Podcasts about trots

Send us a textFilippense 2:3-4 Moet niks uit selfsug doen of om daarmee te spog nie. Wees eerder nederig deur van medegelowiges meer te dink as van jouself. Julle moenie net elkeen na sy eie belange omsien nie, maar ook na mekaar se belange. In die lewe wat net elke dag besiger en besiger word, is dit soms die moeite werd om selfondersoek te doen. Vra jouself af: hoekom het ek daardie ding gedink, gesê of gedoen? Hoekom het ek daardie negatiewe gedagtes oor my suster gehad? Hoekom het ek my huweliksmaat afgejak? Hoekom het ek geld gemors op daardie nuttelose artikel of speelding? Hoekom?Die rede waarom ek dit vandag met jou deel, is omdat ons te dikwels uit selfsug, en soms uit trots, dinge dink, sê en doen. Ja, my vriend, ons weet almal die gemiddelde mens is 'n ongelooflike selfsugtige wese.Dis aaklig! Een van die belangrikste dinge wat ons ons kinders van kleins af moet leer, is, om nie selfsugtig te wees nie. Want mettertyd soos hulle grootword – soos ons ook grootgeword het – verander daardie selfsug so maklik in 'n gevoel van trots.Wees eerlik. As jy dink aan jou hantering van diegene rondom jou, in watter mate het daardie twee karperde – selfsug en trots – jou gedrag beïnvloed? Miskien is dit tyd vir 'n realiteitstoets.Filippense 2:3-4 Moet niks uit selfsug doen of om daarmee te spog nie. Wees eerder nederig deur van medegelowiges meer te dink as van jouself. Julle moenie net elkeen na sy eie belange omsien nie, maar ook na mekaar se belange.Hoe hanteer jy jou selfsug en trots wanneer dit moeilik is om jou emosies te beteuel? Hulle steek immers al te dikwels hul lelike koppe uit - veral wanneer jy onder druk is of wanneer jy selfs seerkry in die proses. Hoe, vra ek jou?Die antwoord is om vir ander om te gee. Stel ongeveins belang in wat in hulle lewens aangaan.Dit is snaaks hoe selfsug en trots verdamp, wanneer jy opreg omgee en opreg besorg is oor die behoeftes van ander.Dit is God se Woord. Vars … vir jou … vandag. Support the showEnjoying The Content?For the price of a cup of coffee each month, you can enable Christianityworks to reach 10,000+ people with a message about the love of Jesus!DONATE R50 MONTHLY

En serie i tre delar om gruvarbetarsonen som blev burgarmiljardär – och måltavla för ett kriminellt gäng. Trots att Max-grundaren Curt Bergfors gör allt för att inte synas eller höras ska hans stora förmögenhet snart få ögonen på sig. Efter att den hemliga miljardären blivit förlamad omges han av flera personliga assistenter. En nyanställd ung kvinna ska visa sig ha kopplingar till ett kriminellt gäng som gör honom till måltavla för en spektakulär kupp. Reportrar: Ellen Hammarskiöld & Cecilia Anderberg Producent: Robin Jansson / Tredje Statsmakten Media Mixning: Patricio Samuelsson Ansvarig utgivare: Klas Granström

Nyheter och fördjupning från Sverige och världen. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play.

Predikan från Pingstkyrkan Eskilstuna

Greg O'Connor talks Harness Racing on 'Trots Talk'. On today's show: Shannon Price, Stacey White, Tim Williams, John Dunn, Blair Orange & Brittany Graham Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tim Williams & John Dunn join Greg for this week's Southern Man segment ahead of racing today at Addington Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Greg chats with the country's leading reinsman Blair Orange ahead of today's Addington race meeting Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Greg chats with Brittany Graham about some results out of Australia, including the incredible 'Leap To Fame' winning again Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Greg chats with Stacey White about success for the Kiwi horse across the ditch Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Shannon Price joins Greg to recap some recent wins at Albion Park Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sommarbörsen tuffar på och sen början på juni har den förärat OMXS30 med en uppgång på 3%. Med tanke på att börsen är upp +3,6% ex. Utdelning YTD så betyder det att sommarbörsen genererat i princip all avkastning i år. Trots att vi befinner oss i semestertider så händer det ändå grejer på börsen, med mig för lite sommarspaningar har jag min kollega Victor Ihrman. Trevlig lyssning på dig!De pengar som placeras kan både öka och minska i värde och det är inte säkert att du får tillbaka hela det insatta kapitalet. Historisk avkastning är ingen garanti för framtida avkastning. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Die Welwitschias het hul onoorwonne rekord teen Senegal behou met 'n 55-17 oorwinning by die 2025 Rugby Afrika-beker toernooi. Hulle gaan daarmee deur na die halfeindrondte van die toernooi wat in Kampala, Uganda gespeel word en draf Sondag teen Algerië, wat 41-6 teen Ivoorkus gewen het, uit. Die direkteur van Namibiese Rugby en tussentydse afrigter van die Namibiese span, Jacques Burger sê hy is trots op die span.

Ja ni ser helt rätt! Trots att säsongen är slut, har GeekPoddens Griniga Gamla Gamers spänt musklerna och slagit ihop sina huvuden för att sammanfatta de bästa och mest intressanta från sommarens speluppvisningar. Summer Game Fest, Xbox Games Showcase, PC Gaming Show, Future Games Show och en tech-demo från Witcher 4. Detta och en hel... Read more »

Bli inte rädd. För visst har ordet cancer fått oss att skygga tillbaka. Trots att var 5.e person drabbad och var 3.e är berörd. Så släpp det. Detta avsnitt handlar inte om cancer. Den handlar om inställningen till livet. Det här avsnittet är till dig Jessica. Och min modiga vän Richard i LA som med allt ljus genomgår det omöjliga. Ett annat ord som egentligen inte finns. Omöjligt. Men mer om det i avsnittet.

HELT GRATISAVSNITT PÅ GRUND AV VIKTIGT* ... nja, det vet i tusan* Trots att vi tassat minst är dopningstassandet plågsamt * Kusk som slutat köra för Riordan – och visst vet även Jepson ...* VARFÖR I hela helvetet är inte dopningsfrågan den viktigaste?* Istället är ALLA fortsatt tysta!* Alla vittnen som inte vill/vågar kliva fram* Solängets bäste nånsin?* ... som vann det härliga Solvalla-loppet* Där Lennart i högsta grad var inblandad* Önskas förändring – stötta Trottosport! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hon är Italiens första kvinnliga premiärminister, en fantasyälskande populist som har ifrågasatts för sina kopplingar till landets mörka historia. Nya avsnitt från P3 ID hittar du först i Sveriges Radio Play. ”Io sono Giorgia, sono una donna, sono una madre!” – ”Jag är Giorgia, jag är kvinna, jag är mamma, jag är italienare, jag är kristen. Det kan de aldrig ta ifrån mig!”Orden ekar ut över en enorm folkmassa på Piazza San Giovanni i Rom hösten 2019. Vid talarpodiet står en kort kvinna med blont hår, ledigt klädd i mörka byxor och en fladdrig ljusgrå blus.Trots att hon är flankerad av flera politiska tungviktare så är det Giorgia Meloni, partiledare för Italiens bröder, som stjäl showen den här dagen. Hennes eldiga ord blir det politiska manifest som kommer att bära Meloni och hennes parti till valseger några år senare.Giorgia Melonis politiska resa inleds i början på 90-talet, när hon som 15-åring ringer på dörren till Fronte della Gioventù, det politiska partiet Movimento Sociale Italianos ungdomsförbund.Det är ett parti som grundades av den fascistiske diktatorn Benito Mussolinis anhängare, och som vid den tiden befinner sig på utkanten av det italienska etablissemanget på grund av de historiska banden till en tid som präglades av skräck och våld.P3 ID om Giorgia Meloni följer hennes utveckling från blyg tonåring med en gnagande känsla av att något är fel i det italienska samhället, till retorisk pitbull som inte räds någon motståndare på den politiska arenan.I avsnittet medverkar Eskil Fagerström, journalist på Sydsvenskan och författare till flera böcker om det moderna Italien, Giulia Kappelin Cingolani, journalist baserad i Italien, och Filip Jacobson, utrikesreporter på TV4.Klippen i avsnittet är hämtade från Rai, Right Side Broadcasting Network, Giorgia Melonis Facebooksida, Fratelli d'Italias Youtubekanal, Wine News, Diario AS, VOA Africa, Vista Agenzia Televisiva Nazionale, Vita husets Youtubekanal, British Pathé, La7 Attualità.

Greg O'Connor talks Harness Racing on 'Trots Talk'. On today's show: Carter Dalgety, Sam Thornley, Brittany Graham, David White & Phil Williamson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Greg chats with Phil Williamson after he brought up 800 training wins with 'Love N The Port' on Friday at Addington Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

David White joins Greg to recap yesterday's win for 'Bet N Win' in Brisbane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Brittany Graham joins Greg to recap some results out of Australia including 'Leap To Fame' getting a win at Albion Park Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Carter Dalgety & Sam Thornley join Greg for this week's Southern Man segment ahead of racing today at Invercargill & Addington Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Under sommaren publicerar vi sommarrepriser av avsnitt vi tycker är extra lyssningsvärda! Varje fredag kommer en ny repris – hela sommaren. Först ut är vår serie om 100 år av svensk nazism. Avsnittsbeskrivningen: I förra avsnittet fick vi höra historien om de första svenska nazistpionjärerna. Men den nazistiska historien slutar som bekant inte vid krigsslutet 1945. Trots en omvärld som förfasas över Hitlerregimens mördarmaskineri och med de ledande nazisterna inför rätta så fortsätter den svenska rörelsen sin verksamhet. Det sker dock allt som oftast i det dolda. Men planer smids för en väg framåt. Vi har nu kommit fram till del två: efterkrigsnazisterna (1945—1979). Runt om i Europa försöker vid den här tiden de nazister och fascister som vägrar ge upp sin kamp istället att omorganisera. Ska rasfrågan fortsätta vara rörelsens ledstjärna eller finns det andra vägar att gå? Här kommer en svensk att få en för utvecklingen viktig internationell roll. Många av övervintrarna tonar ned sin nazism, men i mitten av 1950-talet presenterar sig ett parti som inte döljer sin ideologiska hemvist. Hur ändrade nazistmiljön karaktär efter kriget? Vilka strategier hade de för att återlansera sina idéer? Hur gick det till när Sverige och Malmö blev den europeiska extremhögerns viktigaste mötesplats? Och vilken betydelse har den här generationen av nazister kommit att få för nästa generation av aktivister? Gäster i studion är Heléne Lööw, docent i historia specialiserad på nazism och extremism i Sverige samt Anna-Lena Lodenius, journalist specialiserad på extremism.  Programledare: Anna Fröjd --- Läs mer: Studio Expo: 100 år av svensk nazism – Del 1 av 4: Pionjärerna https://expo.se/podcasts/100-ar-av-svensk-nazism-pionjarerna/  Expo wiki – Nysvenska rörelsen: https://expo.se/lar-dig-mer/wiki/nysvenska-rorelsen/  Malmörörelsen (Erik Sidenbladh, 2012): https://expo.se/nyhet/malmororelsen/  SNF: Extremhögerns Gubbmaffia (Expo, 1997): https://expo.se/nyhet/snf-extremhogerns-gubbmaffia/  Daniel Poohl: Allvarligt, Kamprad (2011): https://expo.se/nyhet/allvarligt-kamprad/  Expo wiki – Riksfronten: https://expo.se/lar-dig-mer/wiki/riksfronten/  Sveriges första nazistledare (Magnus Säll, 2022): https://expo.se/fordjupning/sveriges-forsta-nazistledare/ Nazismens teoretiker (Expo, 1996): https://expo.se/nyhet/nazismens-teoretiker/ #4-2023 Tidskriften Expo, 100 år av svensk nazism: https://expo.se/lar-dig-mer/tidskriften/hundra-ar-av-svensk-nazism/  Studio Expo #79 - Antisemitismen 85 år efter novemberpogromen. Gäster Mathan Shastin Ravid & Morgan Finnsiö https://expo.se/podcasts/antisemitismen-85-ar-efter-novemberpogromen/     Expo behöver ditt stöd Bli poddvän här: https://expo.se/stod-expo/bli-poddvan/ Prenumerera på Expo: https://expo.se/tidskriften/prenumerera  --- Studio Expo ger dig som lyssnar fördjupningar om våra avslöjanden, mer om våra granskningar och analyser av högextrema tendenser. Varje vecka i din poddspelare! Expo är en religiöst och partipolitiskt obunden stiftelse. Vi har granskat och bevakat extremhögern sedan 1995 – för en levande demokrati där rasistiska idéer och organisationer saknar inflytande. Stöd vår verksamhet genom att bli månadsgivare eller swisha en slant till 123 271 02 59.

Sigillgravören och handelsmannen Aaron Isaac (1730–1816) var den förste jude som beviljades permanent uppehållstillstånd i Sverige utan krav på konvertering. Han anlände till Stockholm 1774, och redan året därpå fick han och två andra judar personligt tillstånd av kung Gustav III att bosätta sig i landet utan att överge sin tro.Isaac åtnjöt kungens förtroende och banade väg för en organiserad judisk närvaro i Sverige. Han grundade den första judiska församlingen i Stockholm och fick stort inflytande över judarnas situation i landet.I detta avsnitt av podden Historia Nu samtalar programledaren Urban Lindstedt med historikern Carl Henrik Carlsson, författare till boken Aaron Isaac – Sveriges förste jude, om hur en målmedveten invandrare lade grunden för en hel minoritet – och hur synen på judar förändrades genom århundradena.Aaron Isaac föddes den 16 september 1730 i den lilla tyska staden Treuenbrietzen, där judar levde på samhällets rand och endast med särskilda tillstånd. Redan i unga år visade han konstnärlig och hantverksmässig talang, särskilt inom gravyr – ett yrke han lärde sig på egen hand. Men framtidsutsikterna i hemlandet var begränsade.I Mecklenburg byggde han upp en framgångsrik verksamhet och blev nyfiken på Sverige efter affärer med svenska officerare under det pommerska kriget. När han senare fick ekonomiska bekymmer begav han sig motvilligt till Sverige – trots avrådan från sina närmaste. En midsommardag 1774 steg en envis och målmedveten Isaac i land i Ystad, med sig hade han gravyrverktyg, ett rekommendationsbrev – och en vilja att leva som jude i Sverige.Med stöd från svenska ämbetsmän och tack vare sina unika färdigheter – sigillgravyr var högt eftertraktat – lyckades han efter en lång process få ett unikt tillstånd att bosätta sig i Stockholm utan att konvertera. Det var första gången som den svenska staten accepterade en jude som medborgare utan religiös konversion.Gustav III:s beslut speglade upplysningstidens idéer och påverkades av nationalekonomer som såg judisk invandring som ett sätt att stärka ekonomin. Trots kungens stöd mötte Isaac motstånd från präster och köpmän – något han vittnar om i sina memoarer.År 1782 formaliserades statens hållning i Judereglementet, ett toleransedikt som tillät judar att bo i Stockholm, Göteborg och Norrköping utan att konvertera. Men lagtexten begränsade samtidigt deras rättigheter: inga offentliga ämbeten, inga blandäktenskap, ingen mission, och kraftigt reglerad rörelsefrihet.Aaron Isaac grundade Stockholms första judiska församling, tog emot nya invandrare, organiserade gudstjänster och anlade en judisk begravningsplats. Som hovagent och arméleverantör blev han en bro mellan minoriteten och makten.Bild: Aaron Isaac var Sveriges första öppet levande jude, porträtterad av okänd konstnär. En affärsman, sigillgravör och visionär som år 1775 blev den förste att få tillstånd att bosätta sig i Sverige utan att överge sin tro. Hans insatser låg till grund för etableringen av Sveriges första judiska församling. Bild: Judiska museet (CC BY)Musik: Abe Schwartz's Orchestra. Baym Schtefanishter Rebn (בײַם שטעפֿאַנישטער רבין) Klezmer, judisk dansmusik. USA: Emerson Records, 1918. Tillgänglig via: Internet Archive. Public Domain.Lyssna också på Gustav III:s iscensatta ryska krig.Klippare: Emanuel Lehtonen Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Den kanadensiska tennisspelaren Carson Branstine, som arbetat som modell för att finansera sin idrottskarriär, kvalificerade sig nyligen till Wimbledon. Där ställdes hon mot världsettan Aryna Sabalenka i första omgången. Trots förlusten lyfte Branstine fram en viktig fråga inom tennisvärlden, nämligen de stora uppoffringar som krävs för att nå eliten. Hur svårt är det att täcka kostnader för t.ex. resor, tränare och boende i början av karriären för en tennisspelare? Hur många talanger, som inte har råd med satsningen, tappar vi på vägen? Och hur ser det ut för våra svenska framtidslöften? Med: Alexander Theodoridis Programledare: Demir Lilja

Uppskattningsvis cirka en halv miljon svenska turister åker varje år till områden där risken för jordbävning bedöms som hög. Trots det tror vi kunskapen om jordbävningar och vad man gör om man skulle råka ut för det är ganska låg. Vi pratar historiska jordbävningar, riskområden, hur man skall agera och vilka förberedelser som kan vara lämpliga vid en utlandsresa i dessa områden. Shownotes och länkar på https://www.hemberedskap.se/avsnitt422 Stötta oss och lyssna på extra bonusavsnitt på https://www.patreon.com/hemberedskap

Nyheter och fördjupning från Sverige och världen. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play.

Raiders legend Jarrod Croker for Harness Racing NSW is back on the Run Home talking Papalii back in Origin setup and Trots tips for Young 00:00 Went three for three last week 01:00 Papalii back in the Origin setup 04:45 Tips today for Young Listen to The Run Home with Joel and Fletch live every weekday: 3pm AEST on SEN 1170 AM Sydney and SEN 693 AM Brisbane Listen Online: https://www.sen.com.au/listen   Subscribe to The Run Home YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/@JoelandFletchSEN   Follow us on Social Media! TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@joelfletchsen Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/joelfletchsen X:      https://x.com/joelfletchsen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Olof Rudbeck den äldre (1630–1702) var en av Sveriges största vetenskapsmän. Redan som 23‑åring fick han världsrykte genom upptäckten av lymfsystemet. Detta universalsnille förespråkade en ny vetenskaps­syn fri från religiös dogmatism.Biskopssonen från Västerås kom att prägla lärdomsstaden Uppsala inom medicin, botanik, mekanik och fornhistoria. Trots sina betydande insatser för vetenskap och bildning är han idag främst ihågkommen för sitt fornhistoriska storverk Atlantica, där han framställde Sverige som gudarnas boning och ursprunget till alla större folkstammar.Detta är en nymixad repris.I det här avsnittet av podden Historia Nu samtalar programledaren Urban Lindstedt med professor Henrik Ågren, specialist i tidigmoderna kultur- och socialhistorien vid Uppsala universitet, samt Anders Lundin – programledare, poddare och musiker – som nu medverkar i kabarén Olofolof på Uppsala stadsteater om Olof Rudbeck den äldre.Olof Rudbeck föddes i Västerås 1630 som det nionde av elva barn. Gustaf II Adolf bar själv fram honom till dopet. Hans far, biskopen Johannes Rudbeckius, var en av stormaktstidens ledande kyrkomän och grundare av Västerås gymnasium – Sveriges första av sitt slag.År 1648 inskrevs Rudbeck som student vid Uppsala universitet, där han kom att verka större delen av sitt liv. Vid 23 års ålder presenterade han sin första större vetenskapliga upptäckt – lymfsystemet. Medicin var hans huvudsakliga fält, men han bedrev även forskning inom botanik, mekanik, arkitektur, astronomi och musik.Han blev en ledande förespråkare för den vetenskapliga revolutionen, med krav på empiri, och bröt med religiöst färgad kunskapssyn. De sista decennierna av sitt liv ägnade han åt fyrbandsverket Atlantica (1679–1702), där han med kreativ ortnamnsforskning hävdade att Sverige och Uppsala var gudarnas hemvist och urkällan till alla folk – med Sverige som det förlorade Atlantis enligt Platon.Idag framstår Atlantica som vansinnigt, men Rudbeck knöt an till en samtida historisk tradition – göticismen – där man sökte paralleller mellan göterna och svenskarna. Verket väckte intresse internationellt, men kritiserades också hårt redan i sin samtid.Bild: Olof Rudbeck den äldre (1630-1702). Bilden är hämtad ur Atlantica och utförd af den här i Sverige länge verksamme kopparstickaren Dionysius Padt-Brügge för att tjäna till titelblad för atlasbandet af Atlantica. Wikipedia, Public Domain. Musik: Claudio Monteverdi - Quel Augelin Che Canta av The Tudor ConsortCC BY 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons Lyssna också på Drottning Kristina kom att sakna kungamakten. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Om en resa som gav oss sommarregnsbad, två tappade poäng och en boll i huvudet för Eskil. Trots en match som kändes kontrollerande och stabil blir det trots det endast en poäng på en arena vars namn gud (läs: podden) glömde. Samtidigt infinner sig en hoppfull positivism inför höstsäsongen 2025 tack vare en hemvändare och en skotskitaliensk.  Röster i avsnittet: Viktor Tullgren och Eskil Höglund. 

De sleutel tot een vrij en vervuld leven is niet perfectie, maar vooruitdenken: durven handelen vanuit de vraag “Zal ik hier later spijt van hebben als ik het níet doe?” Regret-minimalisatie betekent vandaag besluiten nemen met het oog op jouw toekomstige zelf – zodat je geen spijt hebt van gemiste kansen, domme aankopen of uitgestelde dromen. Ik ben Adine en ik help rebelse Visionairs met het creëren van vrijheid in hun leven. In tijd, energie, maar zeker ook in geld. Niet met allerlei ingewikkelde strategieën en funnels, maar door je te helpen jezelf weer te ontdekken. Die AWESOME versie van jou die je veel te lang in een veel te klein jasje hebt geprobeerd te stoppen.  Ik geloof namelijk niet in one-size-fits all, maar in de kracht van jou als persoon. Jij bent hier met een reden en ik help je om die reden te vinden, om impact te maken vanuit jouw kern én om daar goed geld mee te verdienen.  Is mijn podcast waardevol voor je? Dan zou ik het enorm fijn vinden als je deze met 5 sterren waardeert op iTunes of Spotify, hem in je netwerk deelt en/of je abonneert, zodat je een melding krijgt bij elke nieuwe aflevering. Dankjewel alvast! En… wat gaat jouw volgende stap zijn?

Ny bok visar Sverigedemokraternas antisemitiska historia / Trots polisens nya metod fortsätter barn begå brott åt kriminella gäng / Libanesisk-svenska Gabriella bär sin svenska folkdräkt med stolthet Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Reportrar: Nina Muossa och Roza Bicer.

Visste du att funktionen att scrolla och svajpa på telefonen är en svensk uppfinning? 2001 grundade svenskarna Thomas Eriksson och Magnus Görtz, bolaget Neonode. De såg att något saknades på mobiltelefonmarknaden och skapade därför en ny sorts telefon utan knappar, som skulle styras med touchscreen. Trots att bolaget tog patent på sin uppfinning, plockade techjättar som både Apple och Samsung upp funktionen. En funktion som nu finns över hela världen. De senaste åren har dock techjättarna varit i flera rättsprocesser om vem som var först med funktionen. Om Neonode vinner processerna är chansen att de får ett miljardbelopp. Varför vet vi så lite om den här svenska uppfinningen? Hur hamnade tekniken hos de stora techbolagen och kan de vinna över giganterna? Gäst: Jesper Spanne, journalist som gjort poddokumentären ”Miljardpantentet”. Programledare och producent: Jenny Ågren. Klipp från: EFN Ekonomikanalen, Podden ”Investera på höjden”, TV4. Kontakt: podcast@aftonbladet.se.

Trots husliv, trasiga tvättmaskiner och bankstrul så har vi spelat massor även denna veckan! Vill du stötta oss och ta del av vårt exklusiva content så bli Patreon! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Patreon.com/gotypodden⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Joina oss på Discord!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠(00:01) FÖRSNACK!(12:17) Nyheter: Konkurrensverket friar Bergsala (36:26) Spel: Lost in Random: The Eternal Die, The Alters, RAIDOU Remastered: The Mystery of the Soulless Army, Mario Kart World, Ruffy and the Riverside, DOOM: The Dark Ages, Death Stranding 2: On the Beach(1:37:24) Spelradarn vevas igång!Feedback, tips eller eventuella frågor får gärna skickas till gotypodden@gmail.com ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Discord⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ eller på ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ / ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ @gotypodden. Tack ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Emma Idberg⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ för våra fina bilder!GOTY-merch i vår ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠merchbutik!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Vill ni höra eller se mer av oss finns våra andra poddar och vår Youtube-kanal i vårt ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠länkträd⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!

När kulturjournalisten och författaren Helena von Zweigbergk ser på sina föräldrars åldrande var det präglat av demens. Trots det är hon inte själv rädd för att börja glömma. Nu har hon skrivit en bok om att bli äldre tillsammans md konstnären och vännen Cilla Ramnek "Det nya gamla". Helena von Zweigbergk: ”Jag har tatuerat in, ”Le och vinka!” på min egen arm så då får jag sitta där på boendet och göra just så tänker jag. Jag är konstigt nog inte så orolig för det.” Intervjuar gör Johanna Hinteregger och podden görs av Alzheimer Life på produktionsbolaget Beppo.

4.3 June's Brain Breather: Feeling Dread with Plumby and Sir Trots-A-LotFiguring out how we're feeling is hard…but easier with friends. Join Bean for a silly story that will help us check in with our minds and take care of our feelings.Feelings Focus: Feeling dread; not wanting to do something; procrastinatingStrategies: Visualization; Game reframe (coping)Protagonists: Plumby the Plunger and Sir Trots-A-Lot the CamelSetting: A house made entirely of tulips…somewhere in TurkeyResources: -Helping Kids Combat Procrastination-Goal Ladder ActivityInfo/Get in Touch: Website: www.storypillar.com Instagram: @storypillar Join our mailing list. Please subscribe, rate, and review wherever you love listening!Donate: https://ko-fi.com/storypillar Shop: storypillarstore.threadless.com Created, Written, Edited, and Produced by: Meg LewisStorypillar Theme Song: Lyrics by Meg Lewis Music by Meg Lewis, Andy Jobe, and Suzanna Bridges Produced by Andy Jobe Episode Cover Art: Mackenzie AllisonMeg LewisSound Effects and Additional Music:-freesound.org-pixabay.com-Pixabay artists: SunnyScy; SIMAS-2010, JacobsAppKnow a kid with cool facts, great jokes, or who wants to share how they're feeling? Tell us! Details at www.storypillar.com/unsticktricks. © 2025 PowerMouse Press, LLC

Det är sen kväll när en grupp maskerade aktivister kliver in genom bakdörren på ett litet slakteri i Skåne. De är här för att samla bevis. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Under 2019 och 2020 smygfilmar Djurrättsalliansen på ett litet slakteri utanför Ystad. Hundratals timmar med smygfilmat material visar hur slakteriarbetarna utför slakt på ett sätt som inte är tillåtet och som i flera fall utsätter djuren på slakteriet för lidande. Filmerna visar också hur personalen slår djuren.Aktivister lämnade inte bevisNär Djurrättsalliansen offentliggjorde sitt material blev reaktionerna hos allmänheten kraftiga.– Vi ville ju visa hur laglig slakt går till men också på att kontrollsystemen inte är tillräckliga, säger Malin Gustafsson från Djurrättsalliansen.Djurrättsalliansen skickade också filmmaterialet till Länsstyrelsen i Skåne som polisanmälde slakteriet.– Vi har fri bevisprövning i Sverige och det gör att polisen kan använda vilka bevis som helst, säger tidigare kriminalkommissarien Bosse Åström.Blev själv dömdVid den här aktionen har Djurrättsalliansen hållit aktivisternas identiteter hemliga, men i samband med en tidigare aktion där man filmat i hundratals grisstallar valde Malin Gustafsson att träda fram och vittna. Trots det lades utredningen om djurplågeri ner och Malin Gustafsson blev själv anmäld och dömd för olaga intrång.I det här avsnittet av Brottsutredarna med reporter Sigrid Edsenius får du höra om när Polisen får hjälp av aktivister att sätta dit djurplågare. Och hur Bosse Åström, en av Sveriges främsta utredare av grova brott, minns hur kreativ Polisen en gång var för att bevisa lidandet hos en människa. Producent: Steffen RenklintSlutmix: Johannes Oscarsson

Slaget vid Villmanstrand den 23 augusti 1741, under Finska kriget 1741–1743, är bland de största katastroferna i svensk militärhistoria. Uppfyllda av övermod och med orealistiska mål inledde hattpartiet i riksdagen, de så kallade Hattarna, ett illa förberett anfallskrig mot Ryssland.Konsekvenserna blev ödesdigra: landavträdelser och starkt ryskt inflytande över Sveriges inrikespolitik. Det mänskliga priset betalades av tusentals svenska soldater, som dog utan att resultat uppnåddes.I detta avsnitt av Militärhistoriepodden berättar Martin Hårdstedt och Peter Bennesved om ett av Sveriges mest glömda krig. Hattarnas ryska krig inleddes sommaren 1741. Trots franska subventioner och ett avtal med Osmanska riket var förberedelserna bristfälliga. Redan vid Villmanstrand led svenska trupper katastrofala förluster: av Wrangels 4 000 man stupade eller sårades hälften. Flottan drabbades av sjukdomar och i augusti 1742 kapitulerade armén i Helsingfors.Som resultat av förlusten avträddes Sveriges sydöstra delar av Finland till Ryssland, vilket lämnade viktiga gränsfästningar på ryskt territorium. Ryssarna påverkade svensk tronföljd och förde in en rysk styrka på 12 000 man strax utanför Stockholm för att "skydda" landet mot Danmark. Dalkarlarna reste sig och tågade till huvudstaden i den så kallade "daldansen", där den svenska militären gick in på Norrmalmstorg. Sverige befann sig därefter i ett politiskt och militärt svaghetstillstånd, som inte skådats på flera århundraden.Bild: Karta över slaget vid Villmanstrand, 23 augusti 1741 (Public domain, Wikimedia Commons).Lyssna också på Stora ofreden – ryska ockupationen av Finland 1713-21.Klippare: Emanuel Lehtonen Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

President Cyril Ramaphosa het Suid-Afrika se krieketspan gelukgewens met die oorwinning van die IKR Wêreldtoetskampioenskap teen Australië gister op Lords in Londen. Die Proteas het op die vierde dag met vyf paaltjies gewen. Die bydraes van kaptein Temba Bavuma en kolwer Aiden Markram het die knoop deurgehaak. Hulle het onderskeidelik 69 en 136 in hul tweede beurt aangeteken. President Ramaphosa sê die afrigter Shukri Conrad, Bavuma en die span het Suid-Afrika trots gemaak. Hulle het die kampioenskap as buiteperd begin, maar hul ontembare gees, wat ons nasie kenmerk, het hulle deurgedra. Bavuma is na die wedstryd gevra om sy emosies op te som:

Antal personer vars efternamn slutar på son blir allt färre i Sverige. Här berättar lyssnare om vad de heter, varifrån det kommer och känslorna kring det. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Dagens nyheter rapporterar att son-namnen har minskat i popularitet de senaste 20 åren och flera tusen väljer att heta något helt annat. Trots det, så toppar Andersson, Johansson och Karlsson listan över de vanligaste efternamnen i Sverige. Ett eget påhittat efternamn, ett som hängt med i släktleden i generationer, ett väldigt vanligt eller kanske ett som få kan uttala och stava rätt - här berättar lyssnare om vad de heter i efternamn, varför och vilka känslor de har inför det!Relationen till mitt efternamn med Annika IlmoniRing oss, mejla på karlavagnen@sverigesradio.se eller skriv till oss på Facebook och Instagram. Programmet startar 22:12.

Jonas Parandian, också känd som Naprapat Jonas, gästar podden för ett ofiltrerat och sårbart samtal om sin extrema expedition till Mount Everest. Detta är inte en historia om bara prestation, utan ett samtal om förlust, smärta, närvaro – och modet att möta sig själv under extrema förhållanden.Drömmen om Everest föddes ett år tidigare, på en vandring i Nepal. Under året som ledde fram till bestigningen tränade Jonas tolv pass i veckan, byggde upp styrka, kondition, uthållighet – och sin mentala motståndskraft. Men bara två veckor innan avfärd fick han beskedet att hans pappa var obotligt sjuk. Trots sorgen valde han att fortsätta, med sin pappas välsignelse – en inre konflikt som kom att prägla hela resan.Vi pratar om vad som händer med kroppen när man befinner sig i dödszonen. Känslan när man ser döda kroppar längs vägen till toppen, beskåda laviner som hotar att ta ens liv, uppleva syrebrist i de mest riskfyllda passagerna - och drivet att fortsätta när man bara vill ge upp.Det här är inte bara en berättelse om att nå toppen av världens högsta berg – utan om att överleva vägen dit, att förstå sin plats i det stora, och om att bära med sig något större än prestation hem. En rå, ärlig och emotionellt stark berättelse om vad det innebär att vara människa – när allt skalas av.Följ Jonas här. Läs mer om Jonas här.Ta del av Framgångsakademins kurser.Beställ "Mitt Framgångsår".Följ Alexander Pärleros på Instagram.Följ Alexander Pärleros på Tiktok.Bästa tipsen från avsnittet i Nyhetsbrevet.I samarbete med Convendum. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jonas Parandian, också känd som Naprapat Jonas, gästar podden för ett ofiltrerat och sårbart samtal om sin extrema expedition till Mount Everest. Detta är inte en historia om bara prestation, utan ett samtal om förlust, smärta, närvaro – och modet att möta sig själv under extrema förhållanden.Drömmen om Everest föddes ett år tidigare, på en vandring i Nepal. Under året som ledde fram till bestigningen tränade Jonas tolv pass i veckan, byggde upp styrka, kondition, uthållighet – och sin mentala motståndskraft. Men bara två veckor innan avfärd fick han beskedet att hans pappa var obotligt sjuk. Trots sorgen valde han att fortsätta, med sin pappas välsignelse – en inre konflikt som kom att prägla hela resan.Vi pratar om vad som händer med kroppen när man befinner sig i dödszonen. Känslan när man ser döda kroppar längs vägen till toppen, beskåda laviner som hotar att ta ens liv, uppleva syrebrist i de mest riskfyllda passagerna - och drivet att fortsätta när man bara vill ge upp.Det här är inte bara en berättelse om att nå toppen av världens högsta berg – utan om att överleva vägen dit, att förstå sin plats i det stora, och om att bära med sig något större än prestation hem. En rå, ärlig och emotionellt stark berättelse om vad det innebär att vara människa – när allt skalas av.Följ Jonas här. Läs mer om Jonas här.Ta del av Framgångsakademins kurser.Beställ "Mitt Framgångsår".Följ Alexander Pärleros på Instagram.Följ Alexander Pärleros på Tiktok.Bästa tipsen från avsnittet i Nyhetsbrevet.I samarbete med Convendum. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Kristina Gyllenstierna (1494–1559) ledde år 1520 försvaret av Stockholms slott mot Kristian II:s danska trupper. Gravid och nybliven änka efter riksföreståndare Sten Sture den yngre, tog hon kommandot med både mod och moralisk styrka.Genom högättade kvinnors perspektiv framträder en annan bild av maktstriderna i Kalmarunionens slutskede och Vasaättens uppkomst, än i traditionell historieskrivning. Dessa kvinnor kunde utöva inflytande, men riskerade också att drabbas hårt när deras män förlorade makten.I podden Historia Nu samtalar Urban Lindstedt med idéhistorikern Karin Tegenborg Falkdalen, författare till Kvinnorna runt Vasatronen, om Kristinas liv och andra adelskvinnors roll i maktspelet.Kvinnornas roller i det tidigmoderna Sverige var mer komplexa än enbart dekorativa. De var mödrar, änkor, rådgivare, godsägare – och i flera fall politiska aktörer med avgörande betydelse. I en värld där politisk makt ofta ärvdes eller bevarades genom släktband, blev kvinnor som Kristina Gyllenstierna, Märta, och Margareta Leijonhufvud nyckelfigurer i bevarandet av dynastisk kontinuitet och motståndskraft.Genom brev, förhandlingar, strategiska äktenskap och minnesarbete vidmakthöll dessa kvinnor släktens ära och makt – ofta i tystnad, men med en kraft och målmedvetenhet som i efterhand framstår som historiskt avgörande.Kristina föddes ca 1494 i en av Sveriges mäktigaste släkter. Genom sitt äktenskap med Sten Sture dy knöts hon till det parti som ville frigöra Sverige från dansk överhöghet. När maken stupade 1520 tog Kristina över ledarskapet och organiserade motståndet. Hon skrev upprop, försökte nå utländskt stöd och agerade som regent i Stures namn.Trots en förhandlad amnesti lät Kristian II avrätta hennes släktingar i Stockholms blodbad. Efteråt fängslades Kristina och flera kvinnliga släktingar i Blåtårn i Köpenhamn, där de satt isolerade i över tre år. I sin andaktsbok bad hon om skydd från sina fiender – hon var mer än en fånge, hon var en symbol för motståndet.När Gustav Eriksson Vasa, hennes systerson, tog makten blev han snabbt hennes rival. Kristina kämpade för sina barns rättigheter, men marginaliserades. Relationen till Gustav Vasa präglades av misstänksamhet. Gustav Vasa arbetade målmedvetet för att koncentrera makten kring sin egen familj. Ätten Sture förlorade sin plats i rikets ledning. Deras relation var från detta ögonblick kylig, präglad av misstänksamhet och maktspel.Hennes sonhustru, Märta Eriksdotter Leijonhufvud, en annan centralgestalt i 1500-talets adliga kvinnohistoria. Märta gifte sig med Svante Sture, Kristinas son, och blev mor till flera söner som gjorde karriär i statens tjänst.Bild: Kristina Gyllenstierna och maken, riksföreståndaren Sten Sture den yngre, avbildade i ett samtida porträtt från Gripsholms slott. Målningen är utförd av en okänd konstnär och ingår i Nationalmuseums samlingar. Public Domain.Musik: Walther, Johann Gottfried. Ach, Gott, erhör mein Seufzen und Wehklage [Ljudinspelning]. Tillgänglig via Wikimedia Commons: Creative Commons Erkännande-Dela Lika 4.0 Internationell (CC BY-SA 4.0).Lyssna också till Nytt ljus över antalet döda i Stockholms blodbad.Klippare: Emanuel Lehtonen Vill du stödja podden och samtidigt höra ännu mer av Historia Nu? Gå med i vårt gille genom att klicka här: https://plus.acast.com/s/historianu-med-urban-lindstedt. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Trots att det känns som länge sedan det var en president i Vita huset som satsade tusentals miljarder kronor på investeringar i grön teknik — och en Greta Thunberg som inspirerade till en av de allra största demonstrationerna någonsin — så fortsätter jordens medeltemperatur att ticka upp. Här gästas vi av Chalmersforskaren Daniel Johansson, som ägnat nästan tjugo år åt att forska på klimatomställningen. Vi tar avstamp i en nulägesrapport om den globala uppvärmningen. Daniel berättar om de senaste mätningarna kring global medeltemperatur, han går igenom koldbudgetar som återstår för att vi ska hålla oss inom 1,5 eller 2-gradersmålet — och berättar om osäkerheten kring klimatkänsligheten, alltså till vilken grad ökade koncentrationer påverkar den globala uppvärmningen. Men framförallt pratar vi om vägen mot att kunna klara klimatmålen. Vi pratar om en rad olika utmaningar och lösningar. Daniel går igenom hur de bredare tekniska trenderna har utvecklats de senaste åren, om olika tekniker för att kunna suga på koldioxid från atmosfären, och om flygets, komplicerade, klimatpåverkan. Vi får även höra om studier som Daniel gjort tillsammans med andra poddbekantingar såsom Thomas Sterner och Christian Azar, där man räknat på samhälleliga kostnader för att släppa ut koldioxid och metan. I podden nämns uttrycket integrerade bedömningsmodeller, eller IAM efter Integrated Assessment Models. Det är Daniels främsta forskningsfält och en vanlig metod inom IPCC och klimatforskning i allmänhet, där klimatmodeller kombineras med kunskap inom andra fält, bl.a. för att utvärdera påverkan från styrmedel och teknikutveckling.

Peter Gerhardsson har presenterat Sveriges EM-trupp och Fridolina Rolfö finns med TROTS skada. Expressen Damfotboll går igenom namnen som saknas, spelarna som får chansen och varför det inte finns några reserver. Med: Vendela Ögren och Frida Olsson

Lojsan har en fullspäckad sommar framför sig medan Hanna sitter med sommarångest. Trots att Lojsans hus numera är hemsökt går Hanna i köptankar, men hur ska det gå när Carinalicous hjälper till med typ… allt? Är det så fel dock?Följ oss på instagram och Tiktok @mandagsvibe, gå med i facebookgruppen "Måndagsvibbare" och skicka frågor, dilemman, am I the asshole och fuckboy or not till mandagsvibepodd@gmail.com. Hadeee!

Utrikesministern om regeringens skarpare kritik mot Israels agerande i Gaza och om läget i Ukraina, Sveriges mest prioriterade utrikesfråga. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Sedan mitten av maj har regeringen gradvis skärpt tonen mot Israels agerande i Gaza, där en svältkatastrof nu hotar efter att Israel blockerat tillgång på mat. Möjligt krigsbrottAtt använda svält som vapen är ett krigsbrott, enligt internationell humanitär rätt och utrikesminister Maria Malmer Stenergard ser allvarligt på Israels agerande. ”När man nu inte har något svar på hur humanitär hjälp ska komma in så att man ska kunna minska risken för svält. Ja, då är det mycket svårt att se att skulle vara förenligt med den internationella rätten,” säger Maria Malmer Stenergard.På frågan om Israel begår krigsbrott när tillgången på mat blockeras i Gaza, svarar utrikesministern att det kan handla om det och att det därför är viktigt att en domstol utreder saken. Namnger israeliska ministrar på sanktionslistaSverige stödjer en granskning av EU:s omfattande samarbetsavtal med Israel och driver också EU-sanktioner mot två extremistiska israeliska ministrar, finansminister Bezalel Smotrich och säkerhetsminister Itamar Ben-Gvir. Tonen i kritiken mot Israel blir skarpare också i EU-kretsen, enligt Malmer Stenergard.”Jag är lika frustrerad som många andra i Sverige, men också i Europa. Och jag hör en helt annan tongång nu i rådsmötena som jag sitter i. Där finns det en helt annan frustration bland medlemsländerna.”Inget återupptaget stöd till UnrwaDen svenska regeringen stoppade i fjol stödet till FN:s hjälporgan för palestinska flyktingar, Unrwa. Detta efter att Israel förbjudit organisationen att verka i Gaza. Trots uppmaningar från flera biståndsorganisationer, uppger Maria Malmer Stenergard att det inte finns några planer på att återuppta stödet.”Det handlar ju om att vi ser till det lilla barn som svälter i Gaza. Vad är vår största sannolikhet att få in hjälp till det barnet? Då har vi bedömt att det inte var särskilt sannolikt att det skulle kunna gå via Unrwa, utan det var större sannolikhet att vi skulle kunna nå fram via andra organisationer,” säger Maria Malmer Stenergard.Utrikesministern menar att vi nu står vid en slags vändpunkt. Hur vi kommer att se på Israels agerande mot palestinierna i framtiden avgörs nu, säger utrikesministern och pekar på de senaste veckornas utveckling i Gaza.”Jag hoppas att vi ser en annan utveckling framöver. Men jag är mycket, mycket orolig,” säger Malmer Stenergard. Ryssland vill inte ha fred Regeringen har pekat ut stödet till Ukraina som sin största utrikespolitiska uppgift. Mycket av Ukrainas öde kommer avgöras av vilken linje USA väljer framöver. Utrikesministern är något mer hoppfull över relationen mellan de två länderna nu än för någon månad sen.”Vi ser hur deras samarbete fördjupas. Jag tror att USA, liksom vi, känner stor frustration över att Ryssland tydligt visar att de inte vill ha fred. Att de hela tiden flyttar målstolparna,” säger Maria Malmer Stenergard. En rättelse:I en tidigare version av denna publicering benämndes Storbritannien som ett EU-land. Rätt är att Storbritannien inte är medlem i EU. Rättelsen är gjord den 6 juni 2025.Gäst: Maria Malmer Stenergard (M), utrikesministerProgramledare: Johar Bendjelloul Kommentar: Johan-Mathias SommarströmProducent: Stina FischerTekniker: Brady JuvierIntervjun spelades in på eftermiddagen, onsdag den 4 juni 2025.

Trots oron över vad som händer i forskningsnationen USA väljer en av våra svenska toppforskare i kemi, Pernilla Wittung Stafshede, att flytta sin forskning till Texas. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Pernilla Wittung Stafshede är en av dem som utser nobelpristagare i kemi, och har varit framgångsrik proteinforskare vid både Umeå universitet och Chalmers. Hon har också varit uttalat kritisk till hur jämställdhetsarbete sköts inom universitetsvärlden och engagerat sig mot diskriminering - frågor som inte står högt i kurs hos Trump-administrationen. Ändå väljer hon att flytta sin forskning från Chalmers till Houston, Texas.Lena Nordlundlena.nordlund@sverigesradio.seProducent: Lars Broströmlars.brostrom@sverigesradio.se

Den franska modeskaparen Agnès Troublé har genom sitt märke agnès b. blivit känd för sina enkla och tidlösa plagg. Nu firar hon 50 år i modebranschen. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Agnès Troublé har sagt att hon hatar mode och att hon aldrig tittar på vad andra designers gör, går på visningar eller shoppar. Trots det går hennes märke agnès b. som tåget. Hon öppnade sin första butik i Paris 1975 och blev snabbt uppmärksammade för sin självklara enkelhet. Hon deltar inte i det vanliga moderejset, utan gör variationer på den typ av baskläder som hon alltid gjort. Svarta byxor. Randiga tröjor. Snickarbyxor. Vita skjortor. Kostymer. För både kvinnor och män.I veckans program berättar vi om Agnès Troublés modekarriär och stora intresse för konst. Hon har till exempel samarbetat med en lång rad konstnärer genom att trycka bilder av deras verk på t-shirtar. Den svenska fotografen Anders Petersen är en av de många konstnärer hon samarbetet med. Vi har pratat med honom om hur det gick till när ett av fotografierna från hans kända fotoserie Café Lehmitz hamnade på en av Agnès Troublés t-tröjor.Vi träffar också författaren Celia B. Dackenberg för att prata om hennes stora fascination för koftor, något hon har gemensamt med Agnès Troublé. Och så ringer vi upp den franske modejournalisten och dokumentärfilmaren Loïc Prigent, som nyligen träffade Agnès Troublé för en intervju.

Trots att vi för bara några år sedan såg ut att nå FN-målet om noll hunger 2030 ser det idag betydligt sämre ut. I Sudan används hunger som vapen. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Medverkande: Awa Mahamedine Ari Yacoub, flykting från staden Al Fashir i Darfur, Sudan, Alex De Waal, Sudanexpert vid Tufts university, Alsonasi Adam, sudanes engagerad i gräsrotsrörelsen Emergency Response Rooms, Rowlands Kaotcha, global vd för The Hunger Project, Jean-Martin Bauer, chef för analys och data på World Food Program mflProgramledare: Kajsa Boglindkajsa.boglind@sr.se Reportrar: Sara Heyman och Amaury HauchardTekniker: Maria StillbergProducent: Anja Sahlberganja.sahlberg@sr.se

Yesterday, the self-styled San Francisco “progressive” Joan Williams was on the show arguing that Democrats need to relearn the language of the American working class. But, as some of you have noted, Williams seems oblivious to the fact that politics is about more than simply aping other people's language. What you say matters, and the language of American working class, like all industrial working classes, is rooted in a critique of capitalism. She should probably read the New Yorker staff writer John Cassidy's excellent new book, Capitalism and its Critics, which traces capitalism's evolution and criticism from the East India Company through modern times. He defines capitalism as production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets, encompassing various forms from Chinese state capitalism to hyper-globalization. The book examines capitalism's most articulate critics including the Luddites, Marx, Engels, Thomas Carlisle, Adam Smith, Rosa Luxemburg, Keynes & Hayek, and contemporary figures like Sylvia Federici and Thomas Piketty. Cassidy explores how major economists were often critics of their era's dominant capitalist model, and untangles capitalism's complicated relationship with colonialism, slavery and AI which he regards as a potentially unprecedented economic disruption. This should be essential listening for all Democrats seeking to reinvent a post Biden-Harris party and message. 5 key takeaways* Capitalism has many forms - From Chinese state capitalism to Keynesian managed capitalism to hyper-globalization, all fitting the basic definition of production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets.* Great economists are typically critics - Smith criticized mercantile capitalism, Keynes critiqued laissez-faire capitalism, and Hayek/Friedman opposed managed capitalism. Each generation's leading economists challenge their era's dominant model.* Modern corporate structure has deep roots - The East India Company was essentially a modern multinational corporation with headquarters, board of directors, stockholders, and even a private army - showing capitalism's organizational continuity across centuries.* Capitalism is intertwined with colonialism and slavery - Industrial capitalism was built on pre-existing colonial and slave systems, particularly through the cotton industry and plantation economies.* AI represents a potentially unprecedented disruption - Unlike previous technological waves, AI may substitute rather than complement human labor on a massive scale, potentially creating political backlash exceeding even the "China shock" that contributed to Trump's rise.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. A couple of days ago, we did a show with Joan Williams. She has a new book out, "Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back." A book about language, about how to talk to the American working class. She also had a piece in Jacobin Magazine, an anti-capitalist magazine, about how the left needs to speak to what she calls average American values. We talked, of course, about Bernie Sanders and AOC and their language of fighting oligarchy, and the New York Times followed that up with "The Enduring Power of Anti-Capitalism in American Politics."But of course, that brings the question: what exactly is capitalism? I did a little bit of research. We can find definitions of capitalism from AI, from Wikipedia, even from online dictionaries, but I thought we might do a little better than relying on Wikipedia and come to a man who's given capitalism and its critics a great deal of thought. John Cassidy is well known as a staff writer at The New Yorker. He's the author of a wonderful book, the best book, actually, on the dot-com insanity. And his new book, "Capitalism and its Critics," is out this week. John, congratulations on the book.So I've got to be a bit of a schoolmaster with you, John, and get some definitions first. What exactly is capitalism before we get to criticism of it?John Cassidy: Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question, Andrew. Obviously, through the decades, even the centuries, there have been many different definitions of the term capitalism and there are different types of capitalism. To not be sort of too ideological about it, the working definition I use is basically production for profit—that could be production of goods or mostly in the new and, you know, in today's economy, production of services—for profit by companies which are privately owned in markets. That's a very sort of all-encompassing definition.Within that, you can have all sorts of different types of capitalism. You can have Chinese state capitalism, you can have the old mercantilism, which industrial capitalism came after, which Trump seems to be trying to resurrect. You can have Keynesian managed capitalism that we had for 30 or 40 years after the Second World War, which I grew up in in the UK. Or you can have sort of hyper-globalization, hyper-capitalism that we've tried for the last 30 years. There are all those different varieties of capitalism consistent with a basic definition, I think.Andrew Keen: That keeps you busy, John. I know you started this project, which is a big book and it's a wonderful book. I read it. I don't always read all the books I have on the show, but I read from cover to cover full of remarkable stories of the critics of capitalism. You note in the beginning that you began this in 2016 with the beginnings of Trump. What was it about the 2016 election that triggered a book about capitalism and its critics?John Cassidy: Well, I was reporting on it at the time for The New Yorker and it struck me—I covered, I basically covered the economy in various forms for various publications since the late 80s, early 90s. In fact, one of my first big stories was the stock market crash of '87. So yes, I am that old. But it seemed to me in 2016 when you had Bernie Sanders running from the left and Trump running from the right, but both in some way offering very sort of similar critiques of capitalism. People forget that Trump in 2016 actually was running from the left of the Republican Party. He was attacking big business. He was attacking Wall Street. He doesn't do that these days very much, but at the time he was very much posing as the sort of outsider here to protect the interests of the average working man.And it seemed to me that when you had this sort of pincer movement against the then ruling model, this wasn't just a one-off. It seemed to me it was a sort of an emerging crisis of legitimacy for the system. And I thought there could be a good book written about how we got to here. And originally I thought it would be a relatively short book just based on the last sort of 20 or 30 years since the collapse of the Cold War and the sort of triumphalism of the early 90s.But as I got into it more and more, I realized that so many of the issues which had been raised, things like globalization, rising inequality, monopoly power, exploitation, even pollution and climate change, these issues go back to the very start of the capitalist system or the industrial capitalist system back in sort of late 18th century, early 19th century Britain. So I thought, in the end, I thought, you know what, let's just do the whole thing soup to nuts through the eyes of the critics.There have obviously been many, many histories of capitalism written. I thought that an original way to do it, or hopefully original, would be to do a sort of a narrative through the lives and the critiques of the critics of various stages. So that's, I hope, what sets it apart from other books on the subject, and also provides a sort of narrative frame because, you know, I am a New Yorker writer, I realize if you want people to read things, you've got to make it readable. Easiest way to make things readable is to center them around people. People love reading about other people. So that's sort of the narrative frame. I start off with a whistleblower from the East India Company back in the—Andrew Keen: Yeah, I want to come to that. But before, John, my sense is that to simplify what you're saying, this is a labor of love. You're originally from Leeds, the heart of Yorkshire, the center of the very industrial revolution, the first industrial revolution where, in your historical analysis, capitalism was born. Is it a labor of love? What's your family relationship with capitalism? How long was the family in Leeds?John Cassidy: Right, I mean that's a very good question. It is a labor of love in a way, but it's not—our family doesn't go—I'm from an Irish family, family of Irish immigrants who moved to England in the 1940s and 1950s. So my father actually did start working in a big mill, the Kirkstall Forge in Leeds, which is a big steel mill, and he left after seeing one of his co-workers have his arms chopped off in one of the machinery, so he decided it wasn't for him and he spent his life working in the construction industry, which was dominated by immigrants as it is here now.So I don't have a—it's not like I go back to sort of the start of the industrial revolution, but I did grow up in the middle of Leeds, very working class, very industrial neighborhood. And what a sort of irony is, I'll point out, I used to, when I was a kid, I used to play golf on a municipal golf course called Gotts Park in Leeds, which—you know, most golf courses in America are sort of in the affluent suburbs, country clubs. This was right in the middle of Armley in Leeds, which is where the Victorian jail is and a very rough neighborhood. There's a small bit of land which they built a golf course on. It turns out it was named after one of the very first industrialists, Benjamin Gott, who was a wool and textile industrialist, and who played a part in the Luddite movement, which I mention.So it turns out, I was there when I was 11 or 12, just learning how to play golf on this scrappy golf course. And here I am, 50 years later, writing about Benjamin Gott at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So yeah, no, sure. I think it speaks to me in a way that perhaps it wouldn't to somebody else from a different background.Andrew Keen: We did a show with William Dalrymple, actually, a couple of years ago. He's been on actually since, the Anglo or Scottish Indian historian. His book on the East India Company, "The Anarchy," is a classic. You begin in some ways your history of capitalism with the East India Company. What was it about the East India Company, John, that makes it different from other for-profit organizations in economic, Western economic history?John Cassidy: I mean, I read that. It's a great book, by the way. That was actually quoted in my chapter on these. Yeah, I remember. I mean, the reason I focused on it was for two reasons. Number one, I was looking for a start, a narrative start to the book. And it seemed to me, you know, the obvious place to start is with the start of the industrial revolution. If you look at economics history textbooks, that's where they always start with Arkwright and all the inventors, you know, who were the sort of techno-entrepreneurs of their time, the sort of British Silicon Valley, if you could think of it as, in Lancashire and Derbyshire in the late 18th century.So I knew I had to sort of start there in some way, but I thought that's a bit pat. Is there another way into it? And it turns out that in 1772 in England, there was a huge bailout of the East India Company, very much like the sort of 2008, 2009 bailout of Wall Street. The company got into trouble. So I thought, you know, maybe there's something there. And I eventually found this guy, William Bolts, who worked for the East India Company, turned into a whistleblower after he was fired for finagling in India like lots of the people who worked for the company did.So that gave me two things. Number one, it gave me—you know, I'm a writer, so it gave me something to focus on a narrative. His personal history is very interesting. But number two, it gave me a sort of foundation because industrial capitalism didn't come from nowhere. You know, it was built on top of a pre-existing form of capitalism, which we now call mercantile capitalism, which was very protectionist, which speaks to us now. But also it had these big monopolistic multinational companies.The East India Company, in some ways, was a very modern corporation. It had a headquarters in Leadenhall Street in the city of London. It had a board of directors, it had stockholders, the company sent out very detailed instructions to the people in the field in India and Indonesia and Malaysia who were traders who bought things from the locals there, brought them back to England on their company ships. They had a company army even to enforce—to protect their operations there. It was an incredible multinational corporation.So that was also, I think, fascinating because it showed that even in the pre-existing system, you know, big corporations existed, there were monopolies, they had royal monopolies given—first the East India Company got one from Queen Elizabeth. But in some ways, they were very similar to modern monopolistic corporations. And they had some of the problems we've seen with modern monopolistic corporations, the way they acted. And Bolts was the sort of first corporate whistleblower, I thought. Yeah, that was a way of sort of getting into the story, I think. Hopefully, you know, it's just a good read, I think.William Bolts's story because he was—he came from nowhere, he was Dutch, he wasn't even English and he joined the company as a sort of impoverished young man, went to India like a lot of English minor aristocrats did to sort of make your fortune. The way the company worked, you had to sort of work on company time and make as much money as you could for the company, but then in your spare time you're allowed to trade for yourself. So a lot of the—without getting into too much detail, but you know, English aristocracy was based on—you know, the eldest child inherits everything, so if you were the younger brother of the Duke of Norfolk, you actually didn't inherit anything. So all of these minor aristocrats, so major aristocrats, but who weren't first born, joined the East India Company, went out to India and made a fortune, and then came back and built huge houses. Lots of the great manor houses in southern England were built by people from the East India Company and they were known as Nabobs, which is an Indian term. So they were the sort of, you know, billionaires of their time, and it was based on—as I say, it wasn't based on industrial capitalism, it was based on mercantile capitalism.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the beginning of the book, which focuses on Bolts and the East India Company, brings to mind for me two things. Firstly, the intimacy of modern capitalism, modern industrial capitalism with colonialism and of course slavery—lots of books have been written on that. Touch on this and also the relationship between the birth of capitalism and the birth of liberalism or democracy. John Stuart Mill, of course, the father in many ways of Western democracy. His day job, ironically enough, or perhaps not ironically, was at the East India Company. So how do those two things connect, or is it just coincidental?John Cassidy: Well, I don't think it is entirely coincidental, I mean, J.S. Mill—his father, James Mill, was also a well-known philosopher in the sort of, obviously, in the earlier generation, earlier than him. And he actually wrote the official history of the East India Company. And I think they gave his son, the sort of brilliant protégé, J.S. Mill, a job as largely as a sort of sinecure, I think. But he did go in and work there in the offices three or four days a week.But I think it does show how sort of integral—the sort of—as you say, the inheritor and the servant in Britain, particularly, of colonial capitalism was. So the East India Company was, you know, it was in decline by that stage in the middle of the 19th century, but it didn't actually give up its monopoly. It wasn't forced to give up its monopoly on the Indian trade until 1857, after, you know, some notorious massacres and there was a sort of public outcry.So yeah, no, that's—it's very interesting that the British—it's sort of unique to Britain in a way, but it's interesting that industrial capitalism arose alongside this pre-existing capitalist structure and somebody like Mill is a sort of paradoxical figure because actually he was quite critical of aspects of industrial capitalism and supported sort of taxes on the rich, even though he's known as the great, you know, one of the great apostles of the free market and free market liberalism. And his day job, as you say, he was working for the East India Company.Andrew Keen: What about the relationship between the birth of industrial capitalism, colonialism and slavery? Those are big questions and I know you deal with them in some—John Cassidy: I think you can't just write an economic history of capitalism now just starting with the cotton industry and say, you know, it was all about—it was all about just technical progress and gadgets, etc. It was built on a sort of pre-existing system which was colonial and, you know, the slave trade was a central element of that. Now, as you say, there have been lots and lots of books written about it, the whole 1619 project got an incredible amount of attention a few years ago. So I didn't really want to rehash all that, but I did want to acknowledge the sort of role of slavery, especially in the rise of the cotton industry because of course, a lot of the raw cotton was grown in the plantations in the American South.So the way I actually ended up doing that was by writing a chapter about Eric Williams, a Trinidadian writer who ended up as the Prime Minister of Trinidad when it became independent in the 1960s. But when he was younger, he wrote a book which is now regarded as a classic. He went to Oxford to do a PhD, won a scholarship. He was very smart. I won a sort of Oxford scholarship myself but 50 years before that, he came across the Atlantic and did an undergraduate degree in history and then did a PhD there and his PhD thesis was on slavery and capitalism.And at the time, in the 1930s, the link really wasn't acknowledged. You could read any sort of standard economic history written by British historians, and they completely ignored that. He made the argument that, you know, slavery was integral to the rise of capitalism and he basically started an argument which has been raging ever since the 1930s and, you know, if you want to study economic history now you have to sort of—you know, have to have to address that. And the way I thought, even though the—it's called the Williams thesis is very famous. I don't think many people knew much about where it came from. So I thought I'd do a chapter on—Andrew Keen: Yeah, that chapter is excellent. You mentioned earlier the Luddites, you're from Yorkshire where Luddism in some ways was born. One of the early chapters is on the Luddites. We did a show with Brian Merchant, his book, "Blood in the Machine," has done very well, I'm sure you're familiar with it. I always understood the Luddites as being against industrialization, against the machine, as opposed to being against capitalism. But did those two things get muddled together in the history of the Luddites?John Cassidy: I think they did. I mean, you know, Luddites, when we grew up, I mean you're English too, you know to be called a Luddite was a term of abuse, right? You know, you were sort of antediluvian, anti-technology, you're stupid. It was only, I think, with the sort of computer revolution, the tech revolution of the last 30, 40 years and the sort of disruptions it's caused, that people have started to look back at the Luddites and say, perhaps they had a point.For them, they were basically pre-industrial capitalism artisans. They worked for profit-making concerns, small workshops. Some of them worked for themselves, so they were sort of sole proprietor capitalists. Or they worked in small venues, but the rise of industrial capitalism, factory capitalism or whatever, basically took away their livelihoods progressively. So they associated capitalism with new technology. In their minds it was the same. But their argument wasn't really a technological one or even an economic one, it was more a moral one. They basically made the moral argument that capitalists shouldn't have the right to just take away their livelihoods with no sort of recompense for them.At the time they didn't have any parliamentary representation. You know, they weren't revolutionaries. The first thing they did was create petitions to try and get parliament to step in, sort of introduce some regulation here. They got turned down repeatedly by the sort of—even though it was a very aristocratic parliament, places like Manchester and Leeds didn't have any representation at all. So it was only after that that they sort of turned violent and started, you know, smashing machines and machines, I think, were sort of symbols of the system, which they saw as morally unjust.And I think that's sort of what—obviously, there's, you know, a lot of technological disruption now, so we can, especially as it starts to come for the educated cognitive class, we can sort of sympathize with them more. But I think the sort of moral critique that there's this, you know, underneath the sort of great creativity and economic growth that capitalism produces, there is also a lot of destruction and a lot of victims. And I think that message, you know, is becoming a lot more—that's why I think why they've been rediscovered in the last five or ten years and I'm one of the people I guess contributing to that rediscovery.Andrew Keen: There's obviously many critiques of capitalism politically. I want to come to Marx in a second, but your chapter, I thought, on Thomas Carlyle and this nostalgic conservatism was very important and there are other conservatives as well. John, do you think that—and you mentioned Trump earlier, who is essentially a nostalgist for a—I don't know, some sort of bizarre pre-capitalist age in America. Is there something particularly powerful about the anti-capitalism of romantics like Carlyle, 19th century Englishman, there were many others of course.John Cassidy: Well, I think so. I mean, I think what is—conservatism, when we were young anyway, was associated with Thatcherism and Reaganism, which, you know, lionized the free market and free market capitalism and was a reaction against the pre-existing form of capitalism, Keynesian capitalism of the sort of 40s to the 80s. But I think what got lost in that era was the fact that there have always been—you've got Hayek up there, obviously—Andrew Keen: And then Keynes and Hayek, the two—John Cassidy: Right, it goes to the end of that. They had a great debate in the 1930s about these issues. But Hayek really wasn't a conservative person, and neither was Milton Friedman. They were sort of free market revolutionaries, really, that you'd let the market rip and it does good things. And I think that that sort of a view, you know, it just became very powerful. But we sort of lost sight of the fact that there was also a much older tradition of sort of suspicion of radical changes of any type. And that was what conservatism was about to some extent. If you think about Baldwin in Britain, for example.And there was a sort of—during the Industrial Revolution, some of the strongest supporters of factory acts to reduce hours and hourly wages for women and kids were actually conservatives, Tories, as they were called at the time, like Ashley. That tradition, Carlyle was a sort of extreme representative of that. I mean, Carlyle was a sort of proto-fascist, let's not romanticize him, he lionized strongmen, Frederick the Great, and he didn't really believe in democracy. But he also had—he was appalled by the sort of, you know, the—like, what's the phrase I'm looking for? The sort of destructive aspects of industrial capitalism, both on the workers, you know, he said it was a dehumanizing system, sounded like Marx in some ways. That it dehumanized the workers, but also it destroyed the environment.He was an early environmentalist. He venerated the environment, was actually very strongly linked to the transcendentalists in America, people like Thoreau, who went to visit him when he visited Britain and he saw the sort of destructive impact that capitalism was having locally in places like Manchester, which were filthy with filthy rivers, etc. So he just saw the whole system as sort of morally bankrupt and he was a great writer, Carlyle, whatever you think of him. Great user of language, so he has these great ringing phrases like, you know, the cash nexus or calling it the Gospel of Mammonism, the shabbiest gospel ever preached under the sun was industrial capitalism.So, again, you know, that's a sort of paradoxical thing, because I think for so long conservatism was associated with, you know, with support for the free market and still is in most of the Republican Party, but then along comes Trump and sort of conquers the party with a, you know, more skeptical, as you say, romantic, not really based on any reality, but a sort of romantic view that America can stand by itself in the world. I mean, I see Trump actually as a sort of an effort to sort of throw back to mercantile capitalism in a way. You know, which was not just pre-industrial, but was also pre-democracy, run by monarchs, which I'm sure appeals to him, and it was based on, you know, large—there were large tariffs. You couldn't import things in the UK. If you want to import anything to the UK, you have to send it on a British ship because of the navigation laws. It was a very protectionist system and it's actually, you know, as I said, had a lot of parallels with what Trump's trying to do or tries to do until he backs off.Andrew Keen: You cheat a little bit in the book in the sense that you—everyone has their own chapter. We'll talk a little bit about Hayek and Smith and Lenin and Friedman. You do have one chapter on Marx, but you also have a chapter on Engels. So you kind of cheat. You combine the two. Is it possible, though, to do—and you've just written this book, so you know this as well as anyone. How do you write a book about capitalism and its critics and only really give one chapter to Marx, who is so dominant? I mean, you've got lots of Marxists in the book, including Lenin and Luxemburg. How fundamental is Marx to a criticism of capitalism? Is most criticism, especially from the left, from progressives, is it really just all a footnote to Marx?John Cassidy: I wouldn't go that far, but I think obviously on the left he is the central figure. But there's an element of sort of trying to rebuild Engels a bit in this. I mean, I think of Engels and Marx—I mean obviously Marx wrote the great classic "Capital," etc. But in the 1840s, when they both started writing about capitalism, Engels was sort of ahead of Marx in some ways. I mean, the sort of materialist concept, the idea that economics rules everything, Engels actually was the first one to come up with that in an essay in the 1840s which Marx then published in one of his—in the German newspaper he worked for at the time, radical newspaper, and he acknowledged openly that that was really what got him thinking seriously about economics, and even in the late—in 20, 25 years later when he wrote "Capital," all three volumes of it and the Grundrisse, just these enormous outpourings of analysis on capitalism.He acknowledged Engels's role in that and obviously Engels wrote the first draft of the Communist Manifesto in 1848 too, which Marx then topped and tailed and—he was a better writer obviously, Marx, and he gave it the dramatic language that we all know it for. So I think Engels and Marx together obviously are the central sort of figures in the sort of left-wing critique. But they didn't start out like that. I mean, they were very obscure, you've got to remember.You know, they were—when they were writing, Marx was writing "Capital" in London, it never even got published in English for another 20 years. It was just published in German. He was basically an expat. He had been thrown out of Germany, he had been thrown out of France, so England was last resort and the British didn't consider him a threat so they were happy to let him and the rest of the German sort of left in there. I think it became—it became the sort of epochal figure after his death really, I think, when he was picked up by the left-wing parties, which are especially the SPD in Germany, which was the first sort of socialist mass party and was officially Marxist until the First World War and there were great internal debates.And then of course, because Lenin and the Russians came out of that tradition too, Marxism then became the official doctrine of the Soviet Union when they adopted a version of it. And again there were massive internal arguments about what Marx really meant, and in fact, you know, one interpretation of the last 150 years of left-wing sort of intellectual development is as a sort of argument about what did Marx really mean and what are the important bits of it, what are the less essential bits of it. It's a bit like the "what did Keynes really mean" that you get in liberal circles.So yeah, Marx, obviously, this is basically an intellectual history of critiques of capitalism. In that frame, he is absolutely a central figure. Why didn't I give him more space than a chapter and a chapter and a half with Engels? There have been a million books written about Marx. I mean, it's not that—it's not that he's an unknown figure. You know, there's a best-selling book written in Britain about 20 years ago about him and then I was quoting, in my biographical research, I relied on some more recent, more scholarly biographies. So he's an endlessly fascinating figure but I didn't want him to dominate the book so I gave him basically the same space as everybody else.Andrew Keen: You've got, as I said, you've got a chapter on Adam Smith who's often considered the father of economics. You've got a chapter on Keynes. You've got a chapter on Friedman. And you've got a chapter on Hayek, all the great modern economists. Is it possible, John, to be a distinguished economist one way or the other and not be a critic of capitalism?John Cassidy: Well, I don't—I mean, I think history would suggest that the greatest economists have been critics of capitalism in their own time. People would say to me, what the hell have you got Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in a book about critics of capitalism? They were great exponents, defenders of capitalism. They loved the system. That is perfectly true. But in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, middle of the 20th century, they were actually arch-critics of the ruling form of capitalism at the time, which was what I call managed capitalism. What some people call Keynesianism, what other people call European social democracy, whatever you call it, it was a model of a mixed economy in which the government played a large role both in propping up demand and in providing an extensive social safety net in the UK and providing public healthcare and public education. It was a sort of hybrid model.Most of the economy in terms of the businesses remained in private hands. So most production was capitalistic. It was a capitalist system. They didn't go to the Soviet model of nationalizing everything and Britain did nationalize some businesses, but most places didn't. The US of course didn't but it was a form of managed capitalism. And Hayek and Friedman were both great critics of that and wanted to sort of move back to 19th century laissez-faire model.Keynes was a—was actually a great, I view him anyway, as really a sort of late Victorian liberal and was trying to protect as much of the sort of J.S. Mill view of the world as he could, but he thought capitalism had one fatal flaw: that it tended to fall into recessions and then they can snowball and the whole system can collapse which is what had basically happened in the early 1930s until Keynesian policies were adopted. Keynes sort of differed from a lot of his followers—I have a chapter on Joan Robinson in there, who were pretty left-wing and wanted to sort of use Keynesianism as a way to shift the economy quite far to the left. Keynes didn't really believe in that. He has a famous quote that, you know, once you get to full employment, you can then rely on the free market to sort of take care of things. He was still a liberal at heart.Going back to Adam Smith, why is he in a book on criticism of capitalism? And again, it goes back to what I said at the beginning. He actually wrote "The Wealth of Nations"—he explains in the introduction—as a critique of mercantile capitalism. His argument was that he was a pro-free trader, pro-small business, free enterprise. His argument was if you get the government out of the way, we don't need these government-sponsored monopolies like the East India Company. If you just rely on the market, the sort of market forces and competition will produce a good outcome. So then he was seen as a great—you know, he is then seen as the apostle of free market capitalism. I mean when I started as a young reporter, when I used to report in Washington, all the conservatives used to wear Adam Smith badges. You don't see Donald Trump wearing an Adam Smith badge, but that was the case.He was also—the other aspect of Smith, which I highlight, which is not often remarked on—he's also a critic of big business. He has a famous section where he discusses the sort of tendency of any group of more than three businessmen when they get together to try and raise prices and conspire against consumers. And he was very suspicious of, as I say, large companies, monopolies. I think if Adam Smith existed today, I mean, I think he would be a big supporter of Lina Khan and the sort of antitrust movement, he would say capitalism is great as long as you have competition, but if you don't have competition it becomes, you know, exploitative.Andrew Keen: Yeah, if Smith came back to live today, you have a chapter on Thomas Piketty, maybe he may not be French, but he may be taking that position about how the rich benefit from the structure of investment. Piketty's core—I've never had Piketty on the show, but I've had some of his followers like Emmanuel Saez from Berkeley. Yeah. How powerful is Piketty's critique of capitalism within the context of the classical economic analysis from Hayek and Friedman? Yeah, it's a very good question.John Cassidy: It's a very good question. I mean, he's a very paradoxical figure, Piketty, in that he obviously shot to world fame and stardom with his book on capital in the 21st century, which in some ways he obviously used the capital as a way of linking himself to Marx, even though he said he never read Marx. But he was basically making the same argument that if you leave capitalism unrestrained and don't do anything about monopolies etc. or wealth, you're going to get massive inequality and he—I think his great contribution, Piketty and the school of people, one of them you mentioned, around him was we sort of had a vague idea that inequality was going up and that, you know, wages were stagnating, etc.What he and his colleagues did is they produced these sort of scientific empirical studies showing in very simple to understand terms how the sort of share of income and wealth of the top 10 percent, the top 5 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent basically skyrocketed from the 1970s to about 2010. And it was, you know, he was an MIT PhD. Saez, who you mentioned, is a Berkeley professor. They were schooled in neoclassical economics at Harvard and MIT and places like that. So the right couldn't dismiss them as sort of, you know, lefties or Trots or whatever who're just sort of making this stuff up. They had to acknowledge that this was actually an empirical reality.I think it did change the whole basis of the debate and it was sort of part of this reaction against capitalism in the 2010s. You know it was obviously linked to the sort of Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. It came out of the—you know, the financial crisis as well when Wall Street disgraced itself. I mean, I wrote a previous book on all that, but people have sort of, I think, forgotten the great reaction against that a decade ago, which I think even Trump sort of exploited, as I say, by using anti-banker rhetoric at the time.So, Piketty was a great figure, I think, from, you know, I was thinking, who are the most influential critics of capitalism in the 21st century? And I think you'd have to put him up there on the list. I'm not saying he's the only one or the most eminent one. But I think he is a central figure. Now, of course, you'd think, well, this is a really powerful critic of capitalism, and nobody's going to pick up, and Bernie's going to take off and everything. But here we are a decade later now. It seems to be what the backlash has produced is a swing to the right, not a swing to the left. So that's, again, a sort of paradox.Andrew Keen: One person I didn't expect to come up in the book, John, and I was fascinated with this chapter, is Silvia Federici. I've tried to get her on the show. We've had some books about her writing and her kind of—I don't know, you treat her critique as a feminist one. The role of women. Why did you choose to write a chapter about Federici and that feminist critique of capitalism?John Cassidy: Right, right. Well, I don't think it was just feminist. I'll explain what I think it was. Two reasons. Number one, I wanted to get more women into the book. I mean, it's in some sense, it is a history of economics and economic critiques. And they are overwhelmingly written by men and women were sort of written out of the narrative of capitalism for a very long time. So I tried to include as many sort of women as actual thinkers as I could and I have a couple of early socialist feminist thinkers, Anna Wheeler and Flora Tristan and then I cover some of the—I cover Rosa Luxemburg as the great sort of tribune of the left revolutionary socialist, communist whatever you want to call it. Anti-capitalist I think is probably also important to note about. Yeah, and then I also have Joan Robinson, but I wanted somebody to do something in the modern era, and I thought Federici, in the world of the Wages for Housework movement, is very interesting from two perspectives.Number one, Federici herself is a Marxist, and I think she probably would still consider herself a revolutionary. She's based in New York, as you know now. She lived in New York for 50 years, but she came from—she's originally Italian and came out of the Italian left in the 1960s, which was very radical. Do you know her? Did you talk to her? I didn't talk to her on this. No, she—I basically relied on, there has been a lot of, as you say, there's been a lot of stuff written about her over the years. She's written, you know, she's given various long interviews and she's written a book herself, a version, a history of housework, so I figured it was all there and it was just a matter of pulling it together.But I think the critique, why the critique is interesting, most of the book is a sort of critique of how capitalism works, you know, in the production or you know, in factories or in offices or you know, wherever capitalist operations are working, but her critique is sort of domestic reproduction, as she calls it, the role of unpaid labor in supporting capitalism. I mean it goes back a long way actually. There was this moment, I sort of trace it back to the 1940s and 1950s when there were feminists in America who were demonstrating outside factories and making the point that you know, the factory workers and the operations of the factory, it couldn't—there's one of the famous sort of tire factory in California demonstrations where the women made the argument, look this factory can't continue to operate unless we feed and clothe the workers and provide the next generation of workers. You know, that's domestic reproduction. So their argument was that housework should be paid and Federici took that idea and a couple of her colleagues, she founded the—it's a global movement, but she founded the most famous branch in New York City in the 1970s. In Park Slope near where I live actually.And they were—you call it feminists, they were feminists in a way, but they were rejected by the sort of mainstream feminist movement, the sort of Gloria Steinems of the world, who Federici was very critical of because she said they ignored, they really just wanted to get women ahead in the sort of capitalist economy and they ignored the sort of underlying from her perspective, the underlying sort of illegitimacy and exploitation of that system. So they were never accepted as part of the feminist movement. They're to the left of the Feminist Movement.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Keynes, of course, so central in all this, particularly his analysis of the role of automation in capitalism. We did a show recently with Robert Skidelsky and I'm sure you're familiar—John Cassidy: Yeah, yeah, great, great biography of Keynes.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the great biographer of Keynes, whose latest book is "Mindless: The Human Condition in the Age of AI." You yourself wrote a brilliant book on the last tech mania and dot-com capitalism. I used it in a lot of my writing and books. What's your analysis of AI in this latest mania and the role generally of manias in the history of capitalism and indeed in critiquing capitalism? Is AI just the next chapter of the dot-com boom?John Cassidy: I think it's a very deep question. I think I'd give two answers to it. In one sense it is just the latest mania the way—I mean, the way capitalism works is we have these, I go back to Kondratiev, one of my Russian economists who ended up being killed by Stalin. He was the sort of inventor of the long wave theory of capitalism. We have these short waves where you have sort of booms and busts driven by finance and debt etc. But we also have long waves driven by technology.And obviously, in the last 40, 50 years, the two big ones are the original deployment of the internet and microchip technology in the sort of 80s and 90s culminating in the dot-com boom of the late 90s, which as you say, I wrote about. Thanks very much for your kind comments on the book. If you just sort of compare it from a financial basis I think they are very similar just in terms of the sort of role of hype from Wall Street in hyping up these companies. The sort of FOMO aspect of it among investors that they you know, you can't miss out. So just buy the companies blindly. And the sort of lionization in the press and the media of, you know, of AI as the sort of great wave of the future.So if you take a sort of skeptical market based approach, I would say, yeah, this is just another sort of another mania which will eventually burst and it looked like it had burst for a few weeks when Trump put the tariffs up, now the market seemed to be recovering. But I think there is, there may be something new about it. I am not, I don't pretend to be a technical expert. I try to rely on the evidence of or the testimony of people who know the systems well and also economists who have studied it. It seems to me the closer you get to it the more alarming it is in terms of the potential shock value that there is there.I mean Trump and the sort of reaction to a larger extent can be traced back to the China shock where we had this global shock to American manufacturing and sort of hollowed out a lot of the industrial areas much of it, like industrial Britain was hollowed out in the 80s. If you, you know, even people like Altman and Elon Musk, they seem to think that this is going to be on a much larger scale than that and will basically, you know, get rid of the professions as they exist. Which would be a huge, huge shock. And I think a lot of the economists who studied this, who four or five years ago were relatively optimistic, people like Daron Acemoglu, David Autor—Andrew Keen: Simon Johnson, of course, who just won the Nobel Prize, and he's from England.John Cassidy: Simon, I did an event with Simon earlier this week. You know they've studied this a lot more closely than I have but I do interview them and I think five, six years ago they were sort of optimistic that you know this could just be a new steam engine or could be a microchip which would lead to sort of a lot more growth, rising productivity, rising productivity is usually associated with rising wages so sure there'd be short-term costs but ultimately it would be a good thing. Now, I think if you speak to them, they see since the, you know, obviously, the OpenAI—the original launch and now there's just this huge arms race with no government involvement at all I think they're coming to the conclusion that rather than being developed to sort of complement human labor, all these systems are just being rushed out to substitute for human labor. And it's just going, if current trends persist, it's going to be a China shock on an even bigger scale.You know what is going to, if that, if they're right, that is going to produce some huge political backlash at some point, that's inevitable. So I know—the thing when the dot-com bubble burst, it didn't really have that much long-term impact on the economy. People lost the sort of fake money they thought they'd made. And then the companies, obviously some of the companies like Amazon and you know Google were real genuine profit-making companies and if you bought them early you made a fortune. But AI does seem a sort of bigger, scarier phenomenon to me. I don't know. I mean, you're close to it. What do you think?Andrew Keen: Well, I'm waiting for a book, John, from you. I think you can combine dot-com and capitalism and its critics. We need you probably to cover it—you know more about it than me. Final question, I mean, it's a wonderful book and we haven't even scratched the surface everyone needs to get it. I enjoyed the chapter, for example, on Karl Polanyi and so much more. I mean, it's a big book. But my final question, John, is do you have any regrets about anyone you left out? The one person I would have liked to have been included was Rawls because of his sort of treatment of capitalism and luck as a kind of casino. I'm not sure whether you gave any thought to Rawls, but is there someone in retrospect you should have had a chapter on that you left out?John Cassidy: There are lots of people I left out. I mean, that's the problem. I mean there have been hundreds and hundreds of critics of capitalism. Rawls, of course, incredibly influential and his idea of the sort of, you know, the veil of ignorance that you should judge things not knowing where you are in the income distribution and then—Andrew Keen: And it's luck. I mean the idea of some people get lucky and some people don't.John Cassidy: It is the luck of the draw, obviously, what card you pull. I think that is a very powerful critique, but I just—because I am more of an expert on economics, I tended to leave out philosophers and sociologists. I mean, you know, you could say, where's Max Weber? Where are the anarchists? You know, where's Emma Goldman? Where's John Kenneth Galbraith, the sort of great mid-century critic of American industrial capitalism? There's so many people that you could include. I mean, I could have written 10 volumes. In fact, I refer in the book to, you know, there's always been a problem. G.D.H. Cole, a famous English historian, wrote a history of socialism back in the 1960s and 70s. You know, just getting to 1850 took him six volumes. So, you've got to pick and choose, and I don't claim this is the history of capitalism and its critics. That would be a ridiculous claim to make. I just claim it's a history written by me, and hopefully the people are interested in it, and they're sufficiently diverse that you can address all the big questions.Andrew Keen: Well it's certainly incredibly timely. Capitalism and its critics—more and more of them. Sometimes they don't even describe themselves as critics of capitalism when they're talking about oligarchs or billionaires, they're really criticizing capitalism. A must read from one of America's leading journalists. And would you call yourself a critic of capitalism, John?John Cassidy: Yeah, I guess I am, to some extent, sure. I mean, I'm not a—you know, I'm not on the far left, but I'd say I'm a center-left critic of capitalism. Yes, definitely, that would be fair.Andrew Keen: And does the left need to learn? Does everyone on the left need to read the book and learn the language of anti-capitalism in a more coherent and honest way?John Cassidy: I hope so. I mean, obviously, I'd be talking my own book there, as they say, but I hope that people on the left, but not just people on the left. I really did try to sort of be fair to the sort of right-wing critiques as well. I included the Carlyle chapter particularly, obviously, but in the later chapters, I also sort of refer to this emerging critique on the right, the sort of economic nationalist critique. So hopefully, I think people on the right could read it to understand the critiques from the left, and people on the left could read it to understand some of the critiques on the right as well.Andrew Keen: Well, it's a lovely book. It's enormously erudite and simultaneously readable. Anyone who likes John Cassidy's work from The New Yorker will love it. Congratulations, John, on the new book, and I'd love to get you back on the show as anti-capitalism in America picks up steam and perhaps manifests itself in the 2028 election. Thank you so much.John Cassidy: Thanks very much for inviting me on, it was fun.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe