Video

Very interesting and informative and about our modern nations and national alliances. This is a great idea for a new youtube channel.

Man, this was a FASCINATING episode!! I just placed my order for this book, as well as another book Swiejs edited called "The Conduct of War in the 21st Century"; I can't wait to delve deeper into this subject. I personally think the emergence of autonomous weapons systems is very interesting, since I grew up during the era of "future war" Call of Duty games like Advanced Warfare and Black Ops III - which included weapons like "drone grenades" and the like. I think it would be fun to write something analyzing the COD campaigns and what they reflect about the American political climate around foreign policy at the time, such as the inclusion of orbital kinetic munitions as the secret superweapon the Venezuelan-led Latin America coalition are working on in COD: Ghosts (2014).

great interview! I took an undergraduate course from prof. Breen in early 2018 about early modern european history, and he was brilliant. like mentioned in the interview, he brought his analysis of nontraditional texts like paintings and artifacts as well as this same thorough reading of written archives. his class reignited my fascination with history. his area of expertise, the history of medicine and drugs has surprising depth back in the early modern period, but really his ability to build a compelling but true narrative about history in general is so appreciated! i am trying to spread the word when i can because i have a feeling this book and others like it that recontextualize the early and mid century will have great importance in my lifetime.

😵‍💫🤮🤑

🌞🌍⏳🗺️🌚⚖️🛕💯♾️🧞‍♀️🗝️☯️👸🏼🪬🇨🇳🇹🇭♥️🍒🌷👍🏻🇪🇺🇷🇺🇮🇪🇺🇲🙇🏼‍♀️.

so inspiring, didn't want the talk to end, thank you both so much. i'm a fan!

1:12

Great interview, definitely going to get this book.

RIP Frederick Crews.

Came here after watching "The Devil's Bath."

I've recently wondered a lot how it can be that Laos, with its landscape suggesting huge fertility, can still have stayed as rural and underdeveloped as it looks until today. Shouldn't one expect, in particular, a lot of investment from China? The numbers here mentioned on bombs and on their often still unreleased capacities may solve the riddle. The more disappointed I am about a seeming lack of commentary about broader-scale mathematics of such contexts in Lin's book and in the talk here provided. I have recently also recognized Cottbus (a city south of Berlin) as a smaller, mirror-inverted geometric equivalent of the city of Columbus in which Mrs. Lin works, especially the Cottbus of about a hundred years ago. This fascinates me inasmuch as I a while earlier had noticed striking similarities between the designers of rifles which have been crucial in the 1866 confrontation between Prussia and Austria - not very far from Cottbus -, on the one hand, and in the Vietnam War, on the other. When Mrs. Lin another time goes to Cambodia to talk to people, hence, it could perhaps pay for her to take someone with her with expertise in the field of hypnotically releasing memories from earlier lives. Perhaps the religions of the Cambodians won't act very much as an obstruction of such an experiment. If people of the area on their own begin to report about conditions in fitting parts of the Central Europe of a hundred years ago, under hypnosis, this could provide a link to such observations of the geometry of cities. I find strong resemblances of such a character also between the Prague of around 1900 and current Bangkok, anyway.

Thank you Emily. How can justices not see the real scientific data? Probably billions of tax payer money being spent on something totally that is not the answer for lowering sexual violence.Getting people help before there is a problem is the real way to go about this.

Yhank you....i am the first ❤

Such a fascinating subject and an inspirational story of a lifetime of love for research

Its so great and enriching to hear a whole interview with Ken Hiruta (there is little online) as I featured an episode on my podcast on this very book - among my favorites in recent intellectual history.

thankyou for this. Nice to find great interviews and to be able to be the first to like :)

Dilettantes doing a hit job on Nietzsche. Trying to level charges of anti-Semitism at Nietzsche (a self-appointed stateless "Pole" who hated German nationalism and who wrote late in life: ALL ANTI-SEMITES OUGHT TO BE SHOT), one guest references THE ANTICHRIST. Nietzsche refers not to Jews per se in his quote, but Judaism, and in particular, its transvaluation of Master-Slave morality in the ancient Greco-Roman world. Nietzsche regards Judaism as the Ur-Christianity responsible for 2000 years of leavening Europe so of course he's going to criticize it for opening the Pandora's Box of Hegel's Bondsman and Servant inversion- it's not anti-Semitism though any more than his critique of Greek philosophers is a dig at Greeks. Nietzsche is the Pagan Reformation, the socialists/communists, as Norman Cohn brilliantly points out in IN PURSUIT OF THE MILLENNIUM, are in fact the new secular Christian dispensation. Have these individuals read Marx's writings on the Jews? They're worthy of Nazi propaganda, here from his riposte ON THE JEWISH QUESTION: "What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money[...] An organization of society which would abolish the preconditions for huckstering, and therefore the possibility of huckstering, would make the Jew impossible[...] The Jew has emancipated himself in a Jewish manner, not only because he has acquired financial power, but also because, through him and also apart from him, money has become a world power and the practical Jewish spirit has become the practical spirit of the Christian nations. The Jews have emancipated themselves insofar as the Christians have become Jews[...] Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist." Hilariously, self-loathing Jew Marx loved playing the British stock market with his rich industrialist slave-owning plantation-owning maternal uncle's money. As he was doing that while writing screeds about Jews and their Money God, Nietzsche was howling with laughter when his sister (a white supremacist he called Llama, because they spit) and her Aryan husband's S. American white supremacist commune failed miserably. I'm calling bullshit on the "reading" the guest says Losurdo does on "the texts" and "important discoveries" that "set the record straight" and finds that Nietzsche has an antisemitism so hateful it shocked even the Wagners. BULLLLLLLLSSSSSSSSHHHHHIIIITTTT. This is a hit job on him by communist propagandists, nothing more. This is Nietzsche on the Jews in THE ANTICHRIST: "Looked at psychologically, Jews are the people with the toughest life force; when transplanted into impossible conditions they took sides with all the instincts of decadence, and they did this freely and out of the most profoundly shrewd sense of self-preservation - not because they were dominated by these instincts, but rather because they sensed that these instincts had a power that could be used to prevail against the world'. The Jews are the opposite of decadents: they had to act like decadents to the point of illusion, they knew, with a non plus ultra of theatrical genius, how to put themselves at the forefront of all movements of decadence (- like the Christianity of Paul-) so they could make these movements into something stronger than any yes-saying defenders of life." And again, Judaism and Christianity are synonymous to him: "For the type of person who wields power inside Judaism and Christianity, a priestly type, decadence is only a means: this type of person has a life interest in making humanity sick and twisting the concepts 'good' and "evil', 'true' and 'false' to the point where they endanger life and slander the world" This hardly the rant of an anti-Semite. From the get-go, the guests here bang the ARISTOCRATIC drum literally, as does the very title of the book they're discussing. Where is the proof this man was some raving devotee of hereditary aristocracy, even his own? In fact Julius Evola, an out-and-out monarchist, criticizes Nietzsche as some kind of nihilistic bohemian. For him it was SURVIVAL OF THE MOST IMAGINATIVE. In his "madness letters" during his final days he wrote: "Wilhelm, Bismarck, and all anti-Semites must be abolished." Additionally, he commanded the German emperor to go to Rome to be shot, and summoned the European powers to take military action against Germany. In his twilight years he writes: "I write for a species of man that does not yet exist: for the "masters of the earth."" He might as well be the Bene Gesserit in "DUNE" whispering about the Kwisatz Haderach. Listen to this wild quote from him, reeks more of Globalists than some hereditary aristocracy: "From now on there will be more favorable preconditions for more comprehensive forms of dominion, whose like has never yet existed. And even this is not the most important thing; the possibility has been established for the production of international racial unions whose task will be to rear a master race, the future "masters of the earth";-a new, tremendous aristocracy, based on the severest self-legislation, in which the will of philosophical men of power and artist-tyrants will be made to endure for millennia - a higher kind of man who, thanks to their superiority in will, knowledge, riches, and influence, employ democratic Europe as their most pliant and supple instrument for getting hold of the destinies of the earth, so as to work as artists upon "man" himself. Enough: the time is coming when politics will have a different meaning." One sees the specter of Gabriele D'Annunzio in Fiume, Lenin and Trotsky in Russia, Mussolini in Italy, Hitler in Germany. But one also sees the over 100 billionaires in the Chinese Parliament (meanwhile, not a single billionaire in the American Congress) whose sons and daughters are sent to America for university (Xi's daughter went to Harvard and in fact has never left America, she lives in Boston like a princess). As to charges of Eugenics, I've read Nietzsche extensively and see nothing of the sort. Eugenics was a new movement popular on the Right and the Left well through the Progressive Era, why you could find Margaret Sanger giving speeches to the Ku Klux Klan or go hear a Marxist professor at Berkley lecture on the greatness of Eugenics. His comment on "what new human being we ought to breed" in THE ANTICHRIST is hardly the stuff of Eugenics. His commentary on the Indian caste system reads more like anthropology mixed with heroic romanticism than any clear cut endorsement of eugenics. But have these Reds stopped to look at their own anti-breeding programs? Take the One-Child Policy in China which has resulted in tens of millions of men not having brides because females were overwhelmingly exterminated in their forced abortion campaigns? Russia is still the leader of abortion in Europe due to it being a communist deep freeze for ninety years, having no money, people in the Nineties in Russia didn't even know how to write a check. Putin has tried and failed to get them to breed. Beyond that, birth rates are so low in socialist Europe that medieval Muslims must be imported merely to meet current pension obligations with new workers in the system.

What is evil about a win-win relationship?

Brave & necessary conversation. I'm in Australia & I've recently been convicted of a historical offence dating back 24 years.I also have a significant history of victimisation. I am a recent graduate of a Master's of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Griffith University. I want to do a PhD. examining women's trauma & the interestions with state violence. Much respect, Emily. I'll be asking my local library to order your book.

The title of this book is misleading. One will associate blood not only with dialysis. To have a photo of a dialysis facility on the cover won't change this. Apparently the makers of the book have learned from CZcams how helpful it can be to use clickbait. And it won't convince to reproach others with negligence in a context of a for-profit activity as long as one disturbs the book market in such a way oneself. The author refers to a lethality quote in the field of US-American dialysis which was higher than the ones in Europe and Japan. Such a situation does not necessarily have to be an outcome of a failure on the side of the medicare providers. It could also be due to the situation that people waited longer until they entered into treatment, in the USA, or that citizens of the US had an unhealthier lifestyle.

Great book. The more I read, the more I realized how these folks are literally living in a different universe. It was as if they've been trying to externalize their psychopathic tendencies by setting up shop wherever more money can be stowed away. I thought "libertarians" were already pretty bad. But it's faaaaaar worse than I ever realized. Something else I noticed is that the people of the world who are actually doing all the work are rarely to never discussed. Reminded me of frat boys in college, all wealthy, all conservative, all thinking about money, disdain for most other people, etc....Now they've "grow up" and are trying to figure out ways to scam the system, change the system to satisfy their monetary designs, etc...To me it's simple psychopathic, or perhaps sociopathic.

woah

I have just looked into this work on Google Books. It seems to be written quite wordily.

I don't think that climate change or vaccines, as perceived by ordinary people, are good examples of subjects concerning which evidence would experience resistance. Ordinary people do not have evidence about such subjects beyond just a possibility to assess the credibility of authorities - which constitutes an utterly complicated undertaking.

This does not really appear to me like a well-founded, comprehensive depiction of the subject. Perhaps it has a too strong focus on questions and on theories.

First of all, thank you so much for this video, I don't have the book and if I had it it would've taken me a lot of time to get all this information that you've covered in a clear and succint way. This is going to be longwinded, I apologize. Second, I'm a bit puzzled about the "Nietzsche is a political thinker" angle... Don't get me wrong, Nietzsche is vocal enough about his allegiances (and what is not at display at his books is even worse) but the thing is: if you take him at his word, his defense of perspectivism renders any political project absolutely baseless. I get that he may just be saying that the individual must surrender to no authority outside his own without really believing what he says, but if that's the case I sincerely think that's reason enough to cancel him for real. I find the idea of the Party of Life preposterous enough to do so - I always thought that kind of remarks weren't meant to be taken literally, specially from a man that said he'd rather be away from anyone who would think of himself as his follower. I know the real purpose of his perspectivism it to shield the privileged from the scrutiny of the rational demands of mankind but how can Nietzsche or those he inspires sidestep this whenever it is convenient? (As in achieving any kind of intersubjective agreement about political goals, even if those subjects may agree on their perceived superiority). Life is whatever someone deems it to be (I've sadly realised it means nothing substantial to him - we should immediately disavow the idea that his philosophy is a vitalism of any kind), okay, then how could it be possible for two free thinking individuals to agree on what life is (so there's no ground for a party of Life). Again, how can we keep teaching the philosophy of someone who says he contradicts himself if this is not a contradiction that arises from the complexity of the matter but a clear intention to deceive? Third, I'm not an expert on leftist nietzscheanism but as far as I know those thinkers don't take the Nietzschean project in full, don't they? Another debate is if any of his ideas can be reconsidered without compromising the result. (I would definitely like to know about the implications of the eternal return commented - but not explained - around the end of the video, for example). I absolutely condone the sanitizing of his thought and I admit I've been both "subjected" to it and I fear I will be teaching following a very sanitized text in class too. (I'll do my best to bring all this context to the table, for sure). Fourth (this might come across as nitpicky), I'm not sure about how Nietzsche may have played a role on the Frankfurt School I've always thought that angle was to use philosophy, psychology (psychoanalysis) and social sciences... Feel free to dunk on me for my ignorance XD Thanks for your time.

All I know is that I am tired of seeing Black women in masculine roles and same sex love interest on the major screen and theater. No shade to the LQGQT community. We CONSTANTLY see BMWM pairing in sitcoms, movies advertisements and movies. Like that is the only Interracial mix . How about BWWM change the narrative? Hallmark love story lines. No worries I am writing a book myself.

Absolutely brilliant. Thanks for hosting this wonderful voice.

WELL

As a physician who deals with both acute and chronic low back pain, I would like an explicit answer to this question: does "good posture" prevent low back pain?

This is the "Dolchstoss" (a stab in the back) against certain traditional forms of a pronunciation of English.

Fascinating dive into the often overlooked history of England's Jews in the Thirteenth Century! Dr. John Tolan sheds light on a crucial yet forgotten chapter of medieval England.

I am reminded of this treatment of the topic. czcams.com/video/v7gi57NJDds/video.html

One could think that such a subject at least for a Western audience must appear as obscure, but after all, the current economic rise of China is perhaps the most impressive social development of our era apart from the Internet and spaceflight. China's now diminishing poverty alone would not have to explain it; India has a similar size and population like China, also generally a capitalist system. Thus, a book like the one here presented should indeed appear as having to interest at least economists or politicians very much.

It would seem plausible that Roosevelt continued supporting Stalin via Lend-Lease even in the latest phases of the war that massively for the sake of subduing the Germans as quickly as possible, out of the fear of a nuclear bomb. Didn't Hitler continue to threaten with his Wunderwaffe? Roosevelt (unlike Truman in the position of his Vice President) was aware of the real nature of the Manhattan Project. Einstein had warned him that Hitler could build such a device. Not even the engineers overlooked how close Hitler might already have come to such an achievement. An attempt of Heisenberg to clarify for the Allies how slowly the Germans were progressing in the field of nuclear weaponry failed. Heisenberg was a key figure in German endeavors to withhold a nuclear weapon from Hitler; he told Hitler that an atom bomb would have to destroy Earth's biosphere, thus deterring the Fuehrer from supporting such a project; so Heisenberg's failure to inform the Allies will have been decisive. Moreover, the Germans were known to fight with an incredible doggedness. Apparently the western Allies needed five men to overwhelm one German soldier - although the Germans, assuming they'd be treated mildly, at the western front often defected, which few of them did in the east. Nazis had undertaken systematic, and often successful, efforts, in regions like Ukraine, to alienate Red-Army soldiers from their Communist leaders, shooting the latter. During the siege of Moscow, massive anti-Semitic, anti-Communist, and pro-German sentiment unfolded even among the inhabitants of the Russian capital. Haven't I read in McMeekin's book here presented a quote according to which a few paratroopers could have sufficed for a German takeover of Moscow when the Communists had been conferring down in the metro? Roosevelt may well have known much of this. Against such a background, it may indeed have appeared as helpful to support Red-Army soldiers with tanks and locomotives even at such later stages of the conflict. Roosevelt may not have been aware of how soon intercontinental missiles able to carry nuclear warheads would emerge. Alaska closely approaches Russia, but its targets are small. The densely populated England or other places in Europe, much differently, must appear to Roosevelt as targets to which a _German_ with the help of an airplane, a cannon, or perhaps a weaker missile could easily transport such a weapon. The Germans were also already developing and using drones. The USA had been strongly divided over the war until Pearl Harbor. Even after Pearl Harbor, there were strong voices in the US advocating that one should focus one's efforts on the war against Japan because the Japanese, unlike the Germans, weren't White people. If Germany could not have been occupied, it would have appeared as prone to rearm soon, Hitler still in power or not, like that had happened in the years of the Weimar Republic. Such a rearmament and a never-ending continuation of hostilities between areas like Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and so on could have resulted in a strong loss of face for a person involved in a war against Hitler who'd have been in as major a political position as is the one of a US-American president. Another point worth mentioning is that Hitler and his accomplices, despite some rhetoric to the opposite, had quite a high number of nobles in the ranks of their military leaders and of their sympathizers. The USA had no monarch, any more, just like the Soviet Union but unlike, e.g., Canada, an Australia threatened by the Japanese, or Britain. Roosevelt, as a Democrat, may have been fed up with nobles, of the responsibility of some of whom in Germany, Austria, and Russia for the First World War he'll have been aware. Taking such an antipathy, or perhaps also earnest fear (there had been much outright _support_ of Hitler in the USA, before the war!), together with the threat of a German atom bomb and of a survival of Hitler or of similar-minded German politicians, it can appear as a reasonable scenario that Roosevelt would have been interested in a removal of as many monarchs also of Eastern Europe (e.g., of Yugoslavia) as could be attained. Reaping a stable Europe with a befriended Soviet Union as an only potential adversary may have appeared as more attractive than an unstable Europe additionally destabilized through a Communist junta annoyed about humiliations. To the public in the USA, negotiating with a figure like Stalin on details could have appeared as ridiculous, while the stance that you have to give Stalin anything he wants because he's dangerous may have been readily comprehended. From the British unreliability certainly was not feared, which will have to explain why Roosevelt could handle Britain toughly. Roosevelt will have done so before Pearl Harbor because of inner-US resistance against a participation in the war. Such resistance will have come from the camp of the Republican party, winning against which in elections was hard. In addition, Roosevelt had seen that Black athletes had pressed for a participation in the 1936 Berlin Olympiad, threatening that in the case of a boycott meant as a protest against anti-Semitism they'd mock him for the treatment of Black people in the USA. Having the Blacks chiming in with the Republicans for Hitler - to whom, despite his racism, Blacks weren't a strong topic because he had few of them within the area he controlled - could have been devastating. Hitler's major strategy anyway wasn't racism, so much, but rather simply aggression. He and his men arbitrarily defined non-Jews as Jews when they though it would serve them, in at least one other case exempting a Jew from being persecuted for the same reason. I even see distinct similarities - down into physiognomic details - between the types of persons Roosevelt and Churchill, on the one hand, and current leaders of China and North Korea have been and are, respectively. Perhaps one will have to look at Roosevelt's furtherance of Stalin in the framework of a broader, anthropological panorama which includes this aspect.

I don't think it is the ideal situation when someone is engrossed in reading a comic so much that he doesn't notice the semantics of the work any more. A person watching a theatrical play has to enjoy the constant back and forth between the fictional universe depicted and its real-life approximations through scenery, props, dialogs, and costumes. Just in the same way, those readers who're most able to enjoy detective stories will not only go along with the heroes but will also appreciate skills of the writer on the level of how the contents are presented. What you see in a comic so strikingly differs from reality that nobody can overlook this. With the creations of Georges Remy I, for example, especially much indulge in the elegance of how cars, landscapes, light have been drawn, of how broader and narrower panels alternate, and of how colors and other visual aspects vary in the courses of (repetitive) scene changes. Even the white areas of the gutters between the panels become a major pillar of the overall prettiness. Missing such aspects because one is too engrossed in content means that one won't live up to the aesthetic demands of the languages in which comics are drawn. It simply reveals that a recipient is primitive. To me, it in the last years even has begun to provide a major share of the enjoyment I draw from comics to watch how the pictures made by Serpieri and Uderzo resemble the ones painted by Ferdinand Hodler and Vincent van Gogh, respectively. It's an endlessly richer experience also to discover how the bronze-colored alien balls hovering in the sky of one story by Uderzo resemble parts of the sunflowers painted by van Gogh than to merely read such a story as the hommage to Walt Disney it is meant as, or even than to simply get engrossed in the largely nonsensical content. Concerning Cohn's finding that one's brain has a more fluent response to comics if one starts to read comics earlier, I wonder how it should be clarified what's cause and what's effect. It could also be that people with brains and minds fitting for a consumption of comics on their own begin to read comics earlier because this type of activity is more pleasant for them than for others.

I wonder what the interviewer finds so terriblly funny. She often is hard to understand apparently because too much laughing blends into how she talks. That's a pity, given that what she says often is quite inspiring. Inspiring I in this talk particularly find Huizinga's approach to switch from a merely descriptive historiography to a version getting a sort of a psychotherapy and exercise for the one traumatized by a loss of historic universes. It should be noted how the title of the man's perhaps most famous work, Autumn / Waning / Autumntide of the Middle Ages, published first in the year 1919 of his confession that he didn't understand history any more, corresponds to such a subject. After having worked on that book for many years, Huizinga may have despaired of history not only because of the First World War but also because he'd have immersed himself in the demise of the medieval cosmoses he for a long time had been professionally focused on. When Rydin says "no" in an affirmative tone and alternating with "yes", I sometimes quite unpleasantly have trouble understanding him.

The book certainly is good and entertaining. So is Mrs. Eaton's verbal presentation. Likewise I can understand how the topic of such an exceptional story of alone belonging successively both to Hitler's and Stalin's empires will conjure up a certain amusement - but I do not understand where the _degree_ of amusement permeating the tone of this presentation comes from. After all, the Hitlerian and Stalinist empires haven't been harmless. Hitler's has had nothing to do with amusement at all, it has been systematically directed against any sort of humor. I also do not see in what way the city here treated could be regarded as the venue of some surprising, positive twist of events which one altogether could perceive as funny. On the contrary, the entire area around Königsberg turned Kaliningrad before, during, and after WWII has experienced a deeply tragical fate. Stalin has been used by the Brits and Americans as a military buffer against Hitler, with the consequence that after the war, a huge part of eastern Europe has for decades remained under Soviet oppression. Poland, in the beginning of WWII providing the British with the reason for their military intervention, has at Yalta been tragically passed over.

It is a pity that I cannot look into this book on Google Books - or perhaps also not so much, given that its author's apparent stance of psychological warfare having emerged only after WWII certainly will turn out untenable. Depictions of one's enemy as evil in all forms will certainly already have unfolded even before the invention of grammar.

Radburn cannot well be understood acoustically. I muse about possible hidden continuations of the Atlantic slave trade throughout later centuries and until the present. Allegedly, Arabs until at least six years ago have still acquired slaves in Mauritania and Sudan, but it would surprise me if a societal phenomenon of the scope of the actions here described by Radburn concerning the Atlantic had really disappeared. After all, our genes and basic psychology still are the same ones which they have been in the millennia of the past. A transformation basically continuing that old, massive-scope slavery during the 19th century may have been colonialism. Workers on European plantations overseas during that era are known to have often been treated with a similar brutality. When the colonies have become independent, it would seem plausible that such a hidden continuation has been exerted economically. Whole countries, ruled by natives like the slave empires described by Radburn had been it before, are now again dependent on foreign currency or on weapons import. An only difference perhaps lies in the situation that natives aren't any more openly sold but have to work on plantations at home or are pressed into serving seasonally, or also without visa for longer periods, in countries like the USA. I have also read about children who allegedly were adopted by well-to-do parents in Western countries on the grounds that in Africa, their parents weren't able to nourish them. Such cases would appear to me as with a high probability having to be righteously compared with a sale of children as status symbols.

This has been an interesting and instructive talk, while it also endorses me in my impression that Princeton University Press and its authors do not have their primary focus on lingual exceptionality.

I'm not so sure if the agricultural revolution has weakened freedom. It has brought about cities, and my impression is that you'll generally enjoy greater freedom in a city than in a village or in a community which consists of even fewer people. Concerning the danger that a terrorist might steer an asteroid into a continent, it could help if people were made aware of a continuity of one's personal consciousness across death. It's now possible (thanks to the Internet) quite easily to show that a while after one's death, one again awakens in a novel body. Even Hitler has relinquished a production of nuclear bombs, when Werner Heisenberg told him that such a weapon would annihilate Earth's biosphere. I'm not aware of a belief of Hitler in reincarnation, but a terrorist who _knows_ that his chances of returning as a primitive animal grow in case he annihilates the higher organisms - or also just a part of them - will certainly be deterred from such a behavior most effectively.

Very interesting interwiev, thank you!

"A historian by training with key service at the State Department during the Obama administration, Kimmage brings his talent and experience to bear in illuminating the complex background for [the] war… It is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand the aggressive war that Vladimir Putin launched against Ukraine and the West." - John J. Sullivan, former U.S. Ambassador to the Russian Federation and former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State "Kimmage provides well-informed and realistic, if bleak, context for current events...Political maneuvering rarely begets a page-turner, but Kimmage's insightful account is just that." Kirkus Reviews "Kimmage's excellent book contains qualities seldom present in narrating an ongoing conflict... A compelling and detailed account that reveals some little known facts and a deeply sobering analysis of Putin's invasion of Ukraine, its consequences for Russia, and the many assumptions about European security." -- Zachary Irwin, Library Journal “In this arresting deep dive, historian Kimmage explores decades of international relations leading up to Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine…the he commentary is elucidating and the fine-grained narrative keeps the pages turning. This deserves to be reckoned with.” - Publishers Weekly Links to reviews in Oxford University Press: pages.oup.com/trade/cus/869304rvw/collisions-ss24?FA

the left want war...

Ahhh... I remember those days well. The mix-tape was the perfect gift for someone special.

54:35 "Disconnect the American people from their ordinary wishes for a decent life and reconnect them to a fantasy version of a country that was once great and could be great again" "It's difficult to free fools from chains they revere" - Voltaire

Very strange, The comment box is empty. Great discussion, in fact, our body is not designed to take or inject any man made chemical into it. Medicine can't cure but gives you comfort at the cost of making you more sick.cure rarely, comfort mostly but console always.

This was an excellent interview with Derron Wallace. I must say, this book is a game-changer! It sheds light on the ethnic expectations and unequal schooling in the US and the UK and how it is, in fact, a Culture Trap! The author's deep ethnography and examples bring these issues to life and shed light on this issue. I highly recommend this book.

☹️ "Promo SM"