiten und radikalisiert sich. In BESSER SO erzählt er Leon, warum er jetzt nicht mehr an Gott glaubt und wie er sich selbst Halt gibt.

Ein Gemüsehändler im Süden Tunesiens zündete sich selbst an. Die Verzweiflungstat Mitte Dezember 2010 wurde zum Fanal für eine nie dagewesene Protestwelle in der arabischen Welt.Doch die Eliten schlugen zurück und die Region versank in Repression und Krieg. Wo ist die Aufbruchshoffnung hin?  Ahmed war 19, als die Protestwelle von Tunesien kommend die ägyptische Stadt Alexandria erreichte. Damals hoffte der Salafist noch vage, dass die Rückbesinnung auf einem Islam wie zu Zeiten des Propheten das bevölkerungsreichste Land der arabischen Welt aus seiner tiefen Krise führen würde. Doch dann wurde auch er von er revolutionären Begeisterung mitgerissen. Hunderttausende forderten auf dem Tahrirplatz in Kairo und im ganzen Land den Sturz des Regimes. Als die Armee unter dem Druck der Strasse den Langzeitautokraten Hosni Mubarak am 11. Februar 2011 tatsächlich fallen liess, war das «der allergrösste Tag» in seinem Leben, sagt Ahmed im Rückblick. Heute träumt er von einem Ort, wo er sich frei äussern könnte, ohne von den Schergen des Regimes bedroht zu werden. Heba Morayef erlebte die damalige Euphorie in Kairo, aber auch die brutale Gewalt, die folgte. Die Repression in Ägypten sei heute schlimmer als sie es unter Mubarak je war, sagt die Verantwortliche der Menschenrechtsorganisation Amnesty International für die Arabische Welt. Die Muslimbrüder, die damals nach dem Aufstand die ersten Wahlen gewannen, wurden zu Tausenden getötet oder weggesperrt. Nach den Islamisten traf es die säkularen Kräfte des Aufstands: Wer immer heute Regimekritik übt, riskiert Schikane oder Gefängnis. Die Regierung rechtfertigt die Repression mit terroristischen Bedrohungen und besonderen ägyptischen Werten, die im Westen nicht verstanden würden. Auch Hassan war vor zehn Jahren als Aktivist dabei, er oszilliert heute zwischen Resignation und dem Glauben, dass sich trotz allem etwas fundamental verändert hat: Das Verhältnis der Jugend zu den Autoritäten sei seit jenen Tagen des Volksaufstandes ein anderes: Lehrer, Imame, Politiker – sie könnten nicht mehr selbstverständlich auf Respekt zählen. In der ganzen Region klammern sich zwar korrupte Eliten mit ihren Sicherheitsapparaten an ihre Privilegien. Doch trotz der Kriege und Verwerfungen des letzten Jahrzehnts, auch der Politologe und Publizist Rami Khouri in Beirut bleibt überzeugt: Der Wille des Menschen, in Freiheit und Würde zu leben, sei die stärkste Kraft - wie ein Pflänzchen, das durch Beton hindurchwächst. Mit dem «Arabischen Frühling» sei diese Kraft in der Region entfesselt worden.

Ein Gemüsehändler im Süden Tunesiens zündete sich selbst an. Die Verzweiflungstat Mitte Dezember 2010 wurde zum Fanal für eine nie dagewesene Protestwelle in der arabischen Welt.Doch die Eliten schlugen zurück und die Region versank in Repression und Krieg. Wo ist die Aufbruchshoffnung hin?  Ahmed war 19, als die Protestwelle von Tunesien kommend die ägyptische Stadt Alexandria erreichte. Damals hoffte der Salafist noch vage, dass die Rückbesinnung auf einem Islam wie zu Zeiten des Propheten das bevölkerungsreichste Land der arabischen Welt aus seiner tiefen Krise führen würde. Doch dann wurde auch er von er revolutionären Begeisterung mitgerissen. Hunderttausende forderten auf dem Tahrirplatz in Kairo und im ganzen Land den Sturz des Regimes. Als die Armee unter dem Druck der Strasse den Langzeitautokraten Hosni Mubarak am 11. Februar 2011 tatsächlich fallen liess, war das «der allergrösste Tag» in seinem Leben, sagt Ahmed im Rückblick. Heute träumt er von einem Ort, wo er sich frei äussern könnte, ohne von den Schergen des Regimes bedroht zu werden. Heba Morayef erlebte die damalige Euphorie in Kairo, aber auch die brutale Gewalt, die folgte. Die Repression in Ägypten sei heute schlimmer als sie es unter Mubarak je war, sagt die Verantwortliche der Menschenrechtsorganisation Amnesty International für die Arabische Welt. Die Muslimbrüder, die damals nach dem Aufstand die ersten Wahlen gewannen, wurden zu Tausenden getötet oder weggesperrt. Nach den Islamisten traf es die säkularen Kräfte des Aufstands: Wer immer heute Regimekritik übt, riskiert Schikane oder Gefängnis. Die Regierung rechtfertigt die Repression mit terroristischen Bedrohungen und besonderen ägyptischen Werten, die im Westen nicht verstanden würden. Auch Hassan war vor zehn Jahren als Aktivist dabei, er oszilliert heute zwischen Resignation und dem Glauben, dass sich trotz allem etwas fundamental verändert hat: Das Verhältnis der Jugend zu den Autoritäten sei seit jenen Tagen des Volksaufstandes ein anderes: Lehrer, Imame, Politiker – sie könnten nicht mehr selbstverständlich auf Respekt zählen. In der ganzen Region klammern sich zwar korrupte Eliten mit ihren Sicherheitsapparaten an ihre Privilegien. Doch trotz der Kriege und Verwerfungen des letzten Jahrzehnts, auch der Politologe und Publizist Rami Khouri in Beirut bleibt überzeugt: Der Wille des Menschen, in Freiheit und Würde zu leben, sei die stärkste Kraft - wie ein Pflänzchen, das durch Beton hindurchwächst. Mit dem «Arabischen Frühling» sei diese Kraft in der Region entfesselt worden.

In Ergänzung zu der Sendung "Mein Freund ist Salafist" gibt es sogenannte Infomodule, kurze Filme zu weiteren Aspekten. Diese regen zusammen mit den Begleitmaterialien zum (weiteren) Diskutieren an. (Online-Signatur Medienzentren: )

In this segment of By Any Means Necessary hosts Sean and Jacquie are joined by Abayomi Azikiwe, Editor of the Pan-African News Wire, to talk about the "June 5th" protest movement demanding the resignation of President Ibrahim Boubacar of Mali, who, exactly would stand to benefit from Boubacar's ouster, and the relationship between that movement, the jihadist formations which helped overthrow Libya, and the Saudi government.

Interview with former Islamic YouTuber Ahmed Sami. Ahmed is an Egyptian Ex-Muslim Deist (believes in God but not Allah) and criticizes religion now after a long period of promoting it. His channel is here YouTube version of this podcast: https://youtu.be/BAUtwK5iYsU Timestamps: 0:00 Introductions2:03 Ahmed's background - learning about the word "atheist", starting a channel to offer counter-apologetics to Salafi apologetics.11:36 Is the "chain of man" method used to transfer the Quran and hadiths accurate?14:00 Kalam cosmological arguments by modern Salafist, William Lane Craig, Frank Tariq.16:08 Why would Islam need t to borrow concepts from Greek and Persian philosophy and mythology if it was revealed from God?18:22 The God gene - Does it even prove the existence of a God? The conspiracies surrounding the God gene.20:35 What are the problems with Isnād and Hadith? The "Holy shield" around religious scriptures that we need to overcome in order to read them objectively.32:00 The lack/cover-up of preserved pre-Islamic literature.37:15 How Ahmed found his way out of Islam.43:38 Explanatory power of science. Biases.46:38 The story of Adam and Eve - is it truth or myth by people trying to explain things they did not fully understand.52:00 What is Deism? Why is Ahmed a deist?55:50 The human-like attributes of God. How the concept of worshipping a God can be traced to the need for a father figure.1:00:20 How humans created God as a reflection of their current culture and philosophy.1:04:00 Where does Ahmed draw strength and motivation in life? Asking questions as we live our lives.1:09:36 The problems with Islamic epistemology.1:11:35 Why religions are not likely to go away any time soon (the endless need for answers). The benefits of religion to some people.1:19:20 Leaving Islam “just to sin”. The hypocrisy of Muslims who drink alcohol, indulge in premarital sex, and all other haram stuff.1:25:44 Ahmed's life after Islam. Leaving Islam for the wrong reasons.1:33:30 Ahmed's perspective on the situation between Muslims and atheists in the middle east.1:36:00 Street epistemology.1:36:40 Ahmed's perspective on the prophecies of Mohammad.1:41:03 Channel announcements1:41:26 Final remarks.

Scott talks to William Van Wagenen about his recent Libertarian Institute article exploring the extremist roots of Syria’s civil war. Contrary to the popular narrative, according to which peaceful, secular, democratic protestors were met with violence by the Syrian government, Van Wagenen explains that Muslim Brotherhood activists were really inciting the protests and attacking Syrian security forces from the very beginning. Though the government has undoubtedly killed its own citizens, this was not a case of peaceful demonstrators being met with force, but one of force being met with force. Not to mention, of course, the fact that America’s support for “moderate rebels” has turned out to be, as usual, support for some of the most brutal and radical islamist militants. Discussed on the show: “The Salafist Roots of the Syrian Uprising” (The Libertarian Institute) “Coping with Crumbling States: A Western and Israeli Balance of Power Strategy for the Levant by David Wurmser 1996” (The Scott Horton Show) William Van Wagenen has a BA in German literature From Brigham Young University and an MA in Theological Studies from Harvard Divinity School. You can read more of his writings at the Libertarian Institute. Follow him on Twitter @wvanwagenen. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: NoDev NoOps NoIT, by Hussein Badakhchani; The War State, by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; Listen and Think Audio; TheBumperSticker.com; and LibertyStickers.com. Donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal, or Bitcoin: 1Ct2FmcGrAGX56RnDtN9HncYghXfvF2GAh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fzx2rB4kDrQ

The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith.Send us feedback at MetagnosisPodcast@gmail.com. [Transcript by Bob, our AWS robot secretary][0:00:13] Yuta: Okay, So this week, we read beginning of Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations. And we only read about 5 to 7 chapters. But I found this personally. Very, I thought it was great. I was very entertained. And I think I learned a lot even though it's very old and its at the beginning of a long tradition of economics. But I thought it held up. Really well,[0:00:48] Henry: do you remember what year it was[0:00:51] Yuta: 1776? OK, it's just kind of crazy. Yeah, it's the year of the Declaration of Independence, and I think it's the year  critique of pure reason came out. So, oh, around that time? Around that time, I think. I might be thinking of a different book but it's around that. Came out right after, anyways, yeah. So I thought we would talk about the 1st two parts of what we read, which I would divide into basically an explanation of how markets and specialization work and how that creates wealth and the second part is going to be about what money is and, how labour on wealth relates to money or commodities.[0:02:00] Henry: it's kind of about how value works in the market, right?[0:02:03] Yuta: Yeah. Yeah. So, first, just to summarize it really quickly. I think it was basically, you know, we just talked about intro economics classes, but it was basically what you would get in an intro economics class. Now I think I was really surprised by how modern it was, and the writing was also, like, very readable. I really appreciated that. It's kind of rare for something, so old, but yes. So it explained that, you know. Okay, so one example I really liked was that in, like, poor tribes, basically, everyone is employed in a way because everybody is useful. Everybody has a way where they can contribute. But in wealthier countries, a lot of people are totally unemployed. And a lot of people who don't work at all like consumed 10 times more than people that work a lot. so it kind of it's kind of a weird situation, but yeah, it works out that way because of, he says specialization. I guess there's a lot of ways to go at this. But this is one way. With specialization, someone can focus on one task and get very good at that. And then through the chain of production, you can focus on your own task and create basically much more than, you would be able to on your own. So he has very concrete examples, which I really appreciated. His biggest example was with pins where he says, he actually described really in detail, the production of pins and it kind of surprised me. It's kind of, you know, trivial in a way. But I know it was told in a compelling way. and yeah, he very convincingly shows how factories can be so much more productive than a single person. I think in his example of something like 200 times or something on that massive scale[0:04:28] Henry: and even at that time before we have, you know, factories that we think of today assembly lines and things like that.[0:04:36] Yuta: yeah, not even talking about robots. They're competing. I think this is just people laboring but organizing that in different ways, not having massive returns,[0:04:50] Henry: and I think that just to recognize a point you made. It's a common theme throughout the book that he brings up lots of concrete examples of each of the concepts that he talks about. And if you are familiar with the idea, then it's sort of a little bit redundant. But it's super useful for learning and getting to know exactly what he's talking about.[0:05:13] Yuta: Yeah, so, yeah, I was going to bring up it reminds me it was very redundant to me. I felt like and also, I think, to a lot of people, like for someone who I mean, I think intro economics classes kind of are pretty redundant for a lot of people. I mean, if you read the newspaper and you kind of understand how trade works, things like that, it's not a lot of new concepts, but yeah, I guess it was also interesting. Interesting to see how this would be thought through from a perspective where it's not obvious he's, you know, probably most of the reason it's obvious to us now is because, Adam Smith and people like that discovered this, and it's kind of filtered down to everyone. Basically,[0:06:14] Henry: Yeah. I mean, this is not really a work of science, per se. It's I wouldn't know exactly how to describe the genre, but he's going through and he's giving an explanation of these things that are so commonplace that most people involved would already have some sort of intuition about, you know, their place within the system. But what he's bringing together is an overall explanation that accounts for the way that everything is already set up.[0:06:43] Yuta: Yeah. So I thought it was science because, he poses a theory about how society works. And then it's, you know, it's falsifiable? you can make predictions about specialization. His predictions would be like a country with more specialization has more wealth. Someone thought that, and then he you know, he has the empirical data that he looks at. So it is theory. So, yes. So what made you think that it isn't science?[0:07:22] Henry: okay. Yeah. Maybe it was a little bit too strong in claiming that it isn't a scientific work. I don't think that it practices the rigor that we would expect from social science in the time that we are talking about now. Yeah, but it was probably a very good work of social science at the time, for sure.[0:07:43] Yuta: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I totally agree. It doesn't resemble like a modern economics paper.[0:07:49] Henry: Yeah. I mean, not that I expected there to be a modern economics papers there. Yeah, so I guess that in terms of the standards of science today, it wouldn't be considered science. But at the time, yes, it would be a good work of science.[0:08:03] Yuta: I think it would. I don't know. I think it's still a work of science, but it's just that economics has adopted heavily mathematical formal methods. And Adam Smith didn't, which I mean, that's something. I mean, maybe in the rest of the look, more of it comes in. But it wasn't obvious to me that it would be like this. I thought maybe it would be have more formal work, but, not that that's a criticism.[0:08:35] Henry: Yes. And that's an interesting point.[0:08:38] Yuta: And it does make sense that it is less formal. Yeah, it is kind of less scientific, in a way it's more philosophical. Yeah, I get your point. Yeah, because you know, he is a philosopher and it's not like there was this long established tradition of economics. He's kind of creating the field largely so, I mean, that's how I see what the role of philosophers as being. It's looking at new aspects of reality that haven't been explored in a rigorous way and then creating the methodology to be able to that. And so that's definitely a philosophical process. Yeah, it's not a scientific process. You need a methodology to do science, you need to come up with the methodologies. At this primitive stage, it's more philosophical.[0:09:38] Henry: Yeah, I guess this goes beyond our original motivations for talking about this. Yeah, that is an interesting point. And putting this in the context of, like, how exactly should you read this? You're not looking for like, oh, he had this experiment that he observed where these people were trading these things or using this thing is money. But it turns out we found this evidence that it isn't exactly the way he said it was. So therefore his theory is wrong. Like that's not how you should be reading this[0:10:07] Yuta: Yeah, and I mean, so far, I think he's, he's been born out pretty right about, you know, this first part that we've been we've been talking about and I think it makes sense to talk about most of the aspects a little bit because it's, you know, the, of the founding of discipline. But yeah, we can talk about the more another time.[0:10:37] Henry: Yeah, I also want to say, so maybe getting back onto the core material. You were mentioning how first he observes that in a poor tribe, right was the example. But everyone is basically employed end in that way. Everyone is not completely self sufficient, is pretty self sufficient. They can get their own food and they maintain their own shelter, and they get whatever the resources they need directly. They don't rely on other people for necessary. Resource is. But one of the aspects of this is that if you weren't self sufficient, not only would you not be employed that you would be dead like it's not really a matter of the everyone decides to be employed. It's more that you can't not be employed.[0:11:29] Yuta: I think we'll Another thing is even went in communities that are highly interdependent, like poor communities that are highly interdependent. I think everyone is still employed just because it's easy to be useful in a city where, I guess, more There isn't, like, a huge inequality in the returns to labour. Something we thought.[0:12:00] Henry: Yeah, this is another point that he brought up it. Was that all right? Uh huh. It was, according to his observations, it doesn't seem that people very and natural talent Teoh a very significant degree, or at least not to a significant degree in comparison to the ah possible differences and returns the labour that adults seem to have. No. And the explanation for this is that are the justification for how this could be the case, while still there is such a discrepancy in return. So labor is that in fact, under certain circumstances, specialization being allowed will allow you to provide much more value than if you weren't specialized.[0:12:48] Yuta: Yeah, so yeah. So how that would apply to the poor tried, I think, is even if people are you know, their specialized like it's the tribe where you know, you have the hunters, and then you have They're gathers. You have people tending to the food, growing crops and people hunting like that's specialization, But they're still going to be poor, and it's still going to be very high, great or ratio of people that are doing useful work. So it's not, just being, you know, self sufficient, even like kind of interdependent societies can be poor. Ah, and have high employment.[0:13:43] Henry: I think there's a difference between interdependence and ah specialization because you ca NBI interdependent and still not be specialized. You conduce a lot of different tasks, but not all the tasks. So I guess that maybe what it is is that we're creating a false dichotomy between no specialization and being specialized. It's more where along the scale of specialization is allowed in your society.[0:14:12] Yuta: Yeah, Okay. And I would definitely yeah, the tribes air less specialized,[0:14:21] Henry: right? Yeah. It's not that they have no special visions, just that they're less specialized. And that has something to do with the reason that they're not as productive.[0:14:31] Yuta: Yeah. Yeah, let's exactly. And that's yeah, to move ahead. Yeah, that's yeah. Basically this point here. I think that the more you specialized, you can, kind of a choir mastery in this very specific thing because you're doing it, you know, for hours, every day and even begin to invent tools to, help with that. And yeah, I mean, his explanations. I really liked one of them here. They're so concrete. When here is about a boy, he seems to say it was an actual home boy, but it's boy like to play with his friends a lot. And so his job was to like this play fellows. Yeah, his I don't even know what this was. But some something with a furnace. You know, I I don't know e I live in the person chain. I have worked in, whatever factory, but so he had some task to do other furnace. And then he figured out a way to, like, open the furnace or something if he attached to rope to it to another part of the contraption. And then So he did that. And then he went out, went to play with his friends, So yeah. Adam Smith. Yeah, besides status as an example of, I guess ingenuity, and someone having with specialized task, allowing for, more productivity. All right. Yeah. And it's although it's not more productivity if you're just playing, if you show someone your invention them, that's definitely very useful,[0:16:17] Henry: right? So he describes. This is an example of specialization where it's not that your specialized in doing a particular form of like, the work that needs to be done to produce the thing. It's that there's a specialization in other directions as well. And I think that he calls this class of people philosophers right. There's a quote I highlighted. Many improvements have been made by the ingenuity of the makers of the machines when to make them became the business of a peculiar trade and some by that of those who are called philosophers or menace speculation, whose trade is not to do anything but to observe everything and who, upon that account, are often capable of combining together the powers of the most distant into similar objects in their progress of society. Philosophy or speculation becomes, like every other employment, the principal, our soul, trade and and occupation of a particular class of citizens. And that was one sentence.[0:17:14] Yuta: Yeah, and, of course, Smith Bottoms of himself. I mean, he was a philosopher going on and on an economist[0:17:23] Henry: e. Well, I think that I sort of read this as, ah, he calls them philosophers. But maybe today we would call them academics, scientists and philosophers.[0:17:36] Yuta: Oh, I thought he meant philosophers in particular. But[0:17:40] Henry: But, I mean, if he was looking at, like, if he was to, you know, come to the 21st century, I think that he would identify those people as what he meant by philosophers as well. Do you[0:17:51] Yuta: think? I don't know. I mean, well, Adam Smith in particular was a false for, you know, as we would think of a false for right. But yeah, maybe. Yeah, I didn't. Yeah, Mom, What I read isn't telling me, but it's but yeah, I think you meant probably philosophers. And you could maybe in include some of what scientists do inside of that. But it seemed like you meant fosters. Just be. Is he talked about them being, kind of most associated with ah, ideas in abstraction. He says he kind of has Ah, He takes the Shawna from when? he says that people are like you mentioned, you know, broadly similar in talent. But once they kind of specialized, they can convince themselves, Like philosophers convinced themselves that they're just, like, totally different than it. Just like a different kind of, you know, being force. yeah. You know, that would be an interesting thing to look into. How? And I'm also interested in how yeah, when people started thinking of themselves as economics Oh, muscle. I mean, like, why did he write this book? Like, you know, his previous work was pretty well received. Was about, you know, on the sentiments off moles. There's something thought look on that very straightforwardly philosophy and mean. I mean, it's in that tradition on directly sites fosters when he writes this thing, it is about, wealth.[0:19:54] Henry: Yeah, I guess I I see. It just sort of him musing about like, these are a ton of things that I've been thinking about, and it actually fits together pretty well. So I'm gonna write this book about it like it's a very it's a neat thing, cause it's, you know, written in the style of the sort of philosophical texts of the time that air read a lot in false E, But it's about, like, you know, the real world. Very normal things that happened rather than very up shark things.[0:20:29] Yuta: Yeah, there is. Yeah, there's like like we talked about that level of abstraction, but he always like, and he usually having starts with the abstract statements, like, you know, specialization brings wealth. But then he uses the extremely concrete examples. Well, which makes it beyond that part is very different from philosophy. Yeah, maybe his fall self goal of training paid off. I'm son. Yeah, I think that was a good point. It's definitely structured in the way that there, Yeah, that philosophical works were Yeah, like, Yeah, a lot. Like, David Hume.[0:21:10] Henry: Brian? Yeah. Exactly. Also[0:21:11] Yuta: as old since yeah, as always. You know Smith earlier where[0:21:16] Henry: I think they both have Hume and Smith, both of Scottish ancestry as well.[0:21:21] Yuta: Yeah, I think. Yeah. I think they're both in in Scotland for the most part. And then Anna Smith studied at Oxford, but yeah, I think they were in the same basically group of people[0:21:33] Henry: uses Scotland for a lot of examples. Really funny. you[0:21:38] Yuta: also England, England. Like the shining? yeah,[0:21:43] Henry: all right. Yeah. All their confusing names for different amounts of money. Anyway, so Okay, this So this first section is about Ah, what was your delineation of it? Again?[0:22:01] Yuta: It's about specialisation or how wealth is created through specialization, right? It's 11 Other point is I'm He says that specialisation is, biggest in manufacturing and that agriculture is kind of similarly productive. Basically everywhere.[0:22:24] Henry: Oh, yeah, that was I didn't really understand exactly what the purpose of thought section was. Yeah, So he says that it doesn't really matter where you drive your culture. It's not gonna be any more efficient in different locations.[0:22:38] Yuta: Yeah, And he says, like wealthier countries put more resources into their agriculture. But like, per unit of resource, more labor, if they're not any more efficient than in a poor country.[0:22:54] Henry: Right? And you were first back to this later actually to say that certain agricultural products are good, stable values to measure things by but also in regards to this point. Hey, does talk about it in terms of specialization, which I think is like the way that you would think of a specialization. Is that its different people deciding to focus on particular kinds of work rather than doing many different kinds of work. But he also, relates this really closely to I think this is a good insight to specialization of time, in place as well. But, ah, he refers a lot to opening not necessarily global, but a larger marketplace so that you can have certain areas that are better doing certain things, Ah, to do those things there and then you can transport it over to another place. And as long as the transportation is ah, you know, not as costly as the efficiency gain. Then it's, ah, role. Better to do in that other location.[0:24:02] Yuta: Yeah, Yeah. This geography plays a large role in his explanation in other places as well. Like he identifies that cities in the coast and then just, the wealthy regions in general tend to be along coasts or along like a a river. That, is very good for transportation on, right? Yeah, he says, Yeah, that's because if you, well, if there, then you can transport your wares to a lot of different places and convert it to things that are useful to you. Weaken specialize more basically BZ Evo access to a wire market,[0:24:45] Henry: right? Exactly. So it's and more Special Edition leads to more efficiency. More wealth?[0:24:51] Yuta: Yeah, I think the word eases. It's like the extent of the market is greater in those areas. Yeah, you're able to sell toe wide range of people is if you like, live in China. Yeah. Yeah. So if you live in the middle of a country and you don't have access to ports, then if you make you know 10 million pins, then you have no no one to sell them to. It's it's kind of pointless to make that many pins. So you have to kind of make a few pins, maybe to say you can sell to your town. But then you have to spend your time on other stuff if you want to be as productive as you can and then you're specializing specialising less. So, yeah, everyone's were[0:25:38] Henry: soft overall, right? Right. Yeah, that's the That's a major theme of specialization is that it's ah, very collaborative effort. Specialization is not to help certain people of the expense of others. It actually will make everyone better involved. Our every everyone will be a better off who's involved in the specialization, you know, game.[0:26:00] Yuta: Just about a month. Yeah, he talks about it's collaboration, but it's based on ah, self interest. Everyone's working based on self interest without at this point, I feel like this. I mean, this is kind of reveal, right? But yeah, it's, but it's like, surprisingly, I think a lot of people don't. Yeah, they don't like this idea or agree with it. What was just kind of always spice to me it because I think it's almost like a political topic now, but I think it's something that's empirically correct. So it should. It should be me on debate.[0:26:46] Henry: Well, in terms of the modern contacts. First of all, here's a quote that, you know, we can't not to say. Ah, but man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brother, and and it is in vain for him to expect it to be there. But by their benevolence on Lee, it will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self love in his favor and true them that it is for their own advantage to do for him what he requires of them. And then there's the quote about the Baker is a little and the junior that's really famous. Yeah, it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest. We address ourselves not to their humility but to their self love and never talk of them of our own necessities. But if their advantages and what I was so yeah, those were good coats. But what I was going to say is that, I think that in the modern context, it's it's interesting to think about this as I was reading, because he gives all these examples and it's sort of like trying to justify, ah, specialization and you know, lots of other things that will get you. But it's so weird because we just take it really for granted in modern society, like you just take it for granted that you can go to the score to get food, and you don't want to make your own food like let's just I couldn't have ever amounted to any other way it would. It just seems ah, like completely different life to have to grow your own food, you know? Yeah. And for[0:28:27] Yuta: for him, that's also the truth, right? Oh,[0:28:31] Henry: yeah. He's living in a society that I don't know exactly where he's living at the time, but there is also this specialization already, but yeah, I couldn't imagine, like only being able to get food from my town. Are you something even?[0:28:49] Yuta: Yeah, that. I mean, that would mean you're living in a basically try, bring like like, there's a few in in the Congo or something,[0:28:59] Henry: right? Yeah, ya. But when you talk about the sort of political arguments that are happening, I almost wonder if it's that it's become such a baseline toe have all of the structures of specialization that the arguments are about very minor differences. But since everyone just accepts the baseline, they've seen relatively large,[0:29:26] Yuta: I think. Among economists, that's definitely I think the case. I think pretty much every minute stuff just yeah, I think that any economist will say, kind of this specialization and markets are do a pretty good job of, Verity of things on. Then they'll argue about, you know, some of the limitations of markets. But I think in the general public, the general polkas in anywhere near at that point. But yeah, that's Simmons. Another discussion. True? Yeah. Okay. Ah, but but you do hear you know all the time about you know, the invisible hand. People just like take downs of the invisible hand of the market or people or kind of greed and selfishness being just basically bad things that are basically bad for people without any acknowledgement of some of its benefits at times.[0:30:37] Henry: Yeah, I agree. But it also seems justice intuitive that people do expect to be compensated for their efforts like they'll argue about, Ah, you know, being nice and not being selfish when it's about things that are, like, special. But when it comes to going to work, you're like, yeah, I want to get better pay check if I can. Like, I don't feel bad about that.[0:31:05] Yuta: I'm and have anything. Some of these people. Okay. Okay.[0:31:11] Henry: Yeah, maybe. Maybe we're talking about different groups, but it seems some majority of people are sort of on board with the whole, like exchanging labor for money and that sort of[0:31:21] Yuta: thing. Yeah. I mean, yeah, perspective. This very messed up from being a crazy liberal arts college. Okay, of anyways, so should we talk about the second part?[0:31:39] Henry: Yeah, yeah, let's do that.[0:31:42] Yuta: Yeah. So the second part, he goes on to talk about what basically went wealth is and how it's transferred between people and the form that it's transferred between people, which is basically commodities on. Then eventually money. And he identifies of money like the value of money. It's kind of it's an interesting question. Like what? How does money have value when it's so what? He and then fights this, that the value behind money is the labor that goes into the goods. So when you buy, I guess[0:32:27] Henry: I think that's the value of the goods, right?[0:32:32] Yuta: well, it's the value of the currency as well, he says. It's It's the value of the labor that goes into producing the goods that your purchasing[0:32:46] Henry: well, that's the value of the goods. But how do you determine how much the value of the currency is[0:32:53] Yuta: by how much something costs? And then,[0:32:56] Henry: well, that's what we're trying to determine. How much How much does a loaf of bread cost in terms[0:33:01] Yuta: of literacy? So let's say it's $10. I think Adam Smith would say, Ah, the bread costs $10 because it took $10 of labour to produce the bread.[0:33:20] Henry: Ah, well, maybe you were starting a different places. I'm thinking of like, imagine we didn't have money or we didn't have a centralized system of money. Then how do we get from that to having money?[0:33:32] Yuta: Okay, I guess Weekend, that's a better place to start. So[0:33:36] Henry: we don't have dollars to reference. We just have lives of bread and, you know, other commodities.[0:33:45] Yuta: well, yeah, well, in that kiss, yeah, it's I mean, trade is a lot harder. Obviously the most. The easiest way to do it would be to trade another loaf of bread. but then he talks about oxen. Became the next kind of one of the first forms of money. Basically, right. Homer talked about people's armor being valued in terms of money. Someone had, in terms of oxen. I mean, someone had armor worth 10 oxen 100 oxen. Yeah.[0:34:27] Henry: See, you measure things in terms of oxen.[0:34:29] Yuta: Yeah, because I s oxen were useful to everyone. So you didn't. Yeah, I kind of have to, yeah. Come up with some artificial. Yeah,[0:34:44] Henry: it was basically a Barner because you're bartering with something that actually has the value that you're trying to get. Like, intrinsically. Yeah, the difference is that since everyone uses oxen, it's sort of fungible You can you can use as an intermediary value you don't toe like, expect the person that you're gonna be trading to yuta have to want the thing you have already. Yeah, yuta, they will.[0:35:09] Yuta: Yeah. So commodity is something that's basically interchangeable, right? So yeah, basically, oxygen became a commodity which Yeah, it's kind of halfway to a currency, as I see.[0:35:24] Henry: Yeah, they were proto currency[0:35:28] Yuta: on young and from there, yeah, you eventually get to Hey, talks about precious metals have always been very popular. Ah, forms of currency because, says most important beacon split them apart. And then you can also put them back together without altering their value. Easy. Can you refuse the metals? Melton in season[0:35:56] Henry: and they have a really scarcity as well. It's not easy to counterfeit it.[0:36:01] Yuta: Yeah, and then this goes to my original point where talks about when the gold mines in America were discovered over. Uh oh, but I[0:36:12] Henry: just was still happening at the time.[0:36:15] Yuta: Yeah. Yeah, that And let's Yes, 70 76. Yeah, that's where reading[0:36:23] Henry: you and always California. Yeah.[0:36:27] Yuta: Which? I don't think it's happened at this at this point. Yeah, yeah, I'm pretty sure. I think this happens way. But anyways, he says the value of gold in Europe went down to 1/3 of its virginal value because the amount of labor required to produce gold became dramatically less after, the gold mines were discovered because it's easy to find gold and dig it out. And if you have, you know, a scarcity in in nature than you have to work a lot harder to get smaller amounts,[0:37:06] Henry: isn't I think this is. He doesn't mention it in here. But there's another similar story of when Spain was conquering South America. They found a bunch of gold mines there as well, and also got a lot of gold from the Incas and the Aztecs and all that. And they brought all the gold back to Seo hand It was it was, uh,[0:37:29] Yuta: around with. There wasn't original point. yeah. OK, so that wasn't[0:37:35] Henry: even worth it to bring it back to Spain because it was so deep about devalued by having so much.[0:37:43] Yuta: yeah. So that was my point about, you know, labour being force for Adam Smith, the value behind currency of the OCR. Different meeting, you know?[0:37:57] Henry: Oh, yeah, I I agree with that. Yeah,[0:38:00] Yuta: OK. Do you agree with Smith?[0:38:05] Henry: Do I agree that labour is what is money value? Yeah. Ah, yes. But I think that it might over simplify it to say it like that because it's not. It's not the labor. Ah, to be able to make something like that. It's more that the labour required to actually produce a valid one. So, for example, he describes how gold coins were given and silver coins were given stamps of approval by some centralized authority in order to show that, you know, it's ah has the right amount of the metal in it. So it actually I was able to require that much labor to create something I thought, but you could, in theory, counterfeit it by not putting as much labor in it, but still getting a stamp. So there's a little bit of marginal room for, problems with that. But[0:39:10] Yuta: I think that's a little counterfeit. Money is a little different. I think that's saying this is like the kind of currency where there is value to it, but you're kind of I'm faking it. And, like the labor that Smith is talking about, isn't the labor that goes into stamping right? It's it's labor that goes into what you can purchase with it.[0:39:36] Henry: Well, I think that to an extent. Actually, it is the labor that goes into stamping it. It's not the labor of like, actually, you know, taking a stamp and doing that. It's the labor of doing that, validly getting a valid[0:39:48] Yuta: Samp. wait, what's what's not labour?[0:39:54] Henry: Well, it's hard to do that t get a valid stamp. You have to go through some process.[0:40:01] Yuta: But why? Why would that give something? Value it?[0:40:05] Henry: Well, here's here's what I imagine is like Imagine there's 100 gold coins, but only half of them have stamps of approval, right? You know, then only the gold coins was stamps of, well, the gold coins with stance approval have a certain value. And the gold coins without the sensor approval have a lesser value.[0:40:25] Yuta: I don't I don't think so. Because, like, if I just if I got some locks and puts in stamps on them, they wouldn't have value. I mean,[0:40:35] Henry: right, right. Because it's not the value of getting your own stamp on the coin. It's the value of getting a certain valid sample on the coin. And that is limited. Like, let's say they only allowed some 50 stamps. Then it's gonna be really hard to get another stamp.[0:40:56] Yuta: Okay, this is funny, because I actually disagree with Adam Smith. Okay, I also disagree with you, uh,[0:41:05] Henry: might be stretching the term of, like, what? Labour is the flying to here. But what what were you gonna say?[0:41:14] Yuta: And also you're disagreeing with Adam Smith. Ah, yeah, your your, So I guess, Yeah. I mean, I can go with that example. Maybe I get a bunch of people, and we agreed Teoh, you know, agree on a stamp to put on rocks, and then we put them on, you know, a limited number of rocks on 10 rocks not still make those rocks valuable. There's be something behind it. Give value to those rocks. Yes, this is Yeah, This sounds very philosophical. Maybe maybe this[0:41:54] Henry: Well, so what we're talking about by value here is the value of the things that you can trade for. Ah, the rocks, right? Or the labor that goes into the things you can trade the rocks[0:42:05] Yuta: worth. I think that's the question. It's why do why does Currency of Valium? Well, if[0:42:12] Henry: it does have value, that would be the value. Right?[0:42:15] Yuta: Well, that's one answer to the question, but that's kind of assuming an answer already.[0:42:20] Henry: So this is why I think so. I I definitely am stretching it. I didn't reed this anywhere in his book, but going to your example with rocks, right? I think that the reason that your rocks no one would accept them like you would be able to trade them for anything is because it's too easy to create a counterfeit rock. It takes a very little labor Teoh counterfeit one of the rocks[0:42:48] Yuta: in my exit. On my next example, I would I had assigned with the community of people to only recognize this particular stamp, and I'll just say, you know, you can't counterfeit. There's only 10 of the rocks. It's a limited spy.[0:43:05] Henry: Yeah, but you don't know where old 10 rocks are it every time, right? Every[0:43:09] Yuta: time I try to rock some that you do.[0:43:12] Henry: Okay. Well, then I guess that it's really hard to counterfeit because you know where all the rocks are. So it's impossible. So that's about[0:43:21] Yuta: it. That's the set up of the new. So do they have value?[0:43:26] Henry: I think that they would have more value than if they were counterfeit. Herbal? Yes.[0:43:32] Yuta: Why? But they wouldn't like the rocks there. Still useless like nobody want. Right? Why would anyone, yeah, take anything[0:43:46] Henry: for the rocks? Because they have guaranteed scarcity. it's just like how we use dollars, right? The dollar is, you know, doesn't take a lot of material to make a dollar,[0:44:01] Yuta: but there's a lot of things that are scarce but that are worthless. Give me an example. okay. I mean, I could make ah painting a really shitty pain you, and there's only one of them, but it's worthless. Give to anyone but me.[0:44:25] Henry: Well, they might be easy to counterfeit that painting because no one you know, paying attention to your painting so no one's keeping track of where it is and all that only, gosh, paintings are very valuable, and there's a lot of effort put into making sure that you don't have a counterfeit. So that's part of why they have value. If no one could tell which the counterfeit was, then they wouldn't have as much value.[0:44:54] Yuta: It's not OK if paintings were counter for the ball, but they would have less value by. It's not the fact that they're scarce. That makes them valuable. Is I could I mean, I think you you also changed my scenario to I mean, I could just say in my scenario, my painting is not gonna credible. You know? I put it online and it's yeah, whatever. Whatever I put in a bank vault, whatever. so you know, I think it makes it valuable. It wouldn't be valuable. Would still be junk. I[0:45:38] Henry: do get the intuition you're going for, and I'm trying to think of how you would justify the other side. yeah.[0:45:46] Yuta: Let me Come on. The other side could just not have a[0:45:52] Henry: I think, though, that there is something to this, that scarcity is an important part of why certain money has value.[0:46:01] Yuta: No, I I agree. If something isn't scare, Senate can't serve as a store of value. But I don't think that's, uh okay.[0:46:11] Henry: But it's not sufficient to make something valuable.[0:46:14] Yuta: Yeah, and it's almost besides the point I want to say, and I think Smith Yeah, maybe off off reed closer. See what he would say? But if he does it, and five, the labour or the value with the labor.[0:46:34] Henry: Yeah, I think you're right. Ah, that one of the so. Another reason that would sorry. Another factor in determining the value of your painting is how much effort went into Or you know, how much labor went into the creation of the painting, right? And if it didn't really take much effort like you're not a good painter and you didn't spend your entire life on this painting, then[0:46:56] Yuta: I mean, honestly, if I spent 100 hours on a painting, I think it would still be pretty much worthless on the market.[0:47:05] Henry: Well, right, because you're about painter, it's labour's equally valuable. Right?[0:47:12] Yuta: Okay. It's okay. so, yeah, all Aiken explain Smith for for the listeners a little bit on this point where he says, Yeah, it's not just, you know, the number of hours that you put in that is the value behind currency. Uh huh. Okay. yeah, he says, it's labour, but you have to take into account the number of years that you want that went into learning the skill to produce labor and yourself taking to count the intensity of labor. So, like 10 hours of hard work could be more labour than 20 hours of lazy work or someone with 10 years of experience could, used more labour in in an hour that in someone with no experience in towers, eso and this I think, Yeah, I'm Is that Do you agree with that? Um,[0:48:19] Henry: yeah, yeah, that's what I was thinking about. So yeah, I think, but that's how you can differentiate labor. And it's so it's not just the exact thing that you did. It's everything that was required to come to that point that you could do that.[0:48:36] Yuta: Yeah, And I think you made a comment along these lines, but I think this is I mean handing. He massively stretched the definition of labor here. I did not good. Yeah. So this is one of my points of disagreement with him, Which by, by the way, it's totally I mean, I think this was so great of work so far, and I'm gonna definitely reed the whole thing, so I don't mean it's not still see a gotcha. You know, 300 years, I e hopefully reason made progress. That's yeah, it's not impressive at all. You just disagree, but, uh yeah, I do disagree on this point. and this kind of young it kind of starts up this point were he stretches the definition of labor so much that it basically to me, I think he acquits it with value, Basically, because he doesn't If you just talk to like a regular person, Labour is, you know, the amount of effort you put into stuff basically or the amount of work. And if, yeah, if someone with 10 years of experience does just some highly specialize thing, I don't know. To me, that doesn't seem like, a lot of labor went into the exact[0:50:05] Henry: like, if you're a Web designer and you goto work and you sit and watch you two for eight hours, and then Stanton our programming then that's not a lot of labor, even though you're paid a ton of money. Yeah,[0:50:17] Yuta: so, Yeah. Good example. Yes. A Smith would say that person put in. Let's say they make, $150,000 a year and morning working, you know, at a grocery store. Full time makes, let's say, 30,000. Ah, year, Smith would say, My reading is the programmer put in five times more labour than the grocery store clerk?[0:50:46] Henry: Roughly. Yeah. I mean, there are other factors that go into determining your salary as well, but that is one of the major ones.[0:50:54] Yuta: Well, I wouldn't Smith say. I mean, that is what span currency. But then anyways, yes. So he would identify it. Obviously not with, like, the physical labor, which is, I think, kind of what you would normally think of Labour's mean, But he would have been fired with instead. kind of. The programmer spent many years in school learning to program Probably yes, pro four years in college for most rumors, something that I'm not maybe a couple years of experience. while this clerk didn't put in and then So if you have all those up labour of the parameters five times more than the labour of the grocery store clerk[0:51:46] Henry: yeah, that is that is an interesting observation. I I think you're right that Ah, he is equating labor and value. But I I wonder if this is a mistake, though I maybe he intends to do that. And he's trying to show that what we think of us Labour really should be encompassing. What we refer to is value.[0:52:13] Yuta: I I think he's trying to do that. But I think it is confused because he's trying to explain, You know, with book is the wealth of nations. It's trying explain, like, what is it behind? Yeah, currency that has value. Like why do people, care about accumulating these, bits of currency? it's not obvious that, you know, I mean, for a long time, currencies didn't have value yet to actually barter. And so there's something behind it. It's and then he's saying, It's the labor, so that that seems to me. It's like if you say labor, is what gives things, value it. I think it's a specific answer, you know, a clear answer. And then, if you kind of conflate labor with value than it's almost like you're not answering the question at all,[0:53:16] Henry: you might even call his. You might even calls approach a labour theory of value. So yeah, just completely not the lever theory of value.[0:53:29] Yuta: No, it is. I think that's that's when it's going, Yeah, where is going to go next? That actually saw a super spies? Because in a class refreshing, your yeah, I read a lot of capital by Karl Marx, and eating Tree starts off. Basically, this is almost the same exact way, except he starts with, Ah, currency and labour are and value instead of I'll Smith starts with specialization all the time. They're pretty similar. And then, yeah, in my understanding from three years ago, this is, the same argument that Karl Marx gave. He even has the same examples. Basically, I think he made a views diamonds instead of gold. But I think he probably talked about gold to But how? Diamonds are very hard to get. You have to like they're in after our something. And then just people spend. It's like he kind of describes how hard it is to mine diamonds. And he says, That's why diamonds are very valuable on bits. Eso it's the labor. That's the store for the what backs value behind no currency and capital and young. I mean, from there it goes, you know, Ah ha, you is the same argument, which really surprised me. I mean, when I read Marx is book, it just It was just, like, totally ridiculous to me,[0:55:16] Henry: huh? But now that it says it now, it's fine. No, no, I e no. Well, I think, though, so[0:55:26] Yuta: Oh, Adam Smith came way before marks, If I remember correctly, so I mean and I'm pretty sure marks. Yeah. You know, he had the benefit of hindsight a little bit[0:55:38] Henry: to to that. Ah, this is just a tangential point. But this marks. Do you think he also is talking about it in the sense of that, certain labor can be differentiated like some labor is more valuable than other labor.[0:55:56] Yuta: Yeah, he, talks about specialization. I remember that specifically and then talks about Yeah, kind of. And he wrote this 18 67 came out Capital. See, he has almost 100 years on up on Smith. So I think there's more, you know, special efficient at this point. I can't Yeah, I can't remember exactly. I'll look into it. exactly how he explains the differences in the value of labour for, like, information workers. Basically[0:56:39] Henry: Well, what? I always interpreted the Marxist for you to be. But maybe I don't have a clear view, as I thought is that, it doesn't matter what people want. It's not turned by the market how valuable your thing is. It's just determined by how much effort you put into making. The thing that's about valuable it is, and you don't seem too problematic with that is that then all labor is basically of the same value because it's just the same amount of effort there are. You know, it's measured in amount of effort you put into it, but clearly I think that what ah Smith is trying to villainy between different labour's that have different value is some labor is more valuable if it's mawr demanded. Like if more people want it,[0:57:33] Yuta: well, I don't think I mean, I agreed up to that last point. I don't He doesn't bring in whether people want the commodities so far in the book. I think he says, unifies value with labor, and I think he's the same with marks on that point.[0:57:58] Henry: Maybe they differentiate later than I. I guess I would have to read it again. But I interpreted as, that's part of what he meant by not all labour has the same Ah, like, you know, great value. Some labour's worth twice as much of the labour for certain reasons.[0:58:20] Yuta: Yeah. Okay. All of godson quotes[0:58:25] Henry: about reed weaken. Okay, You wanna say some puts?[0:58:32] Yuta: okay, here it is, the real price of everything. What? Everything really costs to the man who wants to acquire it is the toil and trouble of acquiring it. right. The value of any commodity, therefore, to the person who possesses it and who means not user consumed himself. But to exchange it for other commodities is equal to the quantity of labour which enables him to purchase or command labor. Therefore, is the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities. Yeah, and that just seems like pure labor theory of value. Mm. Thank you. Yeah. And I agree with your impression of marks. I think that is what Marx says. And I also think that's what it says. Okay.[0:59:36] Henry: Okay. Yeah, I e think I'm coming to a better idea now. Yeah, I think the differentiation comes later. They do agree that labour is the basis for value, but and, you know, it will come most later where they disagree about some things[0:59:51] Yuta: and also like the beginning part. I think I don't think like Marx understood much of what Smith was saying. First part about specialization from what I remember, and it's kind of weird abuse to me. It seems like if he specialized, it allows you to, Even if he put in the same amount of work, it allows you to be wildly more productive and, you know, better compensated as a result because of you know, how your labor is organized and yeah, I thought the first the entire point of the first few chapters was that how you organized labor can, you know, increase the productivity of a group of people by 102 100 times. And to me, That's just those all seem, like arguments against the labor theory of value. It, you know, taken Teoh, if you just extend those arguments out a little bit. So, you know, I think clearly the first part of that book is very much, not like Marks. And yeah, it was a little confusing to me. Not that second part. Yeah, it seems to me to be in opposition with first part.[1:01:15] Henry: Ah, I guess that so in the same way that having put effort into a skill say, right man will increase the the amounts of labour you're capable doing and given time, I think that he would also say that by being in a some organizational structure that will also increase the amount of value or the amount of labor that you're able to dio here. I can see kind of your original point, which is that he's kind of using labour in a weird way.[1:01:51] Yuta: Yeah, And you're of Freudian slip.[1:01:54] Henry: Yeah, I know. Yeah, yeah. So they're doing the same, like, you know, they're putting in the same Maybe effort and value are better. Words sees. Yeah, So they put the same effort. Uh oh, that's are, you know, I I know. But[1:02:10] Yuta: even less true effort just seems more, clear. We not value. but yeah, yeah, it does seem like Adam Smith's idea of labor or definition of labour becomes very tortured at this point where you would identify just busy specialized. Let's say he's one of those examples like, Let's say, someone makes was a pin maker said he made pins for 10 hours a day and he produced 100 pins. Well, it's I'm all Smith, I think uses 20 pins a day something. What is it? You know, it's a lot of work to participant, and you want to read about that. And so you didn't read the book, and then he joins the factory and then with 10 other people. Let's say he brute. He produces £5000 a day. altogether. Yeah, You? Yeah. So yeah. Hey, became dramatically more productive. And I guess Smith would say he put in more labour into it, but e did not find out with education. Really? the I mean, maybe you needed a little bit of training, but not much. And also, if you just took the counterfactual of whether you go into the factory or on your own. You know, the amount of flirting you need to go on your own is lot closure. but yeah, so I mean, yeah, that definition of flavor where the person working in the factory puts in, you know, 100 times more labour, whatever or whatever numbers is kind of tortured definition of flavor from[1:04:03] Henry: the way that you phrase it is a little difficult. I think it may be. Here's ah way you could say is that hey, puts in it requires more labour of him.[1:04:18] Yuta: Yeah, that I mean, that doesn't seem true.[1:04:22] Henry: Well, I guess that the intuition is that he's putting in the same amount of effort, right? It requires the same on effort on his part. Just in that, those 10 hours what he's doing, he's putting, you know, the same amount of calories towards You don't work. Yeah, try it left. So in that sense, he's not doing anything extra. So what would you call it that is increasing when he's working in the factory?[1:04:50] Yuta: His spot activity, I mean well, that we can all agree on, like Smith and me and you[1:04:58] Henry: so maybe is it that he's conflating effort and productivity,[1:05:05] Yuta: which is the same as conflating labor and ah, value.[1:05:10] Henry: Yeah. Okay, I see your 0.1.[1:05:15] Yuta: Yeah, but then Okay. So[1:05:17] Henry: I think, though, that it's not so suffered because I think that you could conceive like it's possible to conceive of effort and productivity in a unitary concept concept. It's sort of just has those two things as factors.[1:05:36] Yuta: wait. What? Ok, so what? Even this effort. And then I didn't understand your point.[1:05:44] Henry: So I would say that I'm just kind of coming up with us, but I'm trying to work along with how you're describing it. So effort would be the amount of actual physical actions you have to dio in order to complete size. We were actually mean. Yeah, sure. I'm avoiding a labor just because he uses it differently and I don't want to be like this. And then productivity would be the actual results of your actions.[1:06:17] Yuta: I Okay, I agree with that on. Yeah,[1:06:24] Henry: I did hide this sort of a Did you can have this sort of unitary concept. Call it labor, which is something of a combination of the amount of effort and the amount of things you produce per effort.[1:06:40] Yuta: I don't understand what e I mean. Okay, but that's ridiculous.[1:06:47] Henry: Well, so imagine I think of it this way. So imagine you're driving your car, right? Your car is going to go at a specific speed. Let's call it, you know, the speed of the car and you're gonna be driving for a certain amount of time. Let's call that the duration of the drive. Then you can have a concept of Thea Mount of Distance you drove, which is going to be determined by the multiplication of the this, the length of time that you drove and the speed at which you drove. So there's no like, you know, it's all intuitive, so maybe you could have in the same case. Ah, your effort on your productivity is theme, amount of stuff he produced per effort that you put in. And then the results of that is your labor.[1:07:41] Yuta: I think I think we should move on, OK, I mean, let's even let's just be having less and less intuitive. I mean, why, Yeah, that's not really very I mean, you can make up some new concept, but but it's not labour.[1:07:59] Henry: Yeah, I get what you're saying. I think I just kind of, you know, I went along with his trajectory and took it A Z was talking about it, but I agree that it he could have done this better. And he's making a conceptual error to complete those concepts.[1:08:19] Yuta: Yeah, I mean, I definitely I guess I get the idea that, you know, we shouldn't It should be our first move to go with Oh, he's wrong But, yeah, just those defenses I don't agree with.[1:08:35] Henry: So do you think we could just have a Labour prime and say That's what he's talking about? Or do you think he's actually saying something false about labour problem? Even[1:08:43] Yuta: I think he's saying something forth,[1:08:47] Henry: and that's because, what he describes his labor isn't actually what value is,[1:08:56] Yuta: Well, he says Labour. Yeah, exactly. I mean, he says Labour's behind the value of commodities. You know, the quote red so that pretty much exactly. And I think that's wrong. And of course, yuta Cement by Labour, he meant something else than he could be right. But I mean, Labour's labor, you can't just make up your own definitions of words and then be right.[1:09:20] Henry: Yeah. So I guess then, Ah, it could be that were either disagreeing with his definition of labor or were disagreeing with some claim about labor.[1:09:35] Yuta: well,[1:09:37] Henry: so this is back to the definitions are going feeling We're gonna bring this up every single time. E[1:09:44] Yuta: guess it gets a little, you know, model.[1:09:47] Henry: And I find the argument of the definition obviously to be an interesting. So I just sort of accepted that the way he's using it. That's what we're talking about when we're talking about labor[1:09:57] Yuta: way. But that's not way. Oh, no. I just gets even more confusing. The lamer is a word,[1:10:03] Henry: you know, E Yeah, I know. But I find that easier to do when I was reading rather than replace Labour was something else. Every time I thought.[1:10:15] Yuta: I guess you okay, if yeah, maybe this is This makes it clear. if he's right about if he has the right definition flavor, then I would say he's wrong about, you know, equating labor and value. But if he has the right definition or it only have you Yeah. Made up definition than he's right. But also he's not saying anything. I mean, he's not explaining what the value of commodities drives from,[1:10:52] Henry: I guess I might subtly disagree, but that's fine. We can move on.[1:10:57] Yuta: Yeah, but he's an explanation of the value of commodities. Is I'm I mean, if it's a circular definition, that doesn't help, right? You want to bring in something new, that grounds value, and that has some explanatory value. So Labour feels like it. It would, and it would if it were true. But[1:11:21] Henry: right as you're saying, like he's using this word labor as if it was some other concept that he's bringing into the picture. But actually, he's just redefining value to be or redefining Labour to be value. Yeah, and so nothing actually was explained.[1:11:37] Yuta: Yeah, I'm definitely going to read the rest of this, so maybe it'll make things more clear on.[1:11:44] Henry: I got a sense from what we read so far that he was actually talking about something, and that thing, I assumed, was what he meant by labor. Eso. That's why I didn't have as much of a problem with it. But I can see use your position being different.[1:12:02] Yuta: Yeah. Also, I don't know to me. Yeah, the first part. The logical. It's so weird because the first part to me, it just seems like an art. An explanation of why labour isn't what gives value to wealthy society.[1:12:23] Henry: Oh, yeah? And then you completely floats it on time.[1:12:26] Yuta: Yeah. Just example about the poor tribes. Like even. You know, he explicitly says, Like, in poor times, everyone is basically fully employed In rich societies, lots of people are unemployed. but how can that be? I'm in straightforwardly. His explanation seems to explain why. You know, societies with less labor, are wealthier and ideas with basically everyone laboring full time the victim, but yeah. Weaken. We've been circling around this point.[1:13:08] Henry: Yeah. So we've talked about money and we started talking about labour. Is there anything I'll see when it's ah, odd?[1:13:23] Yuta: I think we covered the first. Yeah, the two parts that I am wanted to cover. yeah, I had something, but I've forgetting. Do you have anything final? Teoh?[1:13:42] Henry: There was a section on where he talks about how prices are determined. Do you? Did you go to that part?[1:13:51] Yuta: I don't think so.[1:13:52] Henry: Okay. Yeah. Then Weaken Weaken To do that next time. Yeah, but maybe I could just bring him one last thing about the money Example. So I was trying to get to something, and I want to see what you think of it. so this was the thought experiment is that you have 100 gold coins and 50 of them are stamped right, you know, And it's been decreed by the authority. The only 50 of them are gonna be stamped, but they're not, you know, kept track of it all every moment. So it's possible to counterfeit it if you're able to somehow get a sample. But the factor that I want to consider changing is how much or how hard is it to get a counterfeit stamp? I think that if it's really hard, like, practically impossible, then it would be relatively easy and straightforward to use those stamped gold coins as currency. But if it was basically a Z Z is coming up with your own stamp in your house and that would get you a valid looking stamp, then I think it would be impossible to use them as currency or at least they would be severely devalued. Yeah, so I think that well, it might not be the only factor. I think that it's a very important factor for determining the value of a currency is how easy it is counterfeit.[1:15:22] Yuta: yeah. I mean, I think I agree. I would phrase that as it's an important doctor for allowing something to be a currency, Yeah, but yeah, I think where we are basically making the same point.[1:15:41] Henry: But I think what's interesting about it, which will get to I think what you were trying to say is thought, the purpose of having the stamps in the first place was not to somehow, you know, create it as a currency like there wasn't a concept of thought. Even the purpose was to guarantee that that particular coin had been weighed and measured toe contain a certain amount of the metal inside. Right, That was a 1,000,000 stamp. The stamp was not just an empty signal, like we have allowed this many gold coins like I oppose in my experiment. Ah, but it was, ah, measure of how much actual metal was inside of it. Of a certain you know, purity. Ah, so that while you're trading, you don't have to check that yourself. Yeah. So the real value of the stamp is a convenience E, but it didn't actually, the the Salafist the Value of the stamp the purpose of this stamp. But the value of the currency is still in the metal itself and the labour took to create that matter.[1:16:52] Yuta: I think that Yeah, this is Remember what I was going to bring up? And it's It's about this kind of, so, yeah, where do we think value comes from? I think this is a good final topic. And because it's about what Smith wrote about Banana and explaining what he said. So you So you're saying that the value is in the metal, but not in the stand? Yes. All right.[1:17:22] Henry: Yes. I'm sort of trying to disprove my original thought experiment what was wrong with it.[1:17:27] Yuta: And you're also disagreeing with Adam Smith. B is here and fights the value with labour. Oh, really? Into what you can obtain with the currency.[1:17:41] Henry: well, I thought he I thought I was agreeing with him on this point at least, which was that the value of the currency is the amount of labor that went into producing the metal that goes in the currency.[1:17:53] Yuta: Oh, so wait. Oh, I can I thought, by the values in the metal I thought you meant in the physical metal. No. Oh, so it's OK, OK, that sounds like it's not in the metal. It's an the labor that went into Yeah, I[1:18:13] Henry: guess. I mean, the value of the metal meaning the labour took to get that medal[1:18:19] Yuta: okay on this supplies for everything like[1:18:23] Henry: right. But in certain defined Yeah, like he refers the Scotland again. They would trade and nails, sometimes as currency.[1:18:34] Yuta: But then the[1:18:35] Henry: purpose of it was that it took some labour in order to create the currency and that determines the value of the currency. And you can trade that around Ah, based on the value of labor that went into the currency for other labor.[1:18:50] Yuta: Okay, this is a little bit different from Smith because he makes the distinction, but it's the value of the things you can obtain with the commodity. That's the value of the quantity. And you're saying it's it's the value of or its labor that went into obtaining the actual currency. That's the value of the currency.[1:19:15] Henry: Yeah. Overall, Yes. So that would also incorporate counterfeiting.[1:19:21] Yuta: So but then what if you use something like, what's a seashells? Air. Very Ah, easy to obtain initially. But they're in the limited supply. So there a good commodity, then what? But then, you know, they're rare, so they become extremely valuable. How couldn't you? In that case, he couldn't identify the value of the commodity with labor. Right when[1:19:55] Henry: you say commodity or you're referring to the seashell. Yeah, I think I think you would. I think that because it's a rare it's harder and harder to find new seashells. So requires more labour.[1:20:14] Yuta: yeah. Okay, um[1:20:18] Henry: and because that it's harder to find new seashells, you can make it more expensive to get existing seashells and therefore the existing C cells have more value.[1:20:31] Yuta: Yeah, I guess. I mean, I agree that it went become harder and harder to get, you know, more seashells as they become more scarce. But I think that's not where the value comes from because I mean again, this is just the same point. But just be something is scarce. Doesn't make it valuable.[1:20:53] Henry: Yeah, I guess we haven't really addressed that. I think I need to think about that more. I'm not really putting a lot of good content into interesting that more just random rent rambling, but[1:21:06] Yuta: because there are a lot of hard to obtain things that are worthless,[1:21:11] Henry: right? Exactly. Lots of unique artwork that is not worth anything. Yeah, but in terms of the social thing, I actually I like the way of thinking about this, That so it's think of it in terms of, ah, game that you want to get a seashell, right? You have two options. You can either go and look for a seashell, which is gonna take some amount of effort, or you can buy a social by, you know, trading in some way. So let's say you have another thing that's worth amount like that. You put some effort into getting so you can trade that for a special right. So then you will decide what to do based on how hard it is to find Ah, seashell, and how easy it is or how much labor you know, labor value. It costs to buy a seashell. But it turns out that people selling she sells know how much labor it takes to find a new seasonal. So what they'll do is they will make their seashells as's close to that price as possible. And therefore the seashells have that price. Well,[1:22:26] Yuta: if they didn't have the price, they wouldn't bother to find he[1:22:30] Henry: sells right. Well, if they were price lower than a ah, if they were priced lower than it costs to go find a seashell in terms of labour vaccine, then you would prefer to buy seashells rather than go look for new ones. Right? So they can jack up the price all the way to exactly how much labor costs to go find a new one and they'll get the maximout out of their seashell.[1:22:58] Yuta: Wait, wait. I wouldn't, but okay, if the price of the sea shell for the seller is the price to obtain them and it wouldn't be worth them, they wouldn't make a profit. So it wouldn't be worth the time to find seashells, right? Like the value the money that you get from selling the seashell would have to be higher than the value he spent on obtaining official that's the Prophet[1:23:30] Henry: E. I guess that since it's a currency, you shouldn't be really profiting off of it. I think that it would be a pretty matched market,[1:23:42] Yuta: but not proof. Wall. But then, if it's perfectly not so, then you wouldn't get any new seashells we could. OK, we could do this in terms of Bitcoin lately.[1:23:55] Henry: I mean, that's kind of what we've been talking around the whole time. Yeah,[1:23:59] Yuta: I guess it is kind of like an idealized It's like, Yeah, the platonic ideal of currency. Basically, Yeah. So great. Yeah. Yes. as long as the internet exists So I guess you don't even need the Internet. Probably, But, and he was[1:24:23] Henry: don't need the internet in orderto half that coin. But you do need it in order to mind. Bitcoin.[1:24:28] Yuta: Yeah, Yeah. so late? Yeah, When does someone mine the quee

Kamran Bokhari sits down with Sasha Ghosh-Siminoff, executive director of People Demand Change about developments in Syria, particularly the Idlib Province. Bokhari describes Idlib as a “multi-player battlespace,” where numerous different forces such as jihadists, Syrian rebels, Russians, and Syrian regime forces are at work. Ghosh-Siminoff notes that it is important for people to grasp the complexities of Idlib, which has been under opposition control for about eight and a half years. Not only are numerous forces present in the area, but the opposition-controlled space known as Idlib actually contains bits and pieces of other provinces, and the space has expanded and retracted repeatedly. Ghosh-Siminoff points out that 3 million people are living in “Greater Idlib,” and between 60 and 80 percent of them are women and children. After the regime regained some territory, the area where these 3 million internally displaced persons are living is half what it once was. Idlib has become something of a depository for defeated rebel fighters and others who remain unreconciled with the Syrian regime. The only choice they were given, Ghosh-Siminoff says, was to go to Idlib – an area that has been bombed repeatedly by Syrian and Russian forces. The years of bombing campaigns have wrecked the infrastructure in Idlib so that there is no healthcare system or educational system to speak of. Moreover, the makeup of the population of Idlib – mostly women and children – shows that the rationale for the continued bombings – that they are targeting terrorists – is spurious, Ghosh-Siminoff says: “This is about emptying a piece of geographic space of people who oppose the Assad regime.” Turkey is in a difficult position; it has already taken in 3 million Syrian refugees, and economic and political factors make taking in another 3 million untenable. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is in such a position that he cannot appear weak and cannot let these refugees into his country. Russia’s long game in Syria likely involves using the ongoing conflict as a wedge to separate Turkey and the United States – if not to pry Turkey away from NATO entirely. The United States’ inaction, despite Turkey’s requests for guidance and a proactive solution to the Syria crisis, is a sore point for the Turkish government, as is Europe’s displeasure with taking in 800,000 refugees when Turkey has taken in millions, Ghosh-Siminoff says. He also says that U.S. government officials argue that if the Assad regime falls without an organized opposition to take over or a plan for Syria’s future, the situation in Syria will be worse than it is now. However, Ghosh-Siminoff says, the inaction in Syria has created a crisis that has affected the entire Middle East and created unintended consequences for Europe’s political situation. Moreover, a lack of a solution in Syria has left an opening for Salafist-jihadist ideology to take over. As Syrians assess their situation and wonder why no one has helped them, why they were “trapped in this death camp that Syria has become,” Ghosh-Siminoff says, that ideology offers answers. He concludes by saying that leaving millions of young people at the mercy of that ideology will create a long-term security crisis.

Almost 50 years after his death, the legacy of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover remains very much alive, according to 16-year FBI veteran Michael German in his new book, Disrupt, Discredit, and Divide: How the New FBI Damages Democracy. Just as Hoover exploited fears of communist infiltration of American institutions, his successors at the FBI in the post-9/11 era have exploited fears of Salafist terrorism to “shed the legal constraints” imposed on the bureau in the wake of Hoover-era civil rights abuses. Does Congress have the will to rein in the FBI? How should political activists respond to these increased threats to their constitutional rights?Join us as an expert panel talks with German about his book on FBI domestic surveillance and disruption activities in the era of endless war. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Die Zahl der Salafisten in Deutschland ist zum Jahresbeginn stark gewachsen. Inzwischen sind es Bundesweit über 11.500, die der radikalen Bewegung angehören. Salafismus ist arabisch und bedeutet „die frommen Altvorderen“- doch was heißt es, Salafist zu sein? Was macht ein Salafist überhaupt? All’ diese Fragen kann uns Familienvater Sven beantworten, der selbst viele Jahre einer von ihnen war. Was ihn dazu bewegt hat, wie er heute über diese Zeit denkt und wie er es da raus geschafft hat, erfahrt ihr in dieser Folge.

 Is it possible that we are seeing the end of Endless War?One of the most important aspects of Donald Trump's candidacy was his promise to end the endless wars in the so-called "Middle East" and elsewhere.His track record has been mixed in this regard, especially during the period when John Bolton was in the State Department. Thankfully Bolton is gone, at least for now, and some progress is being made again.The withdrawal of US troops from Syria has driven the media-industrial-academia-think tank complex into a frenzy, with both Republicans and Democrats, Western liberals and conservatives, I am pleased to have back on my podcast Hussein Askary, the Southwest Asia Coordinator of the Schiller Institute, Editor of the Arabic language website of the LaRouche Movement, Section Manager at Belt & Road Institute in Sweden, and Author of the 250-page study "Extending the New Silk Road to West Asia and Africa: A Vision of an Economic Renaissance". We discuss:- Hussein Askary's dramatic story as a refugee from the 1991 Iraq War walking 6 days from the Kurdish north to Iran- how he joined the Schiller Institute as the Arabic language editor of its research and publication division- the lessons he learned from the Oslo peace process- why fundamental economic development must take precedence over political reform- the importance of the physical economy for human development- large-scale projects and scientific research for Southwest Asia (the so-called "Middle East"): Greening the Desert, turning it into a productive agricultural zone again- the Chinese model of development vs. the IMF and World Bank failed policies- the Chinese radical, physical economic development of Africa- Buckmister Fuller's idea that humans are the agents of the Universe for self-awareness and self-development vs. the radical environmentalist idea that humans are parasites - How the Earth is NOT our Mother: the Sun is; how we live in the atmosphere of the SUN- How the Climate Models are fundamentally flawed by omitting the centrality of the Sun- countering the dominant Western media interpretation of the US pullout from Syria, re: the Kurds, Turkey, ISIS, Russia, Iran, Israel- the radically changed role of Turkey in the Syrian conflict, due to Trump and Russia- The US Operation Timber Sycamore to funnel arms from other conflict areas to Syrian rebel groups- how ISIS was created by the US intervention in Iraq and Syria- the importance of Trump's 2017 Riyadh Conference in making the Sunni Arab countries stop supporting the Salafist terrorist groups- Putin's strong gamble to stop regime change in Syria- the geopolitical manipulation of the Kurds to destabilise the region- Trump's historically significant public criticism of the military industrial complex- why terrorism is NEVER a private enterprise; how terrorism is ALWAYS supported by hostile States- how this could signal the historic end to jihadism- the history of jihadism as part of the effort to destroy the Ottoman Empire- the end of the era of Liberal Imperialism and the "Right to Protect", and the return of the sovereign Nation State- how Southwest Asia may be stabilised and pursue fundamental human development in the region driven by association with the Belt and Road Initiative- how the massive financial resources are already available in the region for massive, real, physical economic development- how nuclear power allows oil to be used more valuably as an industrial input rather than being burned for fuel (like how wood was transformed after the discovery of coal)- the launch of the Arabic language School of LaRouche's Economics- how people are seeing through deliberate, deceptive provocations that the US uses to justify interventions in Syria, Venezuela, and elsewhere 

Following the 9/11 attacks, the US launched military strikes against Afghanistan. Further retaliatory terrorist actions were anticipated but none like the attempted shoe bomb attack on a transatlantic flight on 22nd December. The culprit was a former, expelled attendee of Brixton Mosque - Richard Reid - bringing the world’s attention to this local Salafist community that was compelled to respond emphatically. This first of two podcasts provides recordings of that response which still resonates today.

1st Salafist owned and Salafist run Mosque in the UK, increased activism across the UK, Good Friday Agreement, Omagh Bombing, completing MBA studies and Zacharias Moussaoui.

The ancient Greeks believed that the mythical Gorgon could turn those who stared at it to stone. The Pentagon’s surveillance technology named after this creature, Gorgon Stare, has used its aerial near-panopticon surveillance capabilities to turn Salafist insurgents into targets. But should such a powerful, virtually all-seeing aerial spying system be allowed to operate over American communities? Arthur Holland Michel, Deputy Director of the Center for the Study of the Drone, tackles this question in his new book, Eyes in the Sky: The Secret Rise of Gorgon Stare and How It Will Watch Us All. Join us on June 25 at 1:00 p.m. as an expert panel talks with Michel about his book and about Gorgon Stare’s implications for the constitutional rights of Americans. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The ancient Greeks believed that the mythical Gorgon could turn those who stared at it to stone. The Pentagon’s surveillance technology named after this creature, Gorgon Stare, has used its aerial near-panopticon surveillance capabilities to turn Salafist insurgents into targets. But should such a powerful, virtually all-seeing aerial spying system be allowed to operate over American communities? Arthur Holland Michel, Deputy Director of the Center for the Study of the Drone, tackles this question in his new book, Eyes in the Sky: The Secret Rise of Gorgon Stare and How It Will Watch Us All. Join us on June 25 at 1:00 p.m. as an expert panel talks with Michel about his book and about Gorgon Stare’s implications for the constitutional rights of Americans.

Nicholas A. Heras asks three notable experts on Salafist-jihadist organizations and the Syrian conflict — Jennifer Cafarella, Hassan Hassan, and Sasha Ghosh Siminoff — about how Syria became the largest recruiting ground for Salafist-jihadist groups in modern history and how the United States should approach its counter-terrorism policy in Syria to meet this challenge.

As of Tuesday, December 11th, the Senate is poised to vote on ending US support of the war on Yemen. According to Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders:"Tomorrow, I will move to proceed to S.J. Res. 54, the resolution I have offered with Senators Lee and Murphy to end U.S. involvement in the disastrous Saudi-led war in Yemen. I am optimistic that a bipartisan coalition of senators will vote to make clear that the United States will no longer support Saudi Arabia in its incredibly destructive war. The Saudi intervention in Yemen has created the worst humanitarian disaster in the world, with millions of people facing imminent starvation. The time is long overdue for the United States to stop following the lead of Saudi Arabia, a brutal regime that recently murdered a dissident journalist and has no respect for human rights. Further, and importantly, the Senate must reassert its constitutional authority and end our support of this unauthorized and unconstitutional war." Dr. Aisha Jumaan returns to the Beloved Community to discuss the humanitarian crisis in Yemen and the latest political developments.  Dr. Jumaan is the founder and president of the Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation.  (http://www.yemenfoundation.com) , a nonprofit charity organization that aims to provide relief to the people of Yemen and support peace building efforts. Professionally, Aisha has been working as an independent consultant in health related projects since April 2013.  She manages and coordinates Health funded projects in Yemen, including the Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP). Prior to this Aisha was a consultant for CDC FETP program supporting FETP programs in the Middle East. In 2011 she helped establish the Yemen program (amid social and political unrest) in collaboration with CDC, WHO and the Ministry of Public Health and Population. Between 2008 and 2010, Aisha was the Director of the HPV vaccine project at PATH working in India, Peru, Vietnam and Uganda.  She has served as a Senior Epidemiologist for over 10 years in several divisions at CDC, including Cancer, Immunizations, Nutrition and Environmental Health.  She has been the primary investigator on several research projects and provided epidemiological and statistical technical expertise. As an Assistant Professor at both Emory University School of Public Health in the Epidemiology Department and at Sana’s University in Yemen under the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Aisha developed and taught intermediate epidemiology to graduate students as well as epidemiology and biostatistics to medical students. While in Yemen, Aisha served as a National Program Officer for the United Nations Population Fund and as a Health Program Officer for the United Nations Development Fund, supervising several major programs in collaboration with local government institutions. She developed and implemented training programs for US Peace Corps Primary Health Care Volunteers in Yemen, and has evaluated training programs for Primary Healthcare Workers for the Dutch Volunteer Organization SNV. Aisha holds a PhD in Epidemiology from the University of North Carolina, an MPH in Epidemiology from Emory University, and a BA in Biology from Mills College.

The brutality of the Saudi royal family had been hiding in plain sight. It was an open secret convenient to the political, media and business elites for whom the Kingdom means big business and an invaluable geostrategic proxy. But the brutal murder and dismemberment of a single Washington Post columnist, Jamal Khashoggi, has forced Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman and his American enablers onto the defensive as the regime's brutal war on Yemen, global support for Salafist fundamentalism, and kleptocratric repression have suddenly been subjected to intense public scrutiny. Dissident scholar Madawi al-Rasheed explains the history and political-economy of Saudi Arabia, and the now-frustrated efforts at obfuscation mounted by bin Salman and his allies. Thanks to Verso Books. Check out their huge collection of left-wing titles at www.versobooks.com Please support this podcast with your money at Patreon.com/TheDig

The brutality of the Saudi royal family had been hiding in plain sight. It was an open secret convenient to the political, media and business elites for whom the Kingdom means big business and an invaluable geostrategic proxy. But the brutal murder and dismemberment of a single Washington Post columnist, Jamal Khashoggi, has forced Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman and his American enablers onto the defensive as the regime's brutal war on Yemen, global support for Salafist fundamentalism, and kleptocratric repression have suddenly been subjected to intense public scrutiny. Dissident scholar Madawi al-Rasheed explains the history and political-economy of Saudi Arabia, and the now-frustrated efforts at obfuscation mounted by bin Salman and his allies. Thanks to Verso Books. Check out their huge collection of left-wing titles at www.versobooks.com Please support this podcast with your money at Patreon.com/TheDig

Als er mit 16 Jahren zum Islam konvertierte, war Sebastian ein normaler Gymnasiast. Plötzlich mochte er keine Musik mehr, verzichtete auf Sport mit den alten Freunden und grenzte sich von seinem bisherigen Leben ab. Seine Welt teilte er in halal und haram ein – in erlaubt und verboten. Die Dokumentation begleitet Sebastian zwei Jahre lang. Sie zeigt, was ihn dazu bewegt, sich zu radikalisieren und was ihn im letzten Moment davon abhält, sich salafistischen Kämpfern anzuschließen. (Online-Signatur Medienzentren: 4987302)

Serah macht sich Sorgen: Ein alter Freund aus Kindheitstagen ist nicht mehr wiederzuerkennen. In den vergangenen Jahren hat er sich immer mehr mit dem Salafismus beschäftigt, einer ultrakonservativen islamischen Strömung. Nach und nach zieht sich Serahs Sandkastenfreund zurück. Was kann Serah tun? Nina Heinrichs besucht mit Serah Aussteiger, Islamexperten und Beratungsstellen. Der Ausstieg aus dem Salafismus ist eine schwierige Sache. Wie wird sich Serah entscheiden? Wird sie versuchen zu helfen? (Online-Signatur Medienzentren: 4985141)

Adam joins the show to discuss the emergence of small salafist militant groups in Gaza and their ongoing conflict with Hamas. Adam explains the difference between Sunni Islamist politics and salafist jihadism in the context of the Israeli government's policy of targeting Hamas for any actions taken by other Gazan factions. The Movements is a leftist history and politics podcast. Subscribe on iTunes, Stitcher and Google Play. Transcripts may be requested for accessibility reasons by e-mailing movementspod@gmail.com. Find us on facebook and twitter @movementspod and support the show by donating at https://www.patreon.com/movementspodSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/movementspod)

Psychiatrist, author and social commentator Dr Tad Tietze speaks to Alex Whisson about the social and political roots of the Manchester atrocity.

Simon Menner Mitte 2014 veröffentlichte eine den Taliban nahestehende Gruppe eine Reihe von Videos, die in einem nachgebauten Fernsehstudio gedreht wurden – inklusive Nachrichtensprecher und Greenscreen. Vermutlich sollte so dem Ruf „Tod dem Westen“ mehr Nachdruck verliehen werden. Wie kann man es sich erklären, dass eine solche Gruppe den visuellen Codes genau der Medien folgt, die sie ja eigentlich verachtet? Unsere Köpfe sind zum wichtigsten Schlachtfeld des 21. Jahrhundert geworden und Angst - in der Form von Terror - scheint die wesentliche Waffe zu sein. Hierbei spielt Propaganda eine immer entscheidendere Rolle. Das ist natürlich auch den Islamistischen Streitern von ISIS, AlQaeda und Co nicht entgangen; allerdings verbreitet man Propaganda heute im Internet und so finden sich diese Gruppen plötzlich auf Plattformen wie YouTube, Facebook und Telegram wieder und konkurrieren mit Minecraft und Pewdiepie um die Aufmerksamkeit des Publikums. Selbstverständlich verfügen diese Plattformen über eine jeweils eigene visuelle Sprache, derer sich auch Terrororganisationen nicht entziehen können. Dies erklärt dann vielleicht das Fernsehstudio. Diese (gefühlte) Notwendigkeit den visuellen Codes des Mediums zu folgen, hinterlässt dabei zwangsläufig Spuren in der Aussage, die vermittelt werden soll. Eine mittelalterliche Moralvorstellung lässt sich eben nur sehr schwer mit den Mitteln des 21,Jahrhunderts eins zu eins vermitteln. Auf der einen Seite möchte man die Welt ins siebte Jahrhundert zurückversetzen, auf der anderen Seite muss man sich mit den AGBs von YouTube herumschlagen. Ich finde dies fast beruhigend. Vermutlich habe ich mir in den vergangenen Jahren mehr dieser Videos angesehen, als der druchschnittliche Salafist und entgegen der allgemeinen Vermutung hat diese intensive Auseinandersetzung etwas unheimlich Befreiendes. Ich möchte zeigen, wie sich diese Propaganda an vielen Stellen selbst entlarvt und wie ich als Künstler damit umgehe. Rühmten sich Islamistische Gruppen Anfang des Jahrtausends noch mit einem Bildverbot, so streamen sie mittlerweile Ihre Propaganda nahezu live in das Internt. Als Reaktion darauf hat sich das Bildverbot in das Westliche Lager verschoben und der Ruf nach Zensur wird immer lauter. Ich habe mich als Künstler in den letzten Jahren intensiv den Bildern dieser Propaganda auseinandergesetzt und möchte darlegen weshalb ein gesellschaftlicher Diskurs hier sehr wichtig ist und befreiend sein kann.

CGP Senior Fellow Kamran Bokhari talks with Eric Trager, the Esther K. Wagner Fellow at The Washington Institute, about the rise and fall of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Trager is the author of "Arab Fall: How the Muslim Brotherhood Won and Lost Egypt in 891 Days" and was in Egypt during the 2011 uprising against then-President Hosni Mubarak. In this podcast, Trager dispels the idea that the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate Islamist movement. He calls the group "a totalitarian cult" and describes the years-long vetting process meant to weed out members who aren't completely loyal to the cause, who ask too many questions or who don't follow orders. Trager also discusses the group's hierarchical structure and its ideology that Islam is an all-encompassing concept and only the Brotherhood's interpretation of the faith is correct. One of the factors that led to the Brotherhood's downfall in Egypt is that its version of Islam does not correspond with many Muslims' beliefs, Trager says, pointing out that the group's use of religion in Egypt alienated a population that is 90 percent Muslim. Though some would argue that the Brotherhood is considered moderate because it is not Al Qaeda, Trager says "They're not Al Qaeda" should not be the standard for moderation among Islamist groups. He also points out that after 2011, the Brotherhood was not the only Islamist party in the game; Salafist groups got involved in politics for the first time. Trager says one of the things that struck him the most after the Muslim Brotherhood gained power in Egypt was the lack of answers about policy changes. He says he spoke with some leaders about what would change under a Muslim Brotherhood government and discovered that the group's political motivations were more about gaining power than imposing any specific policy. After losing power and being gutted in Egypt -- with many leaders dead, in prison or in exile -- the Brotherhood is now divided over tactics, Trager says. But whether the Brotherhood should be banned or not depends on how it manages its relationships with the countries where it has a presence, Trager says, and is not a decision that Washington can make from 6,000 miles away.

The A-Team of Syria commentators is assembled and ready for duty. Joining me this week for a 3-part interview on the Syria conflict, its history, its context and our response to recent events are Rania Khalek and Ben Norton. Rania is an independent journalist and co-host of the Unauthorized Disclosure Podcast. Ben is a staff writer for Alternet, a former columnist at Salon and an incredibly knowledgeable guy on Middle East Affairs. In Part 1, we cover the history of the so-called Arab Spring, the history of the Saudi-US relationship, and the nature of Sunni supremacism stemming from the far right, reactionary and downright fascist Salafist movement.

Wie kann es sein, dass jemand zum IS geht und glaubt, damit etwas Gutes zu tun? Wie denkt und fühlt ein Salafist? Interview mit einem Aussteiger der Szene.

Since the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) announced the creation of their self-proclaimed Caliphate in June of 2014, they have been in open competition with al-Qa'ida for leadership within the global jihadi Salafist movement. This competition has taken place on the Internet, the battlefield, and in cities around the world as both groups grapple for legitimacy. This week's podcast revisits NJOHSP's latest webinar discussing the various forms the competition takes across the globe and what the implications may be for the United States.

An imam, an ex-Salafist, a former US-marine - they are all united in the fight against radicalism and "Islamic State".

Dominik found purpose as a radicalized Salafist. He knows he was clueless and is spreading the word on YouTube.

Am Anschlag auf Charlie Hebdo und die Pressefreiheit führt auch bei uns kein Weg dran vorbei: Wir diskutieren, was Satire darf, und fragen uns, wie man Salafist wird, während Lucky überraschend sein Mitgefühl für Karnevalisten entdeckt. Über einen Umweg nach Wien gelangen wir nach Griechenland und zur Geldmaschine Olympische Spiele. Fred hält einen Nachruf auf Altbundespräsident Richard von Weizsäcker und Lucky freut sich auf die Oberbürgermeisterwahl in Bochum.

By Phil Greaves; Global Research, July 13, 2013 Recent reports within mainstream media are pushing the theory that divisions are forming within the various camps of opposition militants in Syria, while also making attempts to highlight the disparity between the supposed “moderate” rebel forces of the “FSA” – which does not exist beyond a small cadre of defectors with no autonomy inside Syria – and the Al Qaeda affiliated militia of Jabhat al Nusra, (JaN) or the Islamic state of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), while also whitewashing the presence of the larger Salafist brigades that fight alongside them, predominantly Ahrar al-Sham (SIF). To comprehend these alleged divisions, it is fundamental to understand what exactly the “FSA”, or “Supreme Military Council” consists of. In short, these Western-backed outfits and the oft-referenced “spokesmen” that carry them hold no value inside Syria, or any amount of authority among the plethora of militia fighting on the ground. This has been the case since day one of the Syrian crisis. The “FSA” was a retroactive PR stunt implemented by the West and the GCC to uphold a facade of “moderation”, and bolster the false image of militants fighting for “freedom and democracy”. In reality, the FSA represents a branding exercise; enabling foreign powers to rally behind disparate groups of militants – often led by extremists – to undertake their desired use and mask the true identity of what are, by western legal standards, “terrorists”. When the media refer to the “FSA”, at best it is lazy journalism, at worst it is disingenuous and designed to mislead the reader – otherwise known as propaganda. Yet the “FSA”, or “SMC” seem to have a new lease of life within the media. Furthermore, General Salim Idriss has been at the forefront of recent media campaigns to persuade foreign powers to increase military aid to the rebels (including a photo-op with renowned peace advocate John McCain); rebels that Idriss, nor any other commander in the “SMC” or “FSA” have any control over. I posited the theory in early May that the US and its GCC partners (now minus the deposed Qatari Emir) were attempting to marginalize the very militants they fomented, sponsored and armed in order to build a new “moderate” force under their control that is agreeable to the public, and the many European and American Parliamentarians and Congressman that have expressed concern about the “rising” influence of radicals among the militants they are indirectly supporting. Recent attempts to purport divisions could be construed as part of this “re-branding” policy. In a Reuters report titled “New front opens in Syria as rebels say Al Qaeda attack means war” we learn that a “Commander” from the Supreme Military Council was assassinated by ISIS’ Emir: Sheikh Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Whether this is even true remains to be seen; several prominent analysts have cast doubt on the report, claiming it may be a psy-op on the FSA’s behalf; presumably in order to marginalize Baghdadi and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham militants that follow him. These artificial divisions bear hallmarks to recent reports and recent analysis covering the supposed “split” between the Syrian wing of Al Qaeda, otherwise known as Jabhat al Nusra (JaN), and the Iraqi wing of Al Qaeda, otherwise known as the Islamic state of Iraq (ISI). When Baghdadi, the Emir of ISI retroactively announced the “merger” of these groups and declared the militia should now be addressed as the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham, a spat broke out between him and Jabhat al-Nusra Emir Abu Mohammed al-Jolani. The following analysis and reports covering the dispute were blown out of all proportion and have continued in this vain ever since. Again, actual divisions on the ground between ISI and JaN were minimal and did not affect either tactical, nor ideological cooperation and kinship. ISI and JaN are one and the same, in both a tactical and ideological sense, there are slight differences in their outlook for a possible future Syria, but crucially, both the tactical relationship and core ideologies remain untouched and unified. Furthermore, JaN was concieved through ISI funding and logistic cooperation. Journalists and analysts suggesting these groups are separate do not understand their mutual ideology, or they are being purposefully misleading to suit an agenda – that agenda seems to be to highlight ISI as the “bad rebels”, this could be to allow space for the “good rebels” under JaN’s leadership – which are predominantly led by Syrians and not foreigners, therefore more likely to win “hearts and minds” – to join the “moderate” brigades under the SMC command. The first paragraph of the Reuters report fulfills the false narrative that the “FSA” represents a larger force than that of “Islamists”: (NB: Reuters lazy wording not mine.) Rivalries have been growing between the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and the Islamists, whose smaller but more effective forces control most of the rebel-held parts of northern Syria more than two years after pro-democracy protests became an uprising. One has to wonder how the supposed “Islamists” which, according to Reuters are a smaller force than the “FSA” can possibly hold more territory than the Western-backed moderates. Again, Reuters is pushing a false narrative upon its readers to uphold the image that the majority of “rebels” fighting inside Syria are moderate secularists under the command of the “FSA”, or “Supreme Military Council”. The truth of the matter has always been that Jabhat al Nusra – who are one and the same as Al Qaeda in Iraq with slightly different outlooks for their respective homelands – along with the more populist, and larger in number Salafi militia, such as Ahrar al-Sham, who operate under the umbrella group the Syrian Islamic Front (SIF), represent the vast majority of opposition fighters in Syria. These groups have close links, and it is likely that fighters often interchange depending on expertise, experience and geographical requirements. Since the onset they have cooperated closely with logistics and paramilitary operations. Supposed “secular” opposition forces in Syria simply do not exist; under the “FSA” command or anywhere else. There are many smaller groups that espouse an inclusive, and indeed, moderate outlook for a future Syria. These groups have in the majority been rampant with criminality, infighting, and a lack of funds. Leaving disillusioned fighters with the option of joining the better organised and funded Salafi brigades; which have consistently received funding and arms from both state and non-state actors in the Gulf. The “FSA” commander quoted in the Reuters piece claims: “we are going to wipe the floor with them”. Presumably this is aimed at Baghdadi and his fellow ideologues, or as Reuters labels them: “Islamists”. Again, we are supposed to buy the theory that the FSA is in a position to strike anyone militarily inside Syria – let alone a commander of one of the strongest opposition groups operating. At this moment in time, the “FSA” as a fighting force could possibly be at its weakest since its artificial inception. Recent reports have suggested there are up to 6,000 foreign militants fighting against the government in Syria. It is likely that the vast majority of foreigners have joined the more radical outfits such as ISIS, for the same reasons as mentioned above, but can also be explained by the public sectarian tone being applied to the conflict, and calls to the regions Sunni community to engage in “Holy War” against the Syrian state from influential clerics such as Yusuf Qaradawi. Recent political developments also shed light on the “re-branding” of the Syrian opposition. The Emir of Qatar’s unexpected departure from the throne – to be replaced by his son – may have been an indicator as to Qatar’s failures in leading the Syrian insurgency. It is common knowledge that Saudi Arabia have been given the “Syria File”. A fact that is portrayed with no irony by western analysts; who manage to conveniently whitewash exactly which state actor is delegating the “files” – could it be “Mother”? This handing over of the baton was solidified with the departure of SNC Prime Minister Ghassan Hitto – a Muslim Brotherhood member chosen by Qatar in attempts to consolidate the Muslim Brotherhood’s hold on the SNC. Hitto was replaced by Ahmed al-Jarba, an influential tribal figure with close links to the Saudi Monarchy. Reports on the ground in Syria have also suggested that the rebels weapons flow – including such basics as ammunition – have come to an almost standstill. And several rebel commanders have relayed their frustration at the lack of promised US weapons. Recent developments in the US Congress have also given Obama the back-door he was looking for, at least to buy himself more time until a more suitable fighting force is able to undertake the task at hand – if such force ever materializes. Direct US arms supplies – or, to be precise; the official funding for arms supplies – have been blocked by Congress until the administration can determine exactly which rebel groups it intends to arm, and what exactly the administration intends to achieve from what seem to be futile efforts to validate the now almost two-year covert policy of arming the rebels, and achieving nothing but bloodshed and destruction – of course, it would be ridiculous to suggest that was the plan? US allies in the region will undoubtedly be working under their own terms with regard to their destructive policies in Syria, to some extent. Contrary to the Saud monarchies renewed efforts to wrest control of the insurgency; recent developments on the ground, along with Russia’s steadfast support and mass public opinion against supporting the extremist dominated rebels; the Syrian Army have kept the insurgency at bay whilst they choose their strategic victories. Homs is about to become the latest “rebel stronghold” to fall, as rebels announced this morning another “tactical retreat”. One imagines the rebel siege being laid upon 2 million civilians – a war-crime that Western “diplomats” seem reluctant to “intervene” on, or indeed make any mention of – in government controlled Western Aleppo will be the Syrian military’s next priority. The Saudis through their new puppet al-Jarba have promised a huge influx of “game-changing” weapons, but without a massive influx of military hardware, and indeed, trained fighters to use them, it appears the trajectory of the conflict will remain in the Syrian military’s favour. What the various actors supporting the insurgency are willing to do to change that trajectory in the short-term, if anything substantial, remains to be seen. There are at least three interested and powerful parties whose objectives can be served by allowing the Syrian conflict to drag on for years to come; yet none of them necessarily want to see Assad fall. Phil Greaves is a UK based writer/analyst, focusing on UK/US Foreign Policy and conflict analysis in the Middle East post WWII. http://notthemsmdotcom.wordpress.com.

The ultra-conservative Salafist movement, which is said to be the fastest growing branch of Islam, has been blamed for being behind many of the recent violent protests over an anti-Muslim film which appeared on the internet. Jenny Cuffe investigates the spread of Salafism across the countries of the Arab Spring. She asks what threat it poses to democracy in the whole region and also examines concerns in Europe that Salafists now represent a significant security risk. Presenter: Jenny Cuffe Producer: Ian Muir-Cochrane.