It Could Happen Here Weekly 21

even about how to put some other things back together. Um. Today we're gonna be talking about something that is increasingly a part of what we like to call the crumbles around here, which is the health care system in this country, in the hospital system in this country as it uh kind of gets crunched by covid. Um. And we're gonna particularly talk about a really critical aspect of our entire medical infrastructure that a lot of people don't know about

traveling nurses. Uh. And with me today is our guest, and and you are a traveling nurse from New York to California all around the country. Um, thanks for being on the show. Glad to be here. Yeah. So I live in Colorado and I was a regular staff nurse UM until COVID hit. And you know, at that time,

we expected it to crunch everywhere. UM, but my home hospital, like many places that worked on the coast, UM ended up being really empty when everybody locked down and stopped getting into car accidents and going to parties and all of the other things that bring people into the e R and I se use UM. So at that time, i quit my full time job and went to New York as a travel nurse UM. And then I've been dancing around hotspots since then. So New York, Texas, Ohio,

rural New Mexico. UM. I just finished my third contract in California. I've been up to Oregon. So UM, I've seen the health care system working and not working in a lot of different places, and also like how much disparity there is different communities related to COVID as in

the health care that we can provide. Yeah, and I am kind of before we move on to some of the specific things going on with travel nurses, what is your sense of like how often are you in a place and feel like, well, this the hospital system here, this particular hospital they're they're like right on the edge of a breaking point most of the time. Okay, that's

good to know where your seatbelts, folks. Yeah, I mean, particularly since everyone was able to get vaccinated right, Like to me, I really feel like that that that point of like the tipping point of like the quote unquote crumbles kind of like after everybody was was able to get their second vaccination UM, and we had so much hope last May and June and things were reopening and it was kind of like, Wow, things could go back to normal. UM, and then like, I don't believe that's

going to happen. And since and I've seen so much more despair in my coworkers, and I've heard about so many more healthcare suicides UM staff, nurses, travel nurses, arties, other ancillary people, and you know, the kind of running joke, and a lot of workplaces is like, well, I hope I test positive for COVID because that would be better

than coming into work another day. Yeah, alright, I hope I get hit by a car so I don't have to come in your job, I think, is what a lot of people would the people who you know are reasonable human beings and see what you're doing is incredibly necessary. Find that would find the work to be something of a nightmare. I mean, it sounds like horrific, UM, to have to deal with this. I mean it's it's it's not an easy job in the best of times being a nurse. But like with COVID and stuff, it's it's

just there's so much else on y'all's plates. UM. And one of the things that has happened over the course of the last year or well almost two years now, UM, is that from January, the advertised pay rates for travel nurses around the country have gone up by about sixty UM, which in staffing firms of you know, increase their building up hospitals by like so like this huge rays in what um travel nurses are demanding and what is getting paid out. And I think a reasonable person would go, well, yeah,

of course, UM. And yeah, I think anybody would go any reasonable person would go, well, yeah, of course, you guys deserve much more money than that for what you're dealing with right now. UM. I have no problem with this, But people who do have problems with this are the American Hospital Association UM, among other folks. Generally the folks who are seeing this primarily as a well, now we're spending more money issue, as opposed to a hey maybe we don't have enough nurses, right, Yeah, So I guess

I have maybe a couple of comments on that. So one of the things about nurses, so if if you're not in the travel field and you say want to change hospitals, even if you're an experienced nurse, they will take between a month and six months to go through their hiring process and then they will give you a week, two weeks, maybe four weeks of orientation. So that's a

long process to hire a nurse. Normally, for me as a travel nurse, I will talk to a recruiter, I will say yes, I will be on the road somewhere between four hours to twenty four hours later, I will get to the hospital. I will do a bunch of paperwork that is for compliance and makes no difference at all.

I will get between two and six hours of orientation, which is basically, here's the bathroom, here's the store room, this is what we're going to audit in the charts, and then I'm expected to take care of complex actively dying patients. So, so you know, people complain about how much we're getting paid. But if you only have two

hours of like where's the bathroom? And like this is how you get most of the time when you're spending with I T being like hey I need computer access, buddy, and then there you are and you're in the thick of it with no backup. You know, so you already have to be an expert in your field, and you have to be able to walk into an unfamiliar chaotic

situation and hit the ground running immediately. So yes, making a hundred twenty bucks an hour is a lot of money, But I don't know that that's so super unreasonable for two hours of like yeah, it's the exit. Now take care of people who are actively dying, and don't screw it up. It's the way we're told the system is supposed to work, right, Like, this is how capitalism is supposed to function. The demand for something goes up, and the demand for nursing his way the hell up, so

the price goes up. Um, if you believe in capitalism, like one assumes these people who are responsible for you know, paying you and are currently lobbying, So what's happening. I should go back because we didn't note this but the American Hospital Association and a number of other folks are lobbying Congress right now to put a cap on the amount of money that traveling nurses UM can uh can cane. Even a number of UM congress people have said that

they're going to be looking into the issue. Several states Oregon, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Kansas, and Kentucky have introduced legislation that's attempting to cap nurse pay rates. So there's like this huge backlash attempting to lock down the amount of money y'all can continue to get paid UM because of all of the things this country, I guess has money for the people dealing with the

I don't know what. I don't know how many millions of additional sick and dying people UM are are are kind of beyond what these folks are willing to shell out for UM. And I got the size of that, and I mean to clarify, so in a FEMA contract, so what a lot of the contracts I take are, So the nurse is making between a hundred and maybe you also have a taxi stipend or you don't kind

of depending on how you are in that. And then but the bill rate to the hospital is usually like, so the legislation is against the agencies the agencies are making between of course, the agency is then going to say, hey, well we aren't going to pay you as much because we still want the same cut. Yeah, my understanding, so the trickle down effect is likely going to be travel

nurse wages. But my understanding is it's asking the FTC to take enforcement against the travel nurse agencies because the agencies, they're the ones that say they have the person on the phone that says, hey, you have these credentials, we want to send you to this hospital yes, or now we've got this hotel arranged or we don't or you know those types of and we're going to do this

type of on boarding. So they have their own kind of infrastructure and they take, you know, half of the cut, and some of those people are making a lot of

money too. Yeah, And it seems like it's kind of the situation where the way this is being framed, they're trying to crack down on these people who are kind of profiteering or could be argued to be profiteering off the situation um rather than trying to cap the amount that the nurses can make so to speak, or at least not by as much, but the overall effect will be that because of the way these companies work, y'all

will still wind up making less money. Um yeah, how um within the traveling nurse community, what is kind of where are people right now with this? Like? What is what is kind of the mood? Um? So? I think there's a couple of things to note. So in the FEMA contracts, they're usually sixty to seventy two contracts, so you're working back to back to back to back, so I'll do eight weeks sometimes. And most people are not white women like me. This is mostly first and second

generation immigrants and generally people of color. Um So, these are not people that are saving for Lamborghinis. These are people that are getting off their student loans because a lot of them went to private nursing schools because that was kind of what was accessible to them because of all of the disparity and education and opportunities. These are people that are trying to pay off their mortgages. These

are people who are paying off their parents houses. Um So, this kind of idea that like nurses are greedy is I think really unfair because most of us are just trying to, like, you know, make a life that works. And also, you can't do eight hour contracts fifty two weeks out of the year. No, I mean doing it for any extended period of time. I've I've worked those

kinds of hours in a generally less stressful working environment. Um. And it like it breaks you down, um over time, like you you can't do that at any time in your life for one thing like um, and you can't do that forever. And it sounds like this is kind of a lot of people are taking it as like this is an opportunity. I can get my parents out of debt, I can I can get a house, Um, I can say for my kids to I can pay

off my own college. Like it's a chance for a lot of these people by putting in an unbelievable amount of f to get ahead. Uh. And I can't can't even imagine the frustration at seeing so many people be like, well, no,

not so fast. And I mean one of the things that people are bringing up is right like it in the same way that you know, we struggle to want to pass minimum wage laws for the undocumented immigrants that pick our food, and you know, support this infrastructure that is totally unseen now that we have you know what, is mostly forstance second generation immigrants that are working these FEMA contracts, Like, you're targeting a section of the population

that are not the people that have doubled tripled their wealth in the pandemic, right, Like, these are not all of the people that got the small business loans that didn't need them and you know and have are just putting all of that money into stock, right is there? Not? These are people who just want a middle class American dream and we're working, will work really really hard for it. And I mean there these are people who are asking,

can I have the thing we're all promised? If I spend eighty hours a week watching people, in a lot of cases choke out their last fucking breaths, is that okay? And a lot of people are saying, oh, of course, not right. And you know, so we're taking care of dying people while we're getting yelled at at the phone of like, is cursing a lot on the show or no fucking lutely yes, of course. Yeah. I mean I had a family member saying, you're fucking imprisoning her on

a ventilator I'm going to come for you. Where do you fucking live? You know we have to get security involved. Um, you know, we get death threats. I've had people like threatened to find where I live and raped me. And so I mean, yeah, enough of a race taking care of your dying loved one who also probably would say those same things to me because I would say, hey,

please be vaccinated and they would say fuck you. But I'm still going to do everything I can to take care of those um and I'm gonna endure this abuse, and like, yeah, if I'm going to leave my home and the safety of a hospital that works and go into these total cluster fucks of hospitals where the educator has left, the manager has left, the director has left, so there's no leadership. It's travelers, some of which are great, some of which are also hot messes, and try and

to take care of these people. Then like, yes, I want to be paid accordingly for it. Now would I trade that for a social um a social safety net of health insurance because I have to get private health insurance, which is shady. Um, I don't get any disability insurance. I have no stick. Leave right because you're you're you're a pinch hitter. You're not like salary anywhere. Yeah, but

would I trade this high salary for a social safety net? Personally, I would yes, But I mean nobody's gonna say, like, yes, you will be able to retire with dignity if you play by all of these rules. They don't believe that I want to make the money. Yeah, it's I mean, we're all always in this kind and I like, yes, soccer way as much as you can while it's coming situation.

And she's especially if you're especially if you're doing something you're gonna need to recover from later, right, Like this is I I you know, I've I've done overseas work. I understand kind of the nature of like trauma. And while you're doing the job at the rate you're doing it, you're also like pushing off a day of reckoning mentally, and not having a cushion of savings helps with that. Yeah, Like in the middle of it, you're in it, and

then you know, sometimes it's weeks, sometimes it's months. Um. I hiked the Colorado Trail for mental health, and half of those nights I had I See you nightmares. So I was in these beautiful the middle of lower places where everything was quiet. I would wake up with all of the beeps and people dying in my head night after night after night. You know, yeah, I mean yeah, I'm angry that they don't want to compensate me for that, because I mean, they're definitely not paying for my therapist.

They definitely like aren't giving me access to disability if I need it? Right? Like yeah, because obviously again, you're you're a contractor. Effectively, Um, there's not like a union for traveling nurses, is there? Or Am I wrong about that? No? So, I mean the only thing you have each your negotiating power. Um. So I have eight years of experience between emergency and I see you, um, and a lot of very um,

big and highly regarded hospitals. So I'm a hot commodity to them, so I can kind of pick and choose, um, who I want to work with compared to someone that has less desirable specialties. Not that those specialties don't also work as hard, but they're just harder. They're easier to staff, so therefore they're not It's a market thing. Sure, it's a market things. I definitely don't believe that my specialties

are more like inherently valuable just in terms of the market. Um. So you know, so I get I can I have the luxury of turning down contracts that aren't what I want. But I mean, I have no idea what I'm walking into. So on Monday, I'll walk into somewhere. Um, they said, you'll do some paperwork, you'll get your orientation, you'll have it'll all be it'll be a busy day and then you'll be on your own. And I have no idea. Sometimes you're oriented in one unit and you never see

that unit again. So um, and I you know, you have no idea what you're walking into. And how how long are these contracts? Generally? For so, before COVID, the standard nursing contract was thirteen weeks UM. Since COVID, a lot of them are shorter. And I've only done in short contracts because if it's a decent place, then I can renew and stay longer usually, and if it's a bad place, then I'm pretty happy to get out early. Um. So I do between four and eight week contracts, and

I usually do sixty plus hours a week. Is there any kind of like organization that you've seen come together a little more between people who are doing this this gig since you don't have kind of representation. Is that something that started to take form in the last two years since COVID. I mean there's definitely a lot of

talk about it. Um. I think like those of us that started traveling since the pandemic, you know, I would say that I've only done crisis contracts, like I've never done a normal thirteen week, thirty six hour a week, not crisis assignment, like I've only gone into the ship show hot spots, um. And so therefore, like my needs and desires are different than somebody who likes that previous lifestyle.

So in some ways it's a little bit hard for us to kind of agree on common goals because we have a lot of different you know, we're a very diverse group of nurses. Um. Definitely, the Million Nurse March is kind of a step towards that. Tell me about that what what is this? Because I just learned about this pretty recently. Yeah, so I dropped off the grid for the last five days, which was fantastic for me,

but it means I'm also just starting to figure it out. UM. So the kind of general idea is that you know we have I think, uh, I'm gonna hopefully I don't get it wrong. Four millions some nurses in the country, A huge number of nurses in the country and a huge number of dropping out. Um, you know, hundreds of thousands quit last year. They I think one estimate is five hundred thousand may quit this year. And we were just so people know, tens of thousands of nurses understaffed

before COVID nation. Yes, right, right, um, And you know, I think one of the things to understand too is that like if you work, I don't know, what's what's the normal type of job that people work. I don't know. If you work at the d m V A bookman, Oh right, If you work at the d m V and the d m V is slow, you will still stay there eight hours and you'll just get paid for

your eight hours. If you are a normal nurse and you work thirty six hours and the e R is running slow, they could say we're just canceling you for the rest of the day, go home, we won't play you for those class six hours. And so like we've always had pretty like flexible, like we've never had a minute. Most of the places i've worked. I've never had guaranteed hours, and so one of the reasons to go to travel contracts to is also so you can at least have

guaranteed hours. So there's a lot of kind of protections that nurses have never really had, like guaranteed hours UM, like staff ratios, so some states California and organ or um two of them. If you go into the ice U, which is the highest level of care, so people are actively dying, actively unstable, things can go bad within seconds. Usually it's a one nurse will have two patients UM, which is pretty much all you can handle because they're

on multiple drips, multiple types of life. The part keeping them alive so ventilators UM being the one that we see the most UM, and it's really your responsibility to know every inch of that person's body UM and everything going on with them, and you really direct a lot of their care UM. So two to one kind of makes a lot of sense since the pandemic and not having enough nurses, sometimes that slid to three to one

or even in bad situations four to one. So one of the statistic x that UM one of the kind of nurse influencers and comedians, nurse Blake talks about UM. Is that for every additional patient that a nurse takes on, and I believe he's talking about med starch, not I see that that patients UM mortality increases by seven percent. So yeah, so asking a nurse to do more with less is not just like hey, just suck it up, be busier. This is actively contributing to people's disability and

early deaths. So one of the things that the millionairese march Um wants to talk about is man man dated staffing ratios. So I see you would be two to one med starch is usually four to one. I think you are. They're asking for three to one UM. So these have been studied by the American Nurses Association UM and other sort of UM nursing organizations UM. And not only do they make your job as a nurse so much better because we go into nursing because we want

to say things and take care of people. We want good outcomes, right Like, you don't go into nursing to just run around with your head cut off and watch everyone die, right Like, that's terrible. You go into nursing because you want the people to get better under your care, and you want to be able to give them that, and so when you're asked to take care of more patients than you're able to, you're not able to do that,

and it just crushes you. UM. So not only is it better for nurse satisfaction, it also saves patients lives and also prevents things that will give cause lasting disability like ventilator associated pneumonia or bed sores or delirium, things like that. So, you know, mandating UM patient ratios is one of the really big things that the million Nurse marks is for UM. There's a lot of talk about

pay and living wages. You know, like every section. Housing prices and inflation have gone through the roof because you've got to like be renting a spot whenever you're like the hospital only putting you up right well, and fir staff nurses to write like if you're you know, maybe you're maybe they gave you a two percent raise, but hey,

rent increase UM. I used to be on the interview board at my old hospital and we would just tell people like, if you're moving to Denver as a single person, we lose most of our nurses because they haven't looked at housing. So like they'll accept a job, and then they'll look for a place to live and be like, oh, I can't afford to live here. So hey, like, I mean, we can't ask if you're single moving here, but like you probably can't afford to live here with what we're

going to pay you. I mean, cool, I I It's just it's so eternally frustrating that, like the one thing that everybody, when you sit them down, agrees is in controvertibly necessary medical care. Um. We can agree on a lot of things, but not how to make sure that people doing it have a good quality of life and

good income. Like we can we have all these fun, fun rules that make it possible to our X number of thousand dollars for a dose of insulin um, But we don't just have a law that's like, hey, if if you're working full time as a nurse, uh, maybe you shouldn't have to be housing insecure. I don't know how do you make that into a law, But it seems like there should be some option for a country that can make some of the things we make, Yeah,

I mean tying wages to housing prices. It seems like, I don't know, not being an economist and not being an administrator, Like that sounds super easy to me, Like everybody gives a fifteen percent race. Like sure, I'm sure it's more complicated than that, but it seems super simple to send a guy around with a stick to threaten landlords when they raise rent. Like there's we could debate

the answers to this. What do you think I mean, not not that like you have any sort of comprehensive knowledge of all of the people doing this, but like, do you think there's a possibility of like a wildcat strike, which is again for people who maybe aren't is when there's a strike of kers who are not unionized. Um, I mean to some extent, with everybody quitting to do

travel nursing, it's not so different. I mean, some students have lost eight of their staff, right some Like when a unit says, oh, well, we lost of my staff, I'm kind of like, well you did better than most, you know. Um, So in some ways it's already happening.

And in that same way, I am seeing hospitals give better extent incentives to their nurses that have stayed um either retention bonuses or um increasing bonuses for pick for core staff picking up extra shifts UM, or kind of other perks like increasing education benefits or things like that. So I think hospitals are responding to like, hey, we don't want to lose these people to traveling, Like can

we tip the balance a little bit? And I think, you know, overall, hospital leadership is moving slower than they need to UM. But I mean at least they're moving a little bit. So I mean in that way, I can see a wildcat strike UM, just coming from the

kind of labor forces at play UM. And I could and I mean there were one of the hospitals in the South, I think it was Alabama, all of their staff, their staff coordinated UM, so that the ship that was on agreed to stay late because you can't because abandoning patients, UM, you can put your license at risk. Right, So we all walked off in the middle of a shift and said fuck you to the hospital. Patients died then, like our licenses at risk. So we also have to kind

of balance that a little bit. But there was a hospital they organized for the day shift basically to stay as late as they needed, and night shift all stood outside of the hospital and I wouldn't refuse to clock

it in. So sometimes these things are happening in small levels. Um. Also, um, really interesting Yeah, Like um, I mean, and that is like such a tough thing to balance, just the idea that like, well, you are health care workers, like withholding your labor is a thing that's going to be necessary from time to time. There's also consequences for it that are not present if you're making I don't know, tires,

you know. Yeah, And as much as teachers and nurses are the same, Like I don't think our country cares about educating children as much as it cares about their parents dying, you know, like for better or worse. Yeah, I mean, yeah, that's another subject. Um. Is there anything else you wanted to get into today? Um? Before we we close out for the for the episode, Um, I mean, if it's okay with you, and you can cut it if it's not. Um, you know, I try and tweet

about kind of what's happening on the ground. Yeah, absolutely, and the things that I'm seeing. Um. And I'm mostly finished with a book about the first year on the front line and seven different hospitals and kind of the disparities between you know, critical access in New Mexico versus trauma hospitals in you know, the Bay Area and kind of what that first year looked like. UM. So if

you want, you can follow me on Twitter. UM it's an A N N E like an of green Gables and R N which is when I started traveling nursaying, um, you know, and so that I kind of talked a

little bit about like what I'm seeing and what's going on. UM. I was recently in an e er where you know, people often had to stay outside under the heat lamps for thirty hours waiting for a hospital bed just because everything was packed so they couldn't even come inside the hospital and they were you know, waiting, um to get their appendix out and things like that. Again, where are your seatbelts in the helmet? Be real, be real careful right now, guys, right UM? And I mean I think

the other thing is the blood shortage. UM. So most hospitals are revising their guidelines of who won't get a blood transfusion, so you now have to be much more critical before they will give you a blood transfusion. So, UM, there's a lot of politics around blood donation, but if you feel like you can donate blood, um, it's really desperately needed, and people are gonna where your seats because people are really going to legitimately die because we run

out of blood. Yeah, um boy, how do you please wear your seatbelts? Folks? Um, just just hunker down for a little while. No, no new risky experiments in life for just a minute. Not the time to take up skydiving. Yeah yeah, maybe avoid that. Maybe you don't go skiing. Uh if you haven't gone skiing before. Um, I just did that and broke my wrist because I'm I'm exactly

as dumb as the people I'm trying to warn. And then I guess just check in with your mental with your the mental health of your health care workers, because I mean, so many people have you know, I think a lot of us are dealing with at least passive sort of like puck. Maybe I should just drive off the road instead of going into work today sort of thoughts, you know. And oh, for a lot of us, that's just definitleeting thought and then we get our ship together.

But for some people it's going to be more than that. And you know, nursing is one of those things where people have to find themselves by their career and they need people in their lives, saying like, if you are never a nurse again, you are still valued, you are

still loved. Just being alive, it's enough, and this is how you know we can help take care of you if you need to quit for three months, you know, um and supporting people with their intrinsic value rather than like you are only productive and valuable because you were there saving lives. Because I think a lot of us really get stuck in that, and a lot of us are drawn into nursing because we feel some lack of

worthiness without it. You know, well, that's the hard thing to get other people to do, because in part this is a society where we just have such generally crummy attitudes towards mental health. But like we're great at at saying things like, oh, you know, there's a pandemic. Our healthcare workers are heroes. You're all heroes because of the that you're doing the work makes you a hero, as

opposed to saying, hey, thank you for doing that. I know things are still fucked up right now, but if you decide you gotta like take a break or whatever, you know, you're you're you're that doesn't mean you like what you did was still wonderful and you're still great and valuable, and maybe the best thing is for you to take that break and not drive yourself off of

a cliff. Yeah. Yeah, that's that's harder to get people to like way of banners that say outside of their apartment complexes, banging on pots to like let healthcare workers know that no matter what they do, their valued members of the community that people love. Um. But yeah, all right, well, and thank you so much for talking with us today. UM, I hope uh you you hold together and help the people in your life hold together, which is all any

of us can really do other than we're a seatbelt. Yeah, thank you for being a part of the conversation, and thank you for you know, listening to hard things. And you know that's one thing that I think we really appreciate it as to people who will actually listen with open hearts and and we'll witness this with us so that we're not alone in it. It could happen. Here is the podcast that you're listening to right now. I'm Robert Evans. All right, that's that's my job done. What

are we what are we doing? What are we doing today? Hey? What's up? Hey? Andrew? Back at it again with another podcast. UM. Today, we're doing something a little bit different from the previous episodes that I've done. We're having a bit more open discussion about sitting book that has been passed around for about a decade now and has polarized UM members of the anarchist community. UM for it that way, UM today we'll be talking about the book the infamous uh polemic

Desert by Anonymous. For those who uh, you know, not aware of this extremely controversial text. Desert is a nihilist anarchist text for this published in two thousand eleven that is mainly directed at other anarchists and seeks to address issues of climate collapse and revolution. It became somewhat of a meme to tell folks to read Dessert. I'm not

sure when that was, but I just remember scene. It's a lot um I think in yeah around read Desert became a name, yeah yeah, all over Twitter and Instagram and credit. But of course, being a thing that exists on the Internet, people who naturally became torn on the subject of it. And so there are a lot of perspectives and opinions and think pieces about desert, some more

or less accurate than others. But we are here to discuss the book, our personal experiences reading it, things we think it gets right and wrong, and what we could potentially learn going forward. So I would say the floor is yours, whoever wants to go first. I mean, I'm a huge fan of the quote that the book takes it, or that the that it takes its name from, which comes from you know, Tacitus, who was a dude writing in the Roman period um the exact quote that it

comes from his and he's talking. Tacitus is talking about the Roman Empire, robbers of the world. Now that the earth is insufficient for their all devastating hands, they probe even the sea. If their enemy is rich, they are greedy. If he is poor, they thirst for dominion. Neither East nor West has satisfied them alone. Of mankind, they are equally covetous of poverty and wealth, robbery, slaughter, and plunder. They falsely name empire. They make a desert and they

call it peace. Huh, good ass quote. It is a It is a solid yeah. And obviously I think people living in the shadows of every empire that's ever existed can identify with that quote. Um, it's it's a powerful kind of central idea to hang your extended essay. I don't really know what the best term to refer to it as all. It's it's it's a long essay. Yeah,

it's a very long essay. As we talked about kind of coming into this, it's extremely two thousand tens um three Arab spring pre all the big uprisings and revolts we had in twenty nineteen and UM, there's definitely some

stuff that it gets very right. And I think kind of one of the ways in which it's had an impact on me is kind of I've I've thought about what happens to sort of culture as the result of this kind of Hollywood engine that is heavily tied up with the United States military Industrial complex, UM, as a process of desertification of ideas and the ability to like

conceive of of of new futures. UM. That said, I I don't really I haven't reread it in a very long time, UM, and haven't really felt UM called to in in many ways because I do think I don't know, I think there's an extent to which it's been kind of left behind. UM. Yeah. Yeah, some of the things that have happened since I think, yeah, um, I will say that as someone who really came into my owners an archist in although I had identified with it before, um,

when I had read the book. Um, I think it was in late late so when they read the book first time I read it, and honestly, um, there was some good, some bad, some some very outdated stuff, and also some stuff that I don't know. Maybe the author felt it was like groundbreaking at the time, but you know, at this present stage just feels like common knowledge sense,

you know, I mean it was. It was groundbreaking in a way for like climate realism, right, like this was this was written before you know, this is written before climate levy thing. This is written before um, the uninhabitable Earth. This was written before a lot of kind of the texts that view climate change is an absolute like this

was written one year before Hyper Objects. Is really interesting actually, because you know, the whole premence of that book is that climate changes is done, like it happened, where we're like there's no turning back the clock. And the desert was written even before that, like it was it was

one of the first things. Now and of course it's it's it's much more niche, but like it was if I look, if I look back in books that have like impacted me, it was it's one of the first books like that came out, like timeline wise to take climate changes, like, yeah, it's there's no saving it, like there's no living in the two thousands, there's no living

in the nineties. Again, it's like things are like the world's not going to end, but things are going to get worse, right, like and that, and that is kind of a big, big part of the book because it's it's also it's also not pro collapse like it it doesn't take. Collapse is an absolute. It doesn't take. It

doesn't it doesn't subscribe to global collapse. And that's one of the misconceptions I think people have about them, Yeah, that they just assume it's like this collapse Dumorus like misscrupic kind of text, but which I did not read it as that. I first started around the same time you did, um and I read it as a part of a lot of books I was reading to prep for the show when we when we were writing our first five episodes on like on climate change and like the Crumbles. So I read it read it as a

part of my kind of general research. And yeah, like at that point it was already kind of mimified to be like, you know, like an anarcho nihilist like Dumor Manifesto. And I read it and like, that's not what it's saying at all. It's actually once I read it, I was like, as we be taking it back at how how easily um popular perceptions of a piece of media

good um, I mean honestly corrupted beyond recognition. Yeah, you know, like if people are a bunch of people are telling you know it's that or the other about is in text or whatever, you know, it's kind of shake it kind of shakes you up to like actually consumed for yourself and then realize, how do you all get that? Yeah?

How did you read that out of it? It is really interesting because I'm not even sure if they did read out of it or if that was the perception they had going into it, so they read it through that lens, and that lens basically you know, changed the text in their head to fit that thing. Because yea, it is really interesting how how it is so associated with like doomeriism um yet if you like engage in

good faith with the text. It's very much not a doomer manifesto anyway, although there are aspects of it that I am um that I think attitude wise that I am critical of, But I think Chris was going to

say something, yeah. So it's just like I, I really I've always not liked this book, like read it back and I think she Dozeneen when it was first sort of like coming back, and I didn't like it then, And I re read it this morning, and I like it even less now than I did then, and I think, I think, I actually, I actually okay, So like I think it's true that most of the text doesn't do the doom or thing, but I think I understand where people got it from, because you know, you have quotes

in this like uh here, here's one. Yet I can already hear the accusations from my own camp, accusations of deserting the cause of revolution, deserting the struggle for another world. Such accusations are correct, I would rejoin that such millinarian and progressive myths are at the core of the expansion of power. And this is this is what I really like, I think from an ecological perspective, it's sort of Okay, I strongly dislike Desert as an anarchist text because I

think that's just wrong. I think I think, I think there's there there's there's there's an ingrained defeatism in it that is so strong that it it it just it

like warps the author's perception of the past. Like you get these things where he's talking about these these kind of he's talking about like the you know, what you call the classical anarchist movement from roughly like eighteen seventy two really sort of ends with the defeat of the anarchists in Spain and like seven and and he you know, they say things like from Spain pre nineteen thirty six to the Jewish anarchists in North America, the illegalist of France,

and the Italian anarchoscentity close to Argentina. The inhabitants of anarchist counter societies were always, by definition active minorities. The minorities may have gotten larger in an instructionary moments, but

they remained that minorities always. And that's just wrong, It's it's factually wrong, like these these movements were not minorities, like the like the entire like the like the largest union in France was the siege like in the early ante hundred was the you see it that all all of the French, Spanish and Portuguese country speaking countries have a they have one union that's called the u g C and one union it's called CGT and I can't remember which ones which, but like like that was that

was the largest union in France, and it was a syndicalist union, right like it was like and there's you know the same thing with Argentina, right for a like

for a while, was the largest union in Argentina. And I think and this this is sort of my problem with this, which is that you know, this is a person who's basically like they talked about like they were born in the seventies and they've they've they're writing the steals in eleven in just the midst of the collapse of sort of like the complete and total destruction of the old anarchist movement, right, the anarchist movement that had been born out of sort of like the Zapatistas and

the anti globalization movements. And they've been beaten so badly that you know, I mean, they were crushed, they were completely destroyed, and they've been beaten so badly that they they can't they literally can't imagine winning and think that like like revolution in general, like is essentially a secular theology. They repeat this over and over and over again. It's like revolution is theology, Revolution is a myth. And it's like and this is this is something that's just a

product of of defeat. It's not a product of sort of taking seriously the conditions that are emerging around them. And you know, I was talking about this before the recording. It's like right after this is written, it's you get the movement of the squares, and then you get occupied, and it's like basically like every major city in the

world goes into revolt. The revolts are anarchists inspired, and you know, and and desert, like this is why dessert vanishes for like six or seven years, because desert is a piece that's written like it's it's it's a piece that's that's only happens in a in a very specific part of a revolutionary cycle, which is when like every everything has been crushed, all resistance has been crushed, everyone's losing hope, and then everyone starts reading dessert again, and

then the revolutions restart, and and at that point like once once once, there's like, you know, two thousand people in the streets again like fighting the cops. It becomes less and less sort of like like that, that part of its analysis becomes less and less relevant until you know, inevitably everyone like there's there's a defeat, and then everyone goes sort of like And I think I think that's why it has the duomer rep because it's it's it's the text that people read when you've been beaten in

the streets. See, yeah, that's that's an interesting look at it, because I mean, I definitely agree with the revolution is an idea, like is a myth thing, like I I specifically within the context of the United States, which I believe that's what the books trying to mostly focus on. They do bring up other parts of the world and stuff. Um, but it's definitely written by in a by an American like citizen, and that that that is I mean, I

mean that that could actually be wrong. Um, it may not be written by an American, but I in terms of reading it, it is kind of through like a very like Western lens of like revolutions not happening here. Um And I definitely sympathize and agree with that viewpoint.

And I mean if if you're in a point of being like it was two US and eleven then occupied happened and like yeah, but occupied in But that that also fits like every every attempt has not succeeded in this country did to get any kind of big, meaningful

change that we can push towards something that's like post capitalist. Um. So, yeah, I mean I do think I think it's it's it's it's mostly targeting people specifically like communists, um or marks Londonists who like are just waiting around for the revolution to happen and then don't do anything like that, right, that is that is the thing that's trying to But but but but but I think this is this is why it's a text that's like that's not good for

the moment, because our our problem isn't that, like, like the problem right now isn't that there's no one like there's no uprising on the horizon, Like everyone's completely beaten down, no one's ever gonna go into his treats again. Our problem is that like there's just there's there's there's there's periodic uprisings everywhere, and every single time everyone is caught off guard, and every single time, no one is able

to actually sort of mobilize off of it. And you know, like like like no no one, no one's been able to like pivoted into something that's actually like transformative. But but but but I think that that's a very different problem then the problem that desert is because desert has already abandoned the possibility that an uprising can win. That's I mean,

it's yeah. And then let's specifically been the idea of like global revolution, right, that is, that is the thing that specifically targeting they're saying smaller specific they're saying like smaller local things actually can't succeed in a lot of ways. But they're trying to tie this idea of global revolution is like a pacifying idea, right, just waiting around for this to happen, and tying that to this at the time much more niche idea. Now it's now it's way

more popular. But this idea of like global collapse and how people think if they can people think believing in global collapse is smarter than believing in global revolution. They think it's more realistic but the book saying no, this, this idea of global collapse actually falls under all the same issues that global revolution has. I think i'd want to um sort of comments here um with regard to like the defeat is sort of reading in the text.

I understand that reading. Um. I mean personally, I distinguished been like defeatism and domerism, and I always think like my own personality and my own perspective kind of like inoculates me in a way from like adopting that kind of defeatist attitude towards um, you know, change. But I don't think the book is entirely um, you know, dismissive of like revolution. Um. It just I think the main thrust of it is that it's critical the idea of

like one global revolution, one global collapse. What it really emphasizes is that, you know, climate change brings new possibilities for new anarchies plural to develop worldwide and response changing circumstances. But at the same time, you know, in some areas things are going to get willis and some adious things are going to get better. And it's not that really

one broadbrush could be applied to the entire earth. Well, but I think I mean, I think like this, this is another thing that that they're really guilty of, especially like there's an entire section in here where they just keep writing about Africa and it's like well, and then you know, and they'll get pressed on it and they'll be like, no, no, we mean sub Saharan Africa, and it's like what are you talking like? They they won't name countries, they won't name movements, they won't name people.

It's just they'll just write something about the whole of Sub Saharan Africa, and it's just like, well, I think that's evidence of the kind of of what Garrison was talking about this, right, And this is something you see all over the place with people writing about politics, with people trying to write about like particularly revolutionary politics UM in a global sense. And I think it's usually a mistake to do that, UM for the reasons we've kind

of discussed. Any time I see a left wing even as somebody who I think is generally on point, who starts talking about, for example, like extending their theories about revolutionary politics to places I happen to know just a little bit about, it's always very clear like, oh, you don't know shit about Syria. Oh you don't know shit about Libya. Oh you don't know shit about Angle like um. And that's and that's like not even a moral failing.

It's just that it's impost It's it's impossible really to have in depth knowledge of like what's actually going on in those places and what's going on in those revolutions. It's why people default so much to the whole. Well, whatever side the US is on must be the bad side, and whatever side the Russians on must be the good side. It's the easiest way to look at that ship. Um. I don't I think that's I think that's a worthwhile critique to make, and it's a critique to make any

time that it happens. Um. I I agree with Garrison and with Andrew that I think the thing that is that desert gets right. Um. And the thing that I've seen in my own life is that like the opportunities we should be looking for are not suddenly that some sort of global revolution sweeps all of the things we don't like out of power and magically institutes something better

comprehensively across the globe. It's it's it's room for little anarchies it's what we saw in northeast Syria, right where the government pulls out and people have an opportunity to do something not perfect, but better. And I think that is that's kind of one of the things we talked about a lot on this show. That's why mutual aid

is valuable, It's why building these connections are valuable. It's because um, as things crumble, there will be opportunities two in local areas, piecemeal, institute and and push through for more just and and better ways of living. Um And I think that if you're looking at kind of the broad level, potentially optimistic point is that when you have enough of those and when they spread well enough, and if communication is good enough, maybe the things that work

will get adopted on a wider scale. And there's always the opportunity that when enough, when idea is spread far enough, they have a tipping point and and they go viral, you know, so to speak. But I I I don't. I think that while there's a lot of specifics that Desert gets wrong, I do think they were ahead of the curve and recognizing that. And I think it's it's a more productive way to look at the idea of revolutionary change than we're going to finally have nineteen seventeen.

But everywhere, you know, throughouts of the African chapter, the impression that I got while reading that chapter, and I think the book itself references Um Samba Um, I got the impression that the author had read UM Afghan anchism history of a movement by some member and they were

just kind of like inspired by that. I would see, because as I do point out, they didn't like specify the specific cultures, which is an issue considering you know, the tendency that Western has, how of you know, being to Africa this large brush as if it's you know, all one way or the other. Um. But I think what we do see now, um is you know, from the Horn of Africa to South Africa to Nigeria too,

I mean recently Sudan. I believe, Um, there are Africans smaller number organizing under demand of anarchism, and there are anarchic elements that continue to persist on the continent. Yeah, I mean I think that's like you know, I mean, one of the things that they sort of got they got right, was about how like this the sort of the the sort of renewal, the spread of urban anarchism they're talking about like Chile in particular, they got right,

um Indonesia bnglaestra somewhat. But but but I think I think there's there's another like my, my, my, my, my biggest issue with them in terms of the way they

think about ecological stuff. This comes this is something they talk about with like they have this thing where they think that forger societies are like, Okay, they're they're they're they're they're more careful than most people to frame it as like the forging societies can be a galitarian, but I think they they wind up talking about these sort of like the way that sort of forging nomadic society sort of inherently defy the boundaries of the state, and

like that's true, but you can also have like nomadic foraging societies that have that are you know, hereditary slave societies. And this is this is a problem because there's a there's a lot in here about that that that's about sort of like they're, you know, they're they're taking this

a sort of like soft anti se of right. It has a few liads where it does specifically sayzation is the cause of like I think it's like the civilization is genocide, Um, which yeah, and that can't silly civilizations commit genocide. Sure, if they're saying that they do cause genocide.

If you're if you're trying to make the case that it seems to be that civilizations, Uh, well, I don't know every civilization does not commit genocide, but no, but civilization gives a constant Yeah, civilization gives you the framework that makes genocide possible, well, like potentially intentional genocide possible.

I don't know that I would agree with that, because I think you see examples of genocide from hunter gatherer societies and from from so positive societies, and that the obviously documentation on that isn't as extensive because we weren't documenting things for a lot of it. But you do have examples from from what we know of, like um, the Americas of their word, genocides committed by societies we

would call stateless. So I think I might argue that like, genocide is a thing that human beings do, and civilization, because it allows us to do everything on a larger scale, allows us to do way better. Gennos sides, that's definitely

an art I think. I think my problem with it is is that they're going back into this sort of like that they're going back into the you know, there's this inherent binary between forgers and sal societies and that you know, and and specifically they think that that that these sorts that the forger's ideas are you know, inevitably

gonna become a gagalitarian. It's like that's not true, and it's not true in ways that you can see right now in like like they're like they're like there are lots of places right now where you can look at you know, forging ancieties that are incredibly right. Like there's there's like, for example, you you get sort of you get the Filani joining like right wing Islamas groups, right

and that like that kind of thing. I think it has a problem with It's the same thing as looking at indigenous societies and and seeing them all on one side of the fight with with colonizing nations as supposed. I'm reading a book about the history the mapoo Chay right now, which are historically like the indigenous group in Chile that resisted the law, in the indigenous group really and in you could argue in all of Latin America

that resisted the longest and most effectively. But even then, when you look at like the campaigns of the Chilean government in the eighteen sixties and eighteen eighties, large like significant chunks of the mapoo Chay sided with the government against other Mapouchay and like that's the like, it's it's always a mistake. I think this is a good one of the things that you get out of the dawn

of everything. It's always a mistake to like look at any of these groups hunter gatherers, stateless societies is like one thing or another. They're people and some of them sucked just like yeah, they're yeah anyway, Yeah, there's there's one thing that I wanted to sort of pushback against. Uh. ROBBERTI had said that genocide is a thing that humans do. Um. I don't think I agree with that assessment, um in this sense, or at least i'd rather I would like

to clarify. Um, Well, give you an opportunity to clarify what you mean by that. I you know, I don't know that it's just humans, but I think that genocide is a thing that as long as we have evidence in recorded history, it seems like we have done not just against are not just against other humans, but against other kind of hominid species. We have we have examples of things that it seems fair to call genocide, going

back further than we have any kinds of written records. Um, you know, villages in the Balkans that were you know, burnt in people who like groups of people, tribes and whatnot, who seem to have been killed in mass And you know, there's there's other theories for some of that. Some of them may have been like people trying to stop a place we don't plague or whatever. Like, there's not any

kind of comprehensive solidity. But what we do know is that as long as we have documentations of humans doing things, we have documentations of things that we could call genocide. I see, I see, look look into that a bit more. I appreciate the glarification. Yeah, can I can I do a Balkans pivot, because there's a there's a there's a thing like like a genuinely disturbed me reading it in here about the Serbs d during the Bosnian genocide. Were

so that they they're they're quoting disturbing about that. Oh yeah, but this is this is a I I uh okay, So they're they're they're doing they're they're reading a quote from the book Gypsies, Wars and Other Instances of the Wild where he's talking this is about the Boston genocide. How is this possible in Europe at the end of the twentieth century was the question that played obsessively through

my mind. What the war in former Yugoslavia forced us to suggest the fact that people proved willing to make a conscious and active choice to embrace regression, barbarity and return to the wildness. Take the serve fighters who dreamed of a return to the serby of the epic poems were quote there was no electricity, no computers, when the serves were happy and had no cities, the breeding ground of all evil. And then this is this is the

next uh thing? That's that's the text coming back and commenting on it that some modern day militias reflect romantic and desires while shelling towns, massacring villages, and being killed in turn should neither surprise us nor necessarily fully invalidate romance. It does, however, suggest, along with the honest expression of joy and destruction mouth by some soldiers in every war, as well as many anarchists, that there is a coupling of some store between a generalized urge to destroy and

a disgust at a complex human society. And there's there's there's another part um only later on they're talking about ethnic diversity, and autonomy will often emerge both from mutual aid and community and animosity between communities. I'd like to think, and our histories back this up, that self adantified anarchists will never inflict such pain as Serb nationalist militias, an

example I shows purposely for the Repugnicans. But we should admit that our wish to function up is partly driven by the same urge to civilizational dismemberment that can be found in many inter ethnic conflicts and in the minds of fighters more general. And I think that's fucked. I think that's true. That's just I think there's commenting a specific type of anarchist literature, which is like the make

total destroy thing. And yeah, I definitely I have observed that in people the same the same urge that you're you're so broken down by everything that the only urge that is the only creative urge you have is to destroy the things around you. I've seen that. I don't think they're necessarily celebrating that, but they're pointing out that

that urge can be there. When I when I think they get really wrong here is that I don't think that's the urge that that is is like that, that's when when when you're dealing with inter ethnic conflict, when you're dealing with genocie, I don't think that's the urge

that's going on. It's spectically with the Serb because the Serbs, like you know, okay, like when when when an anarchist is doing make total destroy right there, you know there like there, there's there's a very specific set of things you're attacking or they're you know, they're attacking building, attacking the physical infrastructure of the world. When the Serbs are doing the Bosnian genocide, like that, they have a very

specific thing they're doing, which is killing Bosnian Muslims. And I think that's extremely different urge than the sort of like I don't I don't think that's about sort of what it's civilizational dismemberment or whatever. That's about Islamophobia and genocide. And I think that's a different I think the genocidal impulse is a I think, a very different one than the sort of the like the impulse to break the

society that has harmed you. Yeah, I think it's important to draw a distinction between you can kill a shipload of people without it being a genocide. UM. And I think and it's also one of those things I think sometimes why people I think why there's hesitation to see certain acts and early history of genocide is that they're not as complete as modern genocide. But but what a genocide really is, and I think it's important to lay this out. It's not necessarily killing every member of an

ethnic group or a religious group or whatever kind of community. UM. It is stopping their ability to propagate and continue themselves. That's why things like destroying churches and destroying the cultural distroyal markers are part of genocide. And it's also why a lot of genocides they left the women and children alive. They would kill all the men, and they would take

the women in and they would breed with them. They might kill the kids sometimes, but it was this The goal was not necessarily were we need to kill all of you, It's we want to kill this this culture, this population. UM. I think the I think the Yeah, I think the parallel he's trying to make here or there or she U is that that like that type of like genocidal cultural destruction is targeted against specific groups. The difference here is with this type of like you know,

he's he's writing this for other anarchists. He's pointing out, like our destructive urge, our cultural urge isn't even for a specific group, it's just for everything, and that can be unhealthy sometimes sometimes you know, there's ways to do a total destroy that's totally fine, but that can go to unhealthy places. Now, he's not equating like ethnic cleansing with that. He's like they are like they are different.

But when when your total destroy urges against all of culture, then yeah, that that can like that's something you should probably ponder. Yeah, I mean that's definitely I would agree that that's the thing that's potentially problematic, right, like with a number of different desires, Uh, there's a way in which that can lead to people doing really fucked up things. Yeah, It's like it's like it's pointing out that that type of accelerationism not specific to ideology, but just like accelerationism

in general. I mean I think when I when I talk about things like the fact that because not every culture commits genocides and every civil civilization does UM, and throughout history there have been more that found the idea repugnant than found the idea acceptable UM. But it is really a consistent thing in history, And I think the lesson with that isn't necessarily that everything could end in genocide.

So I don't think the lesson is necessarily like, oh, you should look at make total destroys if you know the this kind of trend in anarchist thought could lead

to genocide. It's that people in groups are nearly always capable of killing a shipload of other people for a variety of reasons if applied in the proper ways, And so those of us who seek mass movement should always be conscious of that, because human beings in large groups can do wonderful things, but there's a long history of them doing really fucked up shit, sometimes in ways that surprised the people that got the large group of human

beings together in the first place. The other thing I wanted to bring up is kind of more circling back to the Dumer kind of idea UM, because yeah, a big part of the book is trying purposely is to dissolution people with this idea of global revolution and disolution people with the idea that we can save the earth

because we can't UM. So that's a big thing. And for I think, I think for some people, if you stop right there and you that's how you and that thought, yes, that does lead to numeriism obviously, like that that is, that is, but the books, the book doesn't stop there. The book continues on from there. Now they continue on from a nihilistic standpoint. I'm not a nihilist. I prefer certinism. I prefer discordinism. But those two things are pretty common.

Like there, they are more similar than not. Um is that you can be disillusioned with global revolution and the idea to save the earth, but that should not change what we do or how we feel or operate as anarchists. It's not that we should be disillusioned and then do nothing and step aside. That we should be disillusioned and then find that disillusionment itself a form of liberation, like the freeing nature of being free from this idea of revolution.

Is that like no, we are living our lives now, don't live for a revolution, live your life now, and do things now because that's what you actually have. So it's like that type of nihilistic, absurdist, discordian things. This is, this is this is This is where I come back to having problems with it again because this this is literally just there is no alternative except it's it's yeah and that do energy. I mean, but that's how I live like that. I think I think this is a

bad I think that's a bad plan. And I think if if you look, if you look at what happens with because you know, this, this was the thing that was really big in the American anarchist movement, like in you know, from about just and seventeen like roughly now,

and it's like people were rising too. Yeah that didn't succeed like that, like not really like but I think like like this is like I think, I think this is like like one of the reasons it didn't, we were like, Okay, this is like the thing that's important. One of the things is the important of revolutions, even when they don't succeed, is that for a very brief window you actually can like it becomes it becomes possible to imagine another world, and what what what this entire

thing is saying is don't do that. That's not that's not that's that is not what it is. Absolutely this is no no, okay, can face the sentence, Yeah, like yeah, okay, so what what what what? What I'm saying here is that what what they've abandoned, right, the thing that they're giving up when when they give up revolution, when they're like, this is a progressive myth, this is like theology. What what they've abandoned completely is our human capacity to actually

shape a different world. What they're arguing is that, like the the you know, this essentially, that the combination of ecological and social forces are strong enough that humans humans no longer have the capacity to reshape the world into a way that is different than this, and that this is now the eternal presence, and you know and and yeah, inside of the eternal present, they're saying, you should be fighting for the same things you should be fighting for,

like you know, you should you should be in your own sort of local domain. You should be like, I mean, there're so of the recommendations are wild, Like I think I think their conservation stuff is sketchy, given I mean, it doesn't. But it doesn't apply to an eternal present though, Like they lay out, like the world is changing a lot and will for the next fifty years, Like there will be massive changes and how things are set up in the next like in the next century, and we

need to take advantage of that. We need to turn those liabilities into assets and start making those little anarchies like that. That that is what it's trying to do. And I would add as well that as it points out the situations in Bassic, Stooke and Bangladesh, a difference in the present and will be in the future. You know.

What I think is is trying to be sort of drilled in here is that at least in the text and how I read it, UM, is that yes, things will be different in different parts of the wood, and probably maybe they won't be this, you know or as the what this is, they won't be you know, this one global revolution. But at the end of the day, Um, I think what it's trying to emphasize is that we

don't have the structures. And I think what part of what is trying to emphasize is that we don't have its structures in place right now to launch an instruction we can meaningfully defend. And so that is the sort of thing we should be focusing on. But but they, but they, but this this this, this is going back to my problem with it, going going back to the thing where they go on the rant about how anarchists are like a permanent cultural majority and will never become

a majority. Is that even even in situations where people had that capacity and did it they go back, they project back onto it, go no, no, no, no, they couldn't have done that. Like it's it's not about it's it's it's they they have a belief and this is something that they do explicitly say that that anarchist will always be a permanent minority. Right there, There will always

be an active but permanent minority. And that is the like like that specifically, I think is just an actual rejection of the belief that we collectively can make a

better future. Because if if if you think that our ideas that you know, if being free, right, if if a society, if you think that that is permanently always going to be a minority, you are you know, you are condemning you're condemning the future to the people who don't believe that, and and I I understand why, especially if you know, if, if, if, if the only thing you've ever known is fifty years of when the new

Liberals actually did the thing right. They took over the entire world, restructure of the entire world economy, seized every government. Like if if that's what you lived through, I understand why you would think that. But I think the fact that it was possible to do it from the other direction is in some ways a sense that like, yeah, we could do it too. I don't know, Sorry, I will stop harping on this one specific point. It just extremely annoys me. I think it's not giving up the

idea that the world can be better. It's that we don't need to have the majority of people be anarchists to make the world better. We can still spread our own anarchies and people don't need to self subscribe as anarchists. But as long as we start building those systems in the places around us, people start using them, and people might start like living them out, even if they don't call themselves anarchists. Right, Like, the majority of people will

probably prefer some some type of state or government. Right. You can even look at Rosa and be like, yeah, it's still is state issue in some ways, but some ways not right, Like it's it's it's going We're not going to get an anarchist world. That's not going to happen, but we can make it better through the lens of anarchy.

And I think that's what it's kind of trying to say. Yeah, I I think it's it's worth acknowledging that, like, yeah, the majority of people are never going to be what anarchists are right now, which is people who comprehensively reject the systems they live in. Most people are always going to think more like well, I want to be comfortable. I want to I support changes kind of that that, you know, fix this thing that I've noticed a problem

or that thing. Most people are never going to comprehensively reject the system. But I do have hope that in time and given you know, space to build things and show people other ways and improve life for people, you can get to a point where most people believe a lot of the things that I think are important. Yeah, and I think that's what's time. I think that's sorry.

I think that's what the as specificitis UM tend to advocate for in terms of through the process of social institution in these larger movements, generalizing the ideas of anarchist ideas as a whole, making them more common throughout the population. It's only trying to get each and every boost in the world to self identify as an anarchist, communists or whatever. It's more so that you're trying to spread these ideas

to the point where they are. I suppose the common sentiment the popular will yeah, like I it's it's um, it's like the point of culture jamming and and and ship like that, Like it's the the idea that like it doesn't so much matter, like like like what matters is inserting the things you think are important into the culture and getting people to identify with them and understand them. The terms that they specifically use aren't aren't as important,

like that that's not really what matters. Well, okay, I don't think they're arguing that though, because I mean, like do they have lines like this. We cannot, however, remake the entire world. There are not enough of us, there never will be. But then you know, they like they they they specifically talk about the oh well, they don't have to all be anarchists, and you know. I mean,

here's their line. There is unfortunately little little evidence from history that the working class, never mind anyone else, is intrinsically predisposed to libertarian ecological revolution thousands of years of authoritarian socialization favor of the jack boot. Neither we nor anyone else could create a libertarian or global or ecological

global future by expanding social movements further. There is no reason to think that, in the absence of such a vast ex bance and global transformation concurrent to our desires

will ever happen. I think I think, I think the keyword there is global, Like, yeah, that's they're trying to break with that, and it's important, Like they're writing this specifically for anarchists who are kind of already nihilistic, kind of already anti sif right, They are writing this for other anarchists, that this isn't a book to radicalize a normy or a communist by anarchists for other anarchists to be like, Hey, you already kind of think the world's

kind of going to ship. Here's a way that we can still do things despite the world being shitty. Because once you're once you're disillusioned, it's hard to be illusioned again.

Like it's it's hard once you give up on the idea of global revolution, once you give up the idea of global collapse, it's hard to re enter those even if you see things happening the world, like there can still be uprisings and revolts, absolutely, but there is a distinction of between uprising and the revolts, and like a global revolution, right and specifically, like the Marxist letters to sounds, And I'd also like to um continue the paragraph you're

reading from there. We had said that as anarchists, sweet, he had said, or they had said that, as anarchists, we are not the seed of the future society in the shell of the old, but merely one of many elements from which the future is forming. That's okay, when faced with such scale and complexity, there is value in non cervile humility, even for in such Yeah, but this is this is just this is just giving up. This

is this is the old. It's too complicated, it's too like and like I think, I don't know, like it's it's it's it's giving up on it's giving up on trying to do any kind of on on like humans as a whole trying to do any kind of large scale like you know, like it's trying to do transformation of what the society. I disagree to continue that that coote to give up hoope. For global anarchists, revolution is not to resign oneself to anarchy, remaining any to protest.

Seaweed puts it well. Revolution is not everywhere or nowhere. Any bioregion can be liberated through a succession of events and strategies based in the conditions unique to it, mostly as the grip of facilitation. That area weakens through its own volition for the efforts of its inhabitants. So aization didn't succeed everytones, and so it's undoing might only occur

to varying degrees in different places at different times. Even if an area is seemingly fully under the control of authority, there always places to go to live in, to love in, and to resist from, and we can extend those spaces. The global situation may seem beyond us, but the local never is. And I think that's beautiful. I think that's like a That's one of the things that keeps me alive is ideas like that. Honestly, and at the same time. I also hold the opinion that none of us, including

this author, is a fortune teller. You know. The desert's picture of the future is not the only possibility, you know. And I think in a lot of ways and a lot of always I believe that they can and have already been proven wrong, you know. Like, and there's an issue that I really take a lot of contention with the book. Part of the book that really pisces me off is the sort of persistence of the overpopulation myth. I don't remember it being so consistent since I reread

it um a couple of weeks ago. And so this sort of nonchalance the author seems to have about like mass die offs and that kind of thing, you know, I think that's very troubling to me. That's very specific to It's a type of anti civil literature that's like we view civilization is going to progress towards genocide anyway, and the way to actually avoid more deaths is to kind of help the collapse along because that will end civilization quicker. So therefore less people, less people will be born,

and less people will have to die. So that's the type of thinking they have. I don't necessarily agree with that um necessarily, but yeah, that is that is very typical of this type of literature, so again because it is written mostly for other anti sid anarchists, but like, yeah, it's not like pro genocide. It's saying genocide will happen.

So the way to make less of it is to actually kind of slowly start kind of help helping the crumbles along essentially and while still you know, making people's lives better in your immediate community, like with that, with that very local focus. So again not not saying I necessarily agree with that, but that's the that's the type of thought it's engaging with. I mean, I think that's

true of some of it. But there is definitely a lot of like panic about there's going to be nine billion people and like population growth of all the over population stuff is a little iffy. You know, there is a there's a discussion to have on caring capacity, but we are not there yet. We right now we way overproduced for them for the amount of people we have. Yeah, that and that, I don't know. That also frustrated me immensely.

They're like, yeah, we we have consider they're talking about carring capacity, right, and they're like, oh, we already can't we have a billion people going hungry And it's like, yeah, but that's not about the carrying capacity. That's just that's that's which was literally that and that idea gained more prevalence after Dessert was written. We kind of more understood, like like culturally that it is a distribution issue, not

necessarily a production issue. Now we do overproduce, right because and the amount of production we have contributes this tough like climate change, and that is bad. So we should tone down production, but we should make the ways that it's more sustainable and ecological. Um, yeah, that I think that does point towards the data nature of the text.

I think Also my my last like thing with it is I think I think it could have benefited a lot from like in an indigenous stewardship perspective, because the way it thinks about it's particularly the way things but wildness versus observation is just very messy. And yeah, if

it falls, it falls. It does a better job of it than some other antis of things that I've seen, but it definitely falls into the like trap of like here is the wild and then any attempt to manage it is uh, you know, is is civilization and you need to go back to the wild, and it's like, well, this is already stewarded and managed. That is the one. Yeah. It does fall on that slope of like nature being another that is sacred, which isn't necessarily a great idea

nor is it really true. Yeah, this is very two, very two ten. Yeah. Right, So I think the the book is critical concitation and that sort of binary, and I agree that indigenous stewardship perspective was sorely needed. But at the same time, I do think that the way that the book criticizes UM or rather just points out UM, the su conservation may have been and may still be

new for some people. You know, the idea that these sorts of government conservation projects which sort of preside over this sort of static vision of nature and ecology and stuff that is supposedly threatened by humanity. UM. I think criticizing that approach to nature it's good. I mean the sort of romanticization of the wild that is very typical of anti sive text and thought. UM is verty much

anti sive. But I do believe that people should look ah or should rather resist these sorts of conservation impulse as I was rereading it a couple of weeks ago. I wanted to know, UM, what you guys thought of the section of the book that speaks of the different modern different, the the idea of fourth and fifth generation war Oh boy, that's a UM. I feel that that has been UM sort of a contributional approach to analyzing conflict.

So I figured out, as you have been in you know, actual war zoons robot, that you might have a thing to see. UM. I mean, it's the kind of thing that we should probably cover in in detail on because this is a lot of like William Lynde stuff. I think he's the guy who came up with the idea of like fourth generation war less at least, and it's UM,

it's basically the idea. It's the idea that warfare UM today is conducted through a lot of stuff that's not conventional weaponry, right, so stuff like UM like like like putting bought networks together to like push social division, you know through um social media, UM or carrying out cyber attacks on infrastructure, disinformation UM, all of that kind of stuff, which is I think accurate. I've been reporting on what

you could call fifth generation warfare since some UM. I think it's I think to the extent that it's relevant here. I think one thing that people in the left need to acknowledge is that they have UM been blindsided by the effectiveness that the far right has adapted to UM the key components of this kind of warfare. And I think nothing is more key than social engineering and disinformation UM.

And they've been much more successful at it over the last release ince twos in fifteen in particular, UM, than the left has by basically everywhere, every single and by I think, every single measure of of success. And I think this is something we should save in depth for

another day UM. But I think that it is worth acknowledging that this is And I also think that and this is again part of a bigger conversation we talked about the concept of like culture jamming, when we talked about like operation mind fuck you know, which is Discordian idea UM, all of which you can see is kind of pre predecessors to the concepts of fifth generation warfare.

I think there's a strong argument to be made that those efforts by leftists in the eighties and nineties in particular actually contributed to the substantial right wing victories that

we're seeing right now in this space. UM, and I think maybe it's I think there's a number of reasons for that, um, including some to some extent, the idea of arrogance that um that what that we were just too smart, that they were never going to figure out how to utilize the same means we had or to kind of judo like take the momentum for that and spin it around on us. But they were and they did, and yeah, that'll that'll lead into another episode. We'll have

to talk about this in more detail. That's something like Grant Morrison actually talks a lot about in regards to discordionism and this type of how how you know, he used to work for a company called Disinformation back when Disinformation was yeah, and now it's like one of the leading castes of mass death in the world, right, so he That is something that Morrison talks about a lot in terms of how they did have that arrogance and now the same forces that they used in hopes of

making the world better and now being used to regress the world and make it worse. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I had a big copy of Disinformation on my coffee table when I was nineteen. I just ordered, Oh good, there's some fun essays in their Garrett. Um, all right, that'll probably, I mean, did you have more to say on that? And yeah, I just wanted to see that, you know, regardless of the uncertain future, um, regardless of your stance

on get Its message, however flawed. UM here now, as the minor goods in Alice Suxley's Island so often repeat, um, we can and should pay attention to what we can do to support ourselves for whatever outcome you go through, you know, projects within the spaces we inhabit. I believe that anarchism could be the seed of the new will. I do believe that we have an impact, a huge impact on society and on politics, and I believe there are still many possibilities for liberty still. Yeah, I I

do as well. I think that acknowledging you know, failures both of of of you know, ideas and of methods doesn't mean giving up hope or or ignoring the successes of those same things which which we're are also present. Um. Yeah, so I don't know, stay optimistic. Read something uh doesn't have to beat but just go go read a thing read Yeah, back of your shampoo, B but especially if

it's Dr Brauner's a lot of good stuff in there. UM. All right, that's gonna do it for us this week today at least welcome to It could happen here the podcast we already recorded and I messed up, um or something happened with the zoom and we lost the audio. So now we're recording it again as is, as is the cycle of life. UM. Thankfully I can. I'm now on my tenth shot of espresso of the day and

it is eight pm, so I'm I'm ready. I'm I'm ready this time to a We're gonna be doing another one of our chronicles into open source and ocean style research or open source verification and this kind of side of of generally you know, this is kind of a field of like anti fascist research, UM and journalism. So we're looking at one of these case studies. UM. But today I have someone with me, Alistair from Opossum Press is here to talk about sent and UH and this

type of research. Hello, Hey, thank you for being with me again on this on this call, on this very Deshavo experience for us. UM. I would actually first like to talk about how Opossum Press got started as like a collective of of people dedicated towards this goal of, you know, surveying the fascist creep. Um. I had an interest in and journalism. I have no experience in it, but I have other friends that are into writing and stuff, and I just kind of reached out to friends like, Hey,

would anybody be interested in doing this? And um, there are several friends that were like, hell, yeah, let's do this. And that's pretty much it. After we got it all formed. Um, we set up some open source intel like workshops and we've about every other week we get together for two or three hours and learned stuff that sounds that sounds lovely actually, Um, most of my stuff is usually done alone in my computer dark when I'm on my again

tenth cup of coffee of the day. Do we go s into a group of people like that sounds like it could be actually kind of fun, So yeah, we're gonna In our last episode, we talked about how I tracked down and found out who written house was the night of of that happening in Kenosha Um and today and me talking about someone related to January six, um, the infamous zip tie guy as he became known for like two days on the internet before he got his

actual day. UM. First, I I guess I probably I probably in case you haven't listened to the previous episode I did on Written House, so probably kind of explain what open source stuff is and what like Osan is and verification. So it's about trying to track down information using open sources UM on the Internet. So in terms of like nothing is it's it's all. It's it's it's it's it's already sitting there. Nothing requires like special access,

nothing requires you know, you're to hack into anyone system. UM, it's it's stuff is just the stuff that's already sitting there. The data, whether that be you know, geographical data, personal data, data from social media accounts, data from every time you've entered your email into a random website that you maybe didn't know quite what's going on, but you did it. Something that's that gets stored somewhere as day to and

someone can probably find it. UM. So it's all this stuff about you on the Internet that is all open if you do the digging. UM. Often cases this results in going through social media profiles. UM. That is a good portion of Osan's work is learning how to use Google really well and how to how to how to go through social media. Um, start using like Google search operators, start using social media tools that help you sort through information.

Because the information is there, you just have to learn how to sort through it, right, because there's just so much of it. Um. So that's kind of the just to what open source stuff is. You mean, eventually you can get into the stuff like using like Python, using code and scrapers like all that stuff is there too, but for our purposes, we're gonna stick to the more simplistic stuff because this is an audio format and I'm I'm not going to start explaining Python code on a podcast. Um.

So let's let's let's turn back the clocks a year. Um, a little over a year, and it's a genu where he six what's kind of you or your collective's reaction just to kind of watching things unfold? You know, Like as a researcher, every every time I look at these types of you know, protests, you know, whether they be big or small, always part of my brains like trying to make connections and do stuff right. So as January six is unfolding, what's what's kind of going through everyone

at a post and press his head. The first thing that seemed to be collective in everybody's mind was, oh my god, none of these people are wearing face masks. Yeah. Like the immediate thing is this is probably going to be really easy for a lot of people. There's nobody. Nobody is in any type of like block or trying to hide their identity in at all, something you see

the European fascists actually doing more often. There was a think of a video from Germany of a whole bunch of far right dudees just to ian black block because black blocks a tactic. Um. So yeah, but in the States they're specifically January six, it was Yeah, no one was really worried about keeping their identity secret. They really did not think what they were doing was wrong. I think the other thing we were a lot of us

were really angry. Um, just like we had been like yelling that this was gonna happen, screaming it out, like trying to get people to pay attention, and we got blown off so much. I remember, just like a few days before, I got in an argument with a Facebook friend and like people need to be paying attention, like they're planning something. They're like, oh, it's fine, it's fine, and then you know, just a few days later, I'm like,

oh is it fine? Like that is kind of always the curse of surveilling all of these things, whether they be like a specific event or some movement in general. Right, people who are really into q and on before the Libs knew what Qumanan was and we're warning about it for years before you know it resulted in people dying. Um, Right, That's that's kind of always the curse of these things. So it's it's you get you get the mix of the shock and horror of the thing finally happening in

a weird relief. It's it's it's it's it's a very bizarre feeling to watch these things unfold because you're like, oh, I'm vindicated, but it sucks that I'm vindicated. Right. I remember, like the December watching all these groups, like I was just it was just filled with dread. Um, I knew something was gonna happen. I didn't know what was gonna happen, and it was just so much anxiety. And then like it's funny, January six after it happened, like it all

went away. I was able to get a decent night sleep just because there was I didn't have that build up of suspense of what what is it gonna be, what's it gonna look like? How bad is it going to be? Kind of had that release. Yeah, Unfortunately they were all like amateur, didn't know what they were doing,

and it wasn't as bad as it could have been. Yeah. Well, I think as for the open source stuff, I'm gonna kind of walk us through chronologically and of in terms of the journey of zip Tie Guy because I was doing like archiving on January six, but zip Ti Guy was really the only dude I was interested in identifying. There was there was a lot of other people doing

really great identification work. I was also generous. Six I was going through all the social media history of Ashley Babbitt, archiving all of her Twitter and Facebook like years of stuff. I was to chronicle how she went from like an Obama voter to a Q and on from proponent. So that was what I was doing, and I was writing an article with Belling Cat about that um. But the only only other guy I wanted to identify was zip tie Guy because he was really interesting. He was one

of the few guys that was masked up. Um he had what he had visible weapons on him. He was obviously carrying zip ties. You know. It gives you images of like, oh yeah, it's like they're planning to capture and execute people. That was like the general kind of

vibe um of that. So he is the only person I was actually put work into identifying, and I put a decent amount of work in Now I I failed where other people succeeded, and we can talk about like why in a sec But for like a day at least, all we had to go on was the picture of the guy holding the zip ties in a mask. Um. There's a few other pictures of him around from that day, but it's mostly mostly one picture and the biggest clue that we had to start with, Um, what what what what?

Why don't you explain what the what the first clue is and how that may be piqued your interest. He had two patches on his vest, and one of them was a thin blue line patch, but it was in this uh shape of the state of Tennessee. So so yeah, in terms of having a decent lead, that is like okay, well that that narrows it down to one of fifties states probably right, Yeah, I should say I'm from Knoxville, so like it be in Tennessee that I picked up

on that because that's my state. Yeah, that it becomes a local problem. I And as someone in Oregon, I definitely understand that feeling of of yeah, when fascism becomes a local problem of Yeah. So that definitely piqued your interests specifically, but then it also gives a really good lead for like where to look because osar, he's not trying to do a meta thing by tricking us into giving us a false lead. Generally people don't do that

as often in real life as they do in television. Um, but there's still has plenty of other ways to detect. I mean, I I love I love detecting, and there's there's enough, there's enough stuff to do otherwise that making it needlessly complicated as honestly, I'm fine with it not being that. Um So, yeah, we had we had that to go off initially, so starting looking for like far right activity in Tennessee. Now, I was an outsider, so I didn't really know where to start in terms of

specific rallies. But I know you uh at what point did you start looking trying to like go through pictures of specific rallies to try to like match clothing or stuff. I think it was probably it may have been that day or the day after when I started going through the notebooks that I had, like names of just people we suspected may become problems, um, and I started looking at their profiles again and you know, didn't find anything.

And in our research that we had already done, we didn't see anything on Yeah, I mean that was kind of the case for me as well. With just the picture of the zip tie a guy with the patch, I mean, it's it's a lead, but there wasn't tons to go on. But thankfully, thankfully are are good friends. At January six, we're giving us more clues as because, as the Simpsons meme goes, videotaping this crime scene was

the best idea you ever had. Um. So, like January I think seventh, there was a live stream video that was kind of circulating through like anti fascist group chats um. It was. It was posted like publicly to get everyone's attention on it on January eight, um, but for like a day it was kind of passing through back channels and throughout in this live stream, which is Yeah, there was so many people were live streaming that night, and it is a kind of surreal thing to watch of them.

This this this live stream in particular, it is zip Ti guy if you was friends, um, I think his mom and a few and just running the people from January six all hanging out at a hotel room afterwards, like it's it is. It is the night of the sixth, and they're all just hanging out again totally like no masks, they're they're they're in a hotel lobby, no masks, um, and they're just like hanging out on chilling, like sitting on the couch and chatting for like half an hour.

It's one of the weirdest videos to watch. All all of the live streams from that night are so surreal because it is like this transitionary period of like after the capital attack, but before every before like people like gown out on them, so they don't really know how to behave They still think what they did was kind of fine, even though at this point I think like four or five people are dead, um, but it's so weird just watch them just interact like such normal people

in this moment like after they did this thing, then they go in this hotel room and they're acting completely normal. So it's it's just a weird video in general. But what it does have is someone in the same outfit as Zip Tie guy with no mask on. You actually actually can see his full face. Ye. Getting to see his full face was a big, big, big help because we everyone, everyone was looking for pictures of this guy without his mask all like for the entirety of the day.

So now having a whole video where we're gonna see like all of the angles of him was great. It was perfect. The best the best thing that was really the beauty of of all of of all of all the January six documentation is how many people were live streaming themselves doing crimes and their friends. Um it did. It did make the archiving and uh well the archiving part. Archiving is always painful and tedious, but it made the actual research afterwards a lot easier because there was so

much the documentation of it. So, yeah, we we got we got this video. I'm gonna explain how I kind of took this video and failed to reach the conclusion, and then we can talk about how you succeeded. But first, but first we're gonna hear some ads from our lovely

products and services. Robert was here for our previous recording uh that we tried to end I failed, and he made some very good jokes uh and very good segways about how all of our sponsors support insurrection, just like January six, And if I tried to repeat the jokes, it will be stupid. So I'm just gonna I'm just gonna give you the sense there was a joke, and now you're gonna be left with that dissatisfaction. So bye, goodbye.

Here's some ads. Okay, we're back, and I'm going to give an extremely brief rundown on how I failed to do. Uh well, I didn't fail to do research. I did research. I just didn't reach a proper conclusion. And I knew that. So the the the other the other thing about Zip tie Guy, he had he had the patch of like the sim blue line in Tennessee, and then it's then I soon after got the video of his face and

uh interacting with people. And the the other thing is I think, um we the hat he was wearing in the Zip tie Guy photo was I think was tracked back to be um our favorite coffee company, Black Rifle Coffy Merchandise. It was it was like, what was what was one of the hats they sell? So me, being clever, I'm like, okay, here's this Black Raper Coffee hat. This patch in Tennessee. I know Black Ripe Coffee is based

out of Tennessee. I'm gonna go look through everyone who works for Black Raffle Coffee, which I mean isn't a bad instinct as an outsider, but it did not. It did not succeed. But the funny thing is is that while looking through all the employees at Black Apple Coffee, all of them do look identical to Zip Tie guy.

They all same characteristics, They all look exactly the same on their their beards, their nose, their forehead, their hair, all of them identical, every single one of them, to the point where the only way I could tell that it wasn't a SIPTI guy was being like, Okay, no, he has a mole here, he has like a birthmark here this way, his like his eyes are his eye wrinkles are different. So it's like it's going down to the very like fine tuned facial features. Because all of

their face shapes are like identical. I think there's a point that I had the same instinct. I think I know there's a point that I went through, um the black Coffee Rifle, all of their people look. Um. I don't know if it was for Eric Wentel or if it was like maybe around the Rittenhouse stuff. I don't know. Uh. Yeah, So that that's that's what I spent my time doing,

is going through everybody who works there of Uh. But but by the time I kind of gave up on that of the identity was already discovered, um and posted by your team at a possum press. So how how did you get from you know, this zip Tygi picture than the light the archived livestream video of him without without a mask, to to the point where you could say, hey,

this is his name. But well, I was I wasn't even really in contact with Like we as a group weren't messaging each other trying to figure this out together, but we were, like it turns out a few of

us were working separately. So while I'm going through social media, um, a friend in Nashville was um going through pictures of the protests from there over the summer and they ended up finding about five different pictures, I think, and we knew we knew most of the people in the pictures that are maybe like one or two that we did not know, And one was always Eric Munchell and he's wearing the exact same gear he wore January six. Um, I say, Eric Munchell, we didn't know his name yet then,

so um. From there, we kind of we went ahead and posted what we had to Twitter, and then we went back to the social media and I started looking through the profiles that were the people we knew, and sure enough, one of them, Kurt Dennis, had a live stream that was telling the story, um, the same story that Eric Mutchell told him, that thirty minute video, and he actually while telling it, he's like, yeah, my buddy Eric.

So at that point we go to his friends list and sure enough, he only has one Eric there and it's Eric Munchell. And there we go to that page and find some of the same gear in the background of the pictures that he has publicly posted. Yeah, he like puts the pictures of him and his gear with like ums and yeah, you can you can track all of this like facial like like like like birthmarks and stuff. They're all the same. So, yeah, you and that that's you. Uh,

you definitely got him of Yeah, their own mistakes. Yeah, that's that's my favorite part. Like they they gave us his identity. They often, if not handing themselves to you on a silver pilladder, they at least have a platter um. They they often there's often enough bread, right. The reason why these things are solved because there are enough bread comes to follow and often they kind of leave pretty

big chunks of bread. Um. Just the fact that again added to the surreal aspect of that whole live stream video, the fact that he's like you matched it by telling the same You can hear them someone tell the same story. It's just such a weird, surreal thing. Yeah. So I think in terms of like oas and stuff, what this case study in particular really highlights is the importance of archival stuff, right, some why you were able to solve

this and not me because I wasn't. I mean, I I did my own archival thing for archiving, like the video. But the way that you were able to really crack this open and everyone else who worked on it is because you had like those lists of connections of people who are already kind of active in this like al right far right scene within your local community. Like you already had documentation of the major players who they interact with, right you. You already had pictures of this guy in

gear with other known people. So the fact that there was already previously work archived really made the success of this so much more possible. That's what they but People's Plaza and Nashville during their protests, they were really big on documenting. Um they documented everything with the police and um any counter protesters they would. They had professional photographers out there making sure we had good, clear quality pictures of like everybody on the other side as well, and

that definitely helped us a lot. Yeah, because especially before January six, they there was they did a decent job of archiving themselves, well not not archiving, but like filming themselves and documenting themselves. And then you know, it takes takes other research to then archive that. So not only is important just to like look at the research and look at like the documentation of the that people do of themselves, but then make sure that you have a

source for that that's not their own uploading of it. Right. So, like a great example is like all of the live streams from January six, including like this one from the hotel room. Pretty soon it was deleted by the person who posted it because they realized, oh maybe I shouldn't have this living record of my crimes. Um. But at that point people already saved the video. They they already like I already ran it through a video of saving

program that I had. UM. So it's it's important not only to again archiving having having having previous documentation of people and known players, but then as new information is coming out, make sure you make separate copies of that for your own sake so that you actually have it, and then you're not gonna be stuck looking for something that's gone. Right. The worst case scenarios to like you know that there was an important thing, but you just

don't have access to it anymore. It's like you you remember seeing it, you didn't save it, and now it's gone. That's a horrible feeling to do when you're trying to get this kind of research done. UM. And like it happens, we all, we all make mistakes like this. UM, I definitely have it happened to me actually this week. Yeah, it happens all the time, and it happens to be. It happens to be all the time. I'll look at

something and be like, I should probably save this. I get distracted or I just don't want to because archiving is boring and tedious, and then I check again, that's gone. I'm like, well that's should I should have archived it. Yeah.

So on. On top of all of the archiving stuff, which in general, anti fascist research is really that's the thing that really excels even like um above above journalism is like, you know, getting like traditional journalism is like getting a good documentation of like key fascist players in your area, key people who are kind of pushing far right stuff and far right violence. Actually getting like a good a good, a good idea of who they are

and having that knowledge always handy. Um is something that this type of research is is really that that is really what it excels at, or like what what the what those researchers excel at. This is the thing that they do very well. I think a lot of us probably started doing it just out of curiosity, looking into people, and that's that issaraily how I started, Like I've been

doing it long before. I just didn't know That's what it was called because like I'd see somebody make a messed up common online, I'm like, who is this person? And then you know, trying to find as much as I can about them? Yeah, that's that is certainly how I got started with this type of thing, because it can it can be fun to look for bad people. It is, it is. It is kind of pleasurable, UM and one of one of the again another big contributing factor. And how you got zip tie guy? How how I

got written? How how a lot of this stuff works? Um is uh the beauty of Facebook as a research tool because often in order in order in order to do the archiving, you need to have stuff to archive, and a lot of the stuff that gets posted from these things by the people doing them UM is done on Facebook, or at least it used to write the past five years, really, Facebook has been the main main source of this UM. Now it's maybe now people are kind of getting wise and maybe some stuff is moving

to telegram. Facebook is becoming a little little bit less important of a platform for this type of research. And I know Facebook has changed the way that they um that you can use their service, So it does make research kind of harder in some ways, but but even still it is it is one of the better tools to um to dig into certain types of people because there is certain types of people who are going to

be more likely to use Facebook. Um and Yeah, in terms of how getting Facebook was the method, it's not where the place where you're able to make the link between the fascists. You already knew and and eric um because of because you are you already you you already knew who the players were, and the Facebook had the visualized network to actually make those connections. So Facebook itself and social media in general is really is really useful.

And the in terms of how this operate is like going through friends lists is really easy, um, but oftentimes a lot of people will not maybe have those public um and what wich. Then this again, it's not a dead road. You can still look through likes, you can still look through shares, you can still look through like, um if you like people are tagged in photos. Um it really it really is a is a great is a great system that is good at making you not have privacy. That is the thing. It really it really

excels it. Yeah, and even even if people don't have like an active social media presence per se UM, it can still be really useful in getting specific names of people or or just make or just having a connection be known like this. This was mostly how I was able to identify the all the anonymous UM riot cops in when when the Portland Police Bureau took took away

their badge numbers and names. UM is that I could get like a list of cops and we could start figuring out like, okay, this is probably this is this is this is pre cops previously on the right team, right, you can start doing facial matching UM. And then if I want to learn out, if if I want to if I want to learn more information about like their first name, and more information about them in general, even if they don't have a social media profile, often their

wife might or their mom might. You know, there's a UM. And in terms of fun sentences to say, really learning how to exploit people's family as a weakness is is

wonderful UM for this type of stalking stalking violent bad people. UM. Because yeah, because a lot of a lot of a lot of the riot cops were smart enough to not to at least to either not have their presence at all on the internet, um or to have it very locked down in terms of, you know, no one can see their posts, no one can see their friends, no

one can see anything. But still their wife will occasionally tag them in photos or uh maybe not even photos of them, but like they'll they'll just take them in a photo of like their kid or something. And then this just creates more ways to make connections so that you can, you know, learn more about these specific people. Um, because sometimes that's fun and interesting. Yeah, I've noticed some

people with socks that I've found their identity. It's by going through the likes and seeing, um, you know, the same woman. It is always the first to put a heart react there, and you can go to their pages. Sometimes it's a little if you get through their pictures and you see a picture of the guy there with they'll have like somebody in the comments, oh Mark looks really good. There something you know, naming the husband, and

from there you can get the last thing. You know, you've know the wife's last name, you have a good chance of that being their last name. Yeah. Yeah, So family families really is really great for finding people because because like all of the other recent research is is learning how to make these open source connections, right, A lot a lot of it is connections and networking, and people usually always have an innate connection and networking and

that that that is their family. UM. And often this like extends out in terms of you know, political organizing, whether you're part of you know, militias or just kind of smaller groups. Yeah, that is another network. UM. Friends

is another at work. But you know, for people who are kind of are are more locked down, it is possible to find the information about people, um, you know, especially if if they had, like if they have like a not very common last name, you know, that can make finding information about them much easier if you're using

tools like Facebook. Um. And then it's you know, just a matter of doing all the other you know, open source research of you know, comparing clothing, um, you know, and comparing to what other kind of information you already know about the person, email addresses, phone numbers if you can, you know, get that, get that kind of stuff as well. But I think that's all he had on zip tie guy out mostly m Yeah, he was a really easy one.

There's not a whole lot to really dive into their Yeah, no for for someone for someone who was one of the few people masked up wasn't was not was not that hard to find. I mean, yeah, of course, the fact that he was found by local people in his area not surprising. Um that's another thing I did. Fashion research is really good at, is that type of local research, because you know, they they have they have all those local connections, they have those local um documentation of like

a political events that have happened in their area. So again it's the the importance of of having stuff archives and having stuff like sorted and having stuff organized well so you can access your archive of information is really important. It's it's it sucks that it's it's the part of OS and I hate the most. Everyone. Everyone hates. Everyone hates. I'm I'm sure there's some sick of out there who likes it, but everyone else, everyone else hates all of

the We hate all this organizing and sorting. And I find archiving to be tedious. Archiving videos, live streams, it's tedious, it's difficult. Um, it's done, it's time consuming, it's repetitive, it's not generally not a good time, but it is so useful and in the long run of trying to get these like a list of of like established players in your area. This is how you start seeing patterns, right. You need to have this information already laid out so

you can actually watch the patterns unfold. Otherwise it's just a whole bunch of chaotic information that means nothing. So it's it's super important, as as much of a bummer as it may be. Yeah, let's see, UM, is there anything you've been working on since then that you like that you would like to talk about, or any upcoming

research projects? Right now, I'm really focused on our local UM school board and you know, like many towns across the country, we have fascists trying to take it over and going to the meetings, and so I've been watching that group very closely for the last several months, since

probably about October. Our school year, we started out without a mask mandate UM and a couple of parrots UM who's children like they're there, I mean a compromise like their their kids need the everybody else to wear a mask. So their parents sued the school board and our governor UM to have a mass band aid and the judge issued an injunction and like the next Monday, all the schools had to wear a mask and the anti mask crowd is like losing their ship over it. Still, um,

trying to figure out how to fire the judge. Um, it's like, yeah, we have a member of Patriot Church who's involved in it, and you know they're the ones with the Church of pland Parenthood. It's Ken Peter too. I think he's from Washington, yes, yeah, and he's he's moved down here. Um. I think he still goes up there to the to the church stuff, but most of his time is spent down here in Tennessee and causing just as much trouble as he does up there and

his followers. So I'm curious to see how how does a research project like this school board thing differ from like the research surrounding you know, trying to identify someone at January six. Um, For one, this is local. It's you know, I'm going to the school board meetings. UM. I know it's easier to know where to look for this because like I'm watching it as it happening where you, like, you know, January six. Most of those people you have

no clue where to even start from. UM. So this more now, it's it's monitoring and documenting as we've you know, figure out who these people are, like linking Telegram names with Facebook names and all of that. So I guess now it's more record keeping and getting that documentation done early so when one of them goes too far, we

have and we haven't ready. I mean, that's that's that's the sad part where it's like you're watching inevitable inevitability almost is it con mean, but that's yeah, that's also how like January six works. Right, we were able to identify these people because there was a lot of documentation of a lot of major players already. Right, So a lot of the work in between these big protests and events is is the is this is the slow, tedious documentation because we have to do it now so that

it's a useful later. Let's you know, a big part of research is like, yeah, trying to spot potential you know, issues and archiving it and then if the issue ever becomes a bigger issue, you already have information on it, right, whether that be you know, watching someone online who you might think is who, like watching someone who's like Nazi who you might be worried that like they're posting and plans about how to kill people you're like, Okay, so

probably look into this dude, because he's doing this in case he does something in the future. Um it is that is the kind of uh it sucks because yeah, you are watching this thing where you feel kind of helpless,

but you know that documenting it is worthwhile. Um they Yeah, it's the same thing where like you don't want to be vindicated, but if it does happen, it's better to be prepared because I don't think people realize like how much anti fascist research, how much of this type of like ohs and stuff like my journalism, Like most of the work that you put into it is never seen. Even if you do complete investigations. Sometimes by the end you're like it's getting getting them, getting them out in

enough time for them to be useful. Sometimes it isn't even worth it. Um. So you know a lot of it is, you know, writing stuff and doing research that never actually sees the light of day for a long long time. Right with Eric Mantchell, we had like probably twenty people we had on our list too, and he

wasn't even one of them. Yeah, so you do all this and like, on one hand, it almost felt in a moment like all of that we did was really for nothing, but now it did lead to Yeah, it did lead and even when you do find the correct answer, sometimes sometimes could via circumstances. You know, it's not something you need to post about immediately. Sometimes it's worth just you know, hanging onto um and not being super super

public about every horrible thing you find. It's not like you don't need to post every time you find a horrible thing on Telegram. You don't. You don't need to tell Twitter that. It's like it's it's about collecting these things and keeping them there for future use. Um. Well, thank you so much for coming on to talk with me again, um, after after already already discussing, uh, mostly the same things. Where can people follow your stuff online?

We're on Twitter at um at a possum press really easy. Yeah, we're on Facebook. We don't actually do much on Facebook though. Um. Yeah, as we've discussed now, you probably probably shouldn't. I mean, like in in a lot of ways, a lot of like fascist organizing that used to be done in primarily like Facebook groups or just even just like through like like incidental organizing through just through like posting and cross posting. A lot of that has been moved over to Telegram.

At this point, Telegram is kind of the new main nexus, whereas Facebook and like the days of the early alt right, Facebook was a pretty big nexus for like the more normis right. You know, it's there, there is actually fascist forms that we're doing organizing, but as a place for again, like a lot of people in January six, who didn't really know what they were doing was wrong. They were mostly you know, make American great again people or quing on people. A good portion of like most of them

were not you know, swastika waving Nazis. Um. They may they may agree with fascist ideas, but they don't they don't self describe as Nazis. So like um. But we're even seeing after after January six, with you know, um Facebook like cracking down on these groups, other platforms like Parla going offline, a lot of these normies themselves or

even migrating onto Telegram. Um. So you know, Facebook used to be a really great research tool, and I'm using it less and left less and less often now unfortunately, because I mean it really didn't have a lot of strong suits. Telegram does have his own strong suits, but you know, it's it's still it's still different. I think the normy is moved into telegram is troubling though, because having a way easier time that is there. That is

the obvious thing is. Yeah, now that those groups are in closer proximity, it's easier for one to seep into the other, whereas before there was more of that distinction. Um. Yes, that is a worrying thing that I believe we've talked about before and we'll talk about again um in the future.

In terms of having this like fascist milieu or cultic milieu, UM of a place where the the amount of the amount of overlap between you know, your uncle who's a regular Conservative and you know a member of Adam Offen or you know someone who wishes they remember of Adam often um is very small. It's every these they are they are very close together. Yeah. Well, thank you for talking about all of these things on our on our second osand case study episode. Like guess big big Big

takeaways is uh. Archiving is great, archive live streams, archived things because it's better to have them um and not use them than not have them and need them. UM. And then you know, archiving and documenting local fascists is really great even for things beyond your locality, like in January six. Um, so those are those are my main takeaways from this and uh, you know, also everyone a black life coffee. They all they all look like everyone at day six, all of them do they do all right?

That doesn't for us? Thank you so much. I can follow the metoposus and press um. Good by everybody. Welcome back to it could happen here the only podcast you are legally allowed to listen to right now. Um, I'm Robert Evans. We talk about things falling apart, putting them back together, all that good stuff with me as just like sevent of the time. Is my co host Garrison Davis. Garrison, how are you doing today? I'm doing great. It is

early for you. Yeah, they have to, they have to drag me out of bed, but I I made it just and I'm excited to talk about as three. Okay, I have my second coffee already. Our topic is gun culture, uh and to discuss gun culture with me and a number of aspects of it, including how to maybe make a better one. Uh. Is Carl Casarda from Ranged TV. Carl,

welcome to the program. Hey, thanks for having me. I'm really stoked to be here, and it's a topic, as you can imagine with my work on Enrange TV, is a near and dear to my heart because it's a challenging one. We've got a lot of great things in this community and a lot of challenges too. Yeah. Gun YouTube has gotten some really interesting places in the last um. Really, it feels like most of the growth happened the last five six years, Like there's been a real significant increase

in Yeah. I feel like there's been like a wave. I feel like there's generations of gun two. There's like jen one, Gen two, Gen three in theres Russian back in the day and stuff totally Yeah, and so there's a whole thing there. There's there's generations of what was addressed in the conversation and the cultural significance as well

as the geary impact. I think we've got different kind of generations of the Yeah, and I think this stuff Obviously, when when aspects of gun YouTube go viral, it tends to be stuff that's like particularly problematic, But in my experience, most of it is just dudes shooting stuff to see what happens, or you know, trying out different guns and stuff like it is mostly if you're someone who you know believes in the right to bear arms, it's mostly pretty much just like people drying out guns, uh and

stuff with guns. Yeah, yeah, when things go viral, it's like my my experience with that, there's a number of reasons, right, One is that it's particularly gross that someone does something or says something fucked up. Somebody's out there a dressed as a rotation a right, stuff like that. That kind that tends to push the buttons. But yeah, most of the time, the stuff that gets the largest volume of

viewership are quite honestly more banal. It's things like a fifty caliber exploding or shooting have gallon, you know, gallon, drum of gas. That kind of stuff. Is that that stuff appeals to people that aren't just gun people, so they're like, oh, I want to see shoots fload, so let me click on it. Well, one of my favorite things is to look at videos of people destroying safe life fests. What my favorite ways to watch gut YouTube? But I guess this is probably what we'll probably talking

about this as the episode goes on. But once you watch enough of those from like one channel, you'll you'll get to a video when they fantasize about like shooting antifat or something, and you're like, okay, well yeah, that yeah, that's that's just the way it goes sometimes. And it is, you know, the thing that my first I guess the first time I became aware of like online gun culture, UM was a site that's still really near and dear to my heart. I'm sure you're familiar with it, Carl

the Box of Truth. And it was like, and I think this like fifteen years ago or something like that is when I started reading their stuff, and it's it's just like some kind of bubba e dudes in Texas who will take different who will try out like, hey, there's a myth that UM this specific round in Korea got stopped by people who's were wearing multiple layers of like clothing in the cold. Can winter clothing stop this bullet?

And they would they would you know, mock up the clothing on like a target and they would shoot it. Or like how many books does it take? Like if you have a full backpack, how many books would it take to stop a round of nine millimeter? If I like, it's it's all very much like practical. Hey, people you know, say this works this way or this works that way. Well, let's go out and shoot some stuff and test how

it works. And um, I think was like it is, as you said, the kind of thing I think, even if you don't own guns you might find interesting just because like a lot of it is dealing with here's things you've seen in Hollywood what actually happens? Um. So I I do think like fundamentally there's always going to be a place for that kind of content because it's it's not just like stuff that people who like guns

are interested in. It's just stuff that has kind of objective value, you know, you're trying to expand what people's understanding of things. Yeah, I call that ge whiz content. It's like, G whiz, what happens if right? And so on? In range. The closest equivalent to that, which are the videos that the most views are are somewhat now infamous mud tests. Um. And it started off six years ago and it was literally it was, G whiz, let's go

do this. And of course there's this long standing lore everywhere outside of the gun community and in it about the A k M being this undestructed, indestructible unicorn. You're right into combat that no matter what happens to it, it fires, and they are A fifteen being this fragile piece of ship. And in our mud test, of which we've now done multiple of it, well initially it was

just g whiz. Over time and aggregate, it turned out to actually have really interesting data points and that the A K doesn't do well in mud, and they are excels in mud, which is completely against the lore about Vietnam, which is a different problem. But that kind of thing extends beyond the gun community because people are like guns and mud. What happened is g wiz. It's MythBusters kind of stuff, and I think, but it's interesting how you

can learn from it. Yeah, and I think one of the problems that is, uh we could say like has is an issue on on gun and YouTube. One of the things that has become an issue, and this isn't just within the gun culture, it's everywhere. Is that like if you're into that stuff and if you're if you're coming into it, like I want to see people do this g wiz stuff or I just want to see reviews of different guns because I might be buying one.

Um Google's algorithm is going to feed you a lot of stuff, and some of that stuff is going to be people who, yeah, are preparing to like shoot folks at protests, and our filming videos about that and stuff, and that it has this, um it has this radicalizing

effect on a lot of people. And it also has this kind of can have this kind of radicalizing effect on content where you know, most political stuff you see isn't kind of that over it, but it does if somebody has a video where they're being more explicitly political outside of you know, you know, arguing in favor of gun rights, but if they're getting kind of political and a broader sense, and that does really well the way that content works as other people might be like, oh, well,

folks want me to do a political video, folks want me to talk about I don't know, Nancy Pelosi or whatever, um And that that's you know, not just a problem with gun culture or gun YouTube, but it has increasingly become a thing and in the n r A kind of very famously there's a good podcast on the how that organization has kind of gone from where it started to where it is that talks about like n r

A TV. But they their YouTube channel had some pretty outrageous ship for a while, and I think it left impact even though it failed in this Eventually, well, the NRA is until we can get into that later. The Terney has changed so much since its origins to what it is now. It's not even the people that found it wouldn't recognize it, I don't think at all. But you're touching on a topic there that's also near and dear, and I'm not trying to promote range here, that's just

we're having a conversation. But years ago I decided to proactively demonetize. I turned up my AdSense and I take no money from any views, so it's not like advertising doesn't drive what I do. And I feel like the reason I did that was partially just fuck you YouTube. It was the hacker manifesto of you come watch my content, I cost you money versus making money, which is kind

of a statement on my part. But additionally, I do feel like, whether it's firearms or any other content that is completely advertiser supported, there is a dangerous thing there in that you have to pursue the clicks like a heroin addict, and the clicks make you the money, and therefore you're gonna make the stuff that's gonna make the clicks, because that's how you make your income, and even if

you don't want it to do, it can affect you. Yeah, And I'm curious, like, how do you kind of how do you, um, how do you how do you approach sort of dealing in this space where it is so easy for things to become politicized? Like do you is that is that a kind of thing that you have to be consciously sort of picking your battles. I guess I'm just kind of interested in how you because you definitely have been more open about having kind of more on the left libertarian side of things politics than a

lot of people talk about in that space. How do you decide kind of what is worth inserting and what is worth kind of just you know, no one needs to hear that within this context. Oh yeah, I don't think that that's an easy thing to answer, right, It's hard,

Like there's a lot of landlines. But when um introspectively, for me, the answer for me at least was I'm just going to come to this content as my honest self, Like, if I'm just going to produce what I want to produce, it's and since I don't have to worry about advertising dollars. I'm just gonna make this it I want to make. And as a result, I guess it's sometimes considered an

alternative voice, but I don't think it really is. I think that the loud loud mouths have made it sound like there's only one voice in this community, but there isn't. And so by just being legitimate and honest and being me, there has turned out to be a lot of ground swell if you want to use grassroots type people out there that want to hear something that's not just evangelical American Taliban so. But but in terms of what where to where, what where to put your foot on? What

land mine? I guess I did For me. My decision has been to do topics that have been intentionally ignored that shouldn't have been. Like I've done a bunch of videos about the confluence of civil rights and firearms ownership, which there's a lot of it, and it's it's really amazing how much there is and no one talks about it. Yeah, I mean we, yeah, we we've chatted about that a

little bit in some of our episodes. It's like nineteen nineteen when there were all those like race riots around the country, or even if you're looking at like the post construction period, there's a history both of like gun control being used for racist purposes, but also just of communities arming themselves, Black communities arming themselves. That is is woefully undertold, although it is people are starting to deal

with it more thankfully. UM. I'm kind of interested in talking to you about sort of the culture jamming aspect of we have this huge gun culture, aspects of it are very toxic and becoming politicized in a way that is um aggressive. Um, how do we how do we have a positive influence and kind of hopefully pull things back because I do think within kind of the issue of gun rights, there's more actually more possibility for people to sort of come together and reaching a chord than

there is on something like abortion. Um. And I think a lot of that conversation is going to start in spaces like the one you inhabit. Yeah, no, I yeah. I like what you say culture jamming because another term

I've heard is subversibile. That's not the intent, but like you mentioned, the red Summer of nineteen nineteen, and yeah, I talked to when I talked to a lot of people that that are really historically interested in minded and I was astonished how many people have not even heard of it, never mind you only like the explicit realities

of it. And so when it comes to the culture jamming thing, there's one video I did about or two of the events of Red Summer of nineteen nineteen, one of them here in Bisbee locally, and it's an interesting problem to someone who normally would be considered as a

very standard issue firearms content creator. In that particular Red Summer nineteen nineteen episode, it turned into the local police attempting to disarm the tenth Cavalry soldiers who are off you know, military soldiers in bis Beyond recreation, And so

you've got this interesting cognitive dissonance. Do I support the cops that a lot of firearms people are like just blindly support, or do I support the military, which a lot of fires people blindly support when both of them converge and the and it's a racist agenda in it that poses a question that I like to do with like this kind of content, because it means that the you or has to really if they get through the video, have to introspectively go holy funk, Which do I support

or do I support either? Or is there a problem here I haven't been considering. I think asking questions like that really matters when you try to like start these conversations with people who are kind of in the same space but but not you know, I haven't considered talking about this stuff before or on what would traditionally be

seen as kind of very opposed political um wing. How do you kind of start these conversations in a way that makes it most likely that you're gonna be able to have a positive dialogue that actually moves forward as opposed to kind of getting bogged down in the and the things that caused people to just kind of lock horns generally when you we start getting into these areas. Yeah, you know, I don't know, it's totally possible you're gonna have that problem no matter what you see that with

your work. For surely, when you take an honest approach to history and just be like, here's the facts, Um, there's gonna be people that are just gonna be completely resistant to that. They're not going to take it. But um, I think the best way to do that is to just be that honest approach to it like one of the things that I think we do with firearms content gears cool tech is cool. Guns are neat, They're fun. I enjoy shooting with guns. I like the fourth of it.

I like going to competitions. But one of the things that gets left out of the conversation a lot is what are the implications of firearms and the sociological economic environments that we live in. And I think that's one of the things that didn't get talked about. And so if we talk about it fairly and also tend to I think it's hard to do, but have people from all sides of this perspective, as long as they're not completely dangerous and toxic, being part of the conversation, we

can have a better middle ground. That's the hard part. Like so being inclusive, ironically, even of views that you aren't necessarily your own, as long as the person you're dealing with isn't. My line is, if you're actively supporting bigotry or the harm of other people, there's a no go. We're done. But if we have different views but we realize that that's not the intent, then then we should have a conversation. I think that that's a difference. Now.

I think one of the areas in which this can get murkiest is when you are talking to people and I've had a few of these conversations who are convinced that there is uh that they're kind of on the precipice of of a violent conflict sparked by someone coming to take their guns right that and it, And you know, there's the version of this that is like, I'm worried that the a t F Is going to do some fuckory in a bunch of my ship is going to

be illegal, which is pretty reasonable. And then there's the I'm worried Antifa's going to come to my small town and and and take my you know, guns or do whatever like Because that there are often people in that who are just kind of um tragically misinformed and radicalized in a way that they're not so much eager to harm people as they are just like broken and frightened

because of the things that have been fed to them. Um, do you have any kind of best practices when it comes to sort of approaching those conversations and trying to improve the information those people are getting. I guess for me in that, regardless of what I here when I see people like that, and I think all of us have those people in our world, whether it's your your aunt or your uncle or a friend, right, Like we've

seen that over the last couple of years for sure. Um, I think the best thing you can do there for me again, I'm just talking to My approach is a break the echo chamber if you can. And so the echo chamber is the problem when we suck from the fire hose of only one source, like NonStop. Yeah, that's gonna be dangerous. That's the kind of stuff that pollutes your mind to the point where you can't think outside

of that box. So like being more inclusive and that word is kind of a trigger word or catchphrase, but being legitimately more inclusive and presenting a lot of different diversity that really is part of the firearms community. Can I can in some circumstances break the echo chamber? Like I'm really happy with this one project on the channel where I'm working with the net Evans about specifically a female or woman's approach to self defense with firearms. And

you don't really see that. You'll see like channels that are only for women, and you'll see like all the majority of gun channels that are only for gun fascinated dudes. But throwing that into the mix, there's gonna be some subset of people that will clicking and watch it out of that g whiz Lowell and that kind of stuff can break a paradigm in terms of well, I never thought of that. I never looked at it from that perspective.

And that's at least that's what I think is the right answer is do your best to make sure you're approachable and try to break the echo chamber. Yeah, that makes complete Yeah, I mean that makes a lot of sense. Um. I think the other side of this is also worth talking about because we've kind of been focused on how do you break the echo chamber, how do you get people who are you know, in the gun culture on

the right to be more open minded. The other side of this is you have a lot of people who are kind of liberals um or on the left who have a really reflexively negative opinion to the reaction to the very idea of gun ownership or gun rights, and have these you know, you will generally see there's there's a mix of people who can come to it from a very reasonable and argued point to mix of people who are just going to, like in the same way that folks on the right to throw out a handful

of quotes that they've seen on memes, um, that they can use to kind of, you know, shut down debate. How do you do you have a lot of those conversations where you're kind of trying to make people at least more open to because this is something my work has dealt with a lot. Is kind of trying to sit down to like, I get why you don't think these things should be legal. Um, obviously, I I see the same mass shooting news that you do. There's a problem,

a deep problem with guns in this country. I don't deny that, but like, let's also talk about the idea that the state should have an absolute monopoly on on the ability to do violence. Let's talk about the ability of marginalized groups to defend themselves. Let's talk about the history of gun control and how it's like it is it is. There's a lot of conversations that kind of

get wrapped up in that. UM. I'm wondering, do you have thoughts in terms of like how to kind of broach those and progressive avenues to go down to when you're having that side of the conversation. You know, it's totally interesting. I think I feel like I don't I'm curious what you think about this from your work as well.

I feel like over the last for good reasons, over the last couple of years, more than a couple of years, I think I've seen, maybe it's just my own echo chamber, I've seen a lot of people on that side of the political spectrum coming more and more around too being pro gun. Yeah, and then the statistics back that up. Supportive and social in the United States is the lowest

it's been in quite a while. In so that like if there's that joke on that side of the political fence about you go far enough left to get your guns back right, um so um. But I think there's been a real wake up call for a lot of people that used to be very much vehemently against the idea with some of the stuff they saw and went, whoa, Um,

this isn't These aren't going away. And if you're reasonable, if you're willing to have a rational thought about, at least in this country, the reality of firearms ownership, whether you like it or not, it's not debatable. This is real it's what it is. They're not like they could ban everything tomorrow and there's gonna be air fifteens in this country for the next hundred years. Um, so that

ain't going to change. So with that realization, maybe the maybe the better idea, which I think is with all technology is instead of being afraid of it, is to actually learn about and understand it, whether you want it or not. You but like learning and understanding it is

at least a step further forward than just complete object fear. Yeah, that that is often kind of where I start the conversation with just like we have to deal with the reality as it is on the ground, which is that there's four million firearms in private hands here, which is not all that far from half of all of the

guns in the world. Um, So any any sort of like plan you have, it's the kind of like one of the things that often comes up in those conversations is Australia and people they were like, well they were

able to do it after now Port Arthur was Scotland. Um, I forget the name of the massacre, but there was a massacre in in in Australia that they banned most kinds of firearms after and confiscated them, and it gets brought up a lot where like, well they did this in the short frame of time, and there was this this impact on gun violence deaths. Why couldn't we do it? And the reason is that they had to confiscate a total of two hundred thousand arms and there's four hundred

million guns in private hands in the United States. Um, it's it's a different scale of problem. And that that's before we get into sort of the legal barriers because Australia didn't have a Second Amendment. Obviously, like whether or not you like it, firearms have a level of protection that is equivalent to the protection free speech enjoys in this country. And you can't just pretend that's not the case.

There's this tremendous body of jurisprudence around it. Yeah, no, totally, and like so that that's that's part of it is the reality there. Australian here is a completely different beast as well as culturally, like the people that were into guns there, And I don't mean to offend any Australians listening, but it wasn't like here, like in a place of Arizona at least like Arizona. Guns are just if you're in Arizonian they're just intrinsically part of life, whether like

they're just constant. They're everywhere you go to like you see them open care you not always do she open care either. Sometimes it's like reasonable, open carey. Sometimes you see the other side of it. But they're just everywhere. It's just part of the deal. And it's like a

lot of that in a lot of the country. And so UM I actually think that that fear based ignorance of them is more dangerous because then we don't teach people what to do around them or how to be safe around them, kind of like abstinence, Like education and school teach people not to have some well that's dumb that ain't gonna work, and guns exist in this country. Does just be afraid of them that don't work either. So in regard, I think that the reality is it's

much better to UM to approach this. What I think. I guess the way I try to deal with that is if you don't fetishize them, people that are more afraid of them are less likely to just click away. If you talk about them like this is a thing, here's what they are, They're not a totem against evil. They're just a tool. And here's a historical story or narrative or sociological impact of this that's not fetishizing it as some religious item. I think that that helps break

that barrier a little bit. And I think that that does bring me to something I think about a lot, which is the how you're in and actually has I think gotten a bit better than it was prior to Sandy Hook, but the very sorry state in a lot of cases of advertising of gear and guns. UM think the most famous example was a I believe it was a Bushmaster ad that got pulled after Sandy Hook that was like an a R fifteen that came with a man card that you would get like with your gun. Yeah,

get your man card back. Your Man card has been reissued because you have this gun here, and that I I you know, I've seen a lot of different gun cultures because it's actually, like we've just talked about how unique U s gun culture is, but a lot of people actually own firearms around the world. There's a lot of even like in Europe, like France has a very

significant gun culture. Um and in Germany, you'd be surprised like people can own a lot of the same weapons you can here, there's a lot more hoops to jump through to to get access to them. Um, but there's still like there's gun cultures all around, and especially places like Iraq and Syria. It was really going to um when I saw kind of the gun culture that I I most wanted to port some things over to hear

from there. It was in northeast Syria, in Rojava, where like damn near every not every individual, but every like family had an a k because in art there was this understanding that you have a duty from time to time to like patrol and watch your neighborhood and not in sort of this like I'm gonna set up a checkpoint for Antifa, but in I like, hey, isis just

carried out a big attack. Let's let's get some folks out into the streets to like watch our neighborhoods, because that's just the reality of the world, and we don't we don't do we don't just have like a group of militarized police rolling around every neighborhood. Like we also are responsible for protecting our communities and so we train

with weapons. And there was a lot of conversations I had with women about like, well, the fact that I have this and know how to use it now means that things can't be done to me that were before because I have an a K forty seven, And that means something I would like to port the kind of like what you were talking about, not just seeing it as a tool, but seeing it as a tool with societal responsibilities. You don't just have a gun so you can hold up in your house in the zombie apocalypse.

You have a gun because you're part of a community and because there's there's some value that we see in members of the community being armed and not just the state. Yeah, no, totally. So I mean that goes that kind of goes way back to the old like now sort of silly sounding thing, but like God made man, cult made them equal, right so before that, like if you were a frail human being for whatever reasons, Um, you really were sort of defenseless,

especially in the places like the frontier. But skill at arms could change that and um, and that it puts it can put a more balanced power infrastructure in place. Um. Not that I want to live in a world, but we're always like at this point of mutually assured destruction. But it is much better to have more power balanced than power imbalance, and firearms absolutely provide that in trained, responsible, educated hands. Um. And that's what I think the story

should be, right, that's the emphasis. Like when when the whole thing happened went down in Iraq like you're describing, I think it was ironic. One of the things that the US military did was allowed every home to have an AK, like because you get to keep one gun and it's one of these and uh, and you talked about gun unders worldwide, like, Um, once you jumped through some of the hurdles in some of these countries, it's

actually easier to own certain things than you can't. Like, yeah, like a machine gun in the US is highly regulated. It's four and pretty difficult and highly expensive because of a specially closed market. But like Bloke on the Range, one of the guys I work with on on on YouTube, once he gets his permit, like he's like, I'm just gonna go buy a fully automatic stent and he just does. And it's not at an exorbitant price like it would

be in the United States. So it's not apples to apples like these controls, whether we like them or not. Some of them are actually more liberal than we have in the United States. Yeah, I think a good example of that, and an example of where like a lot of folks who might kind of reflexively think this is insane, but like it's silencers, you know, suppressors being the more accurate term, but silencer is what you call them. It's the thing you see James Bond screw on the end

of his gun to make it quiet um. And there's the like this attitude that they should be heavily restricted because there's this misnomer that for the most part they make things sound like stuff in James Bond. Now, there are some ways to get a firearm that is incredibly quiet um, particularly using like a smaller around and sub sonic ammunition. There are some very some weapons you can effectively make quiet enough that people won't notice it. But when you're putting a silencer on an a R fifteen,

it is not quiet. No one will miss it firing. But what it won't do if you have to defend yourself in your home is shatter your ear drums forever, right or this is honestly the bigger case for suppressors. If you are hunting with an animal, as a lot of people do with your dogs. You can have a suppressor on your shotgun as your bird hunting or whatever, and you will not destroy that dog's ears. Um. You know, it's the same thing like I'm hunting for deer. You know,

it's it's it's easier. Um, it's like less dangerous for you potentially. Like I one thing you notice, if you've spent a lot of time around hunting dogs, they don't have good hearing by the time they get older because

they're hunting. You know. It's funny suppressors, Like everything that's that's more controlled has gotta allure of magic around, right, Like, oh, a suppressor of silencer or or for that matter, of machine gun, and like therefore it is the forbidden fruit and everyone wants it more than they ever would have

once you own. I have one transferable machine guns with tax stamped the whole nine yards, and I shoot it like once a year because you shoot it and then you're like, wow, that was expensive, and and it's like, oh, we that was fun, and then you put it away. And the truth is the some automatic stuff is far more interesting and actually generally more effective once you use

full auto fire, it's got very limited use. Um. Fully there there, I mean there is like if we again are being complete, there's one mass shooting I can think of where a fully automatic weapon made the shooter more dangerous and it was the Las Vegas shooting because he was in a set fixed position. Um. He was holed up um and he had he was not like moving and standing, he was like braced while firing into a

crowd from a building. As a general rule, if you're talking about like what's someone going to be more dangerous with, if they're somebody who decides to shoot up something, it's a semi automatic weapon. Because atomatic weapon number one going to jam more often requires a bit more understanding and know how on behalf of the user. And also it's a lot harder to hit with and we'll run out of ammunition very quickly as opposed to it and a

semi automatic a R fifteen. The reason they are so often used in mass shootings is it's kind of the best weapon to use for that. If that's it's also prolific, Right, there's like cordwood in this country. You can like they're literally everywhere. Um. The Las Vega shooter, though, I don't know that he had actually any truly select fire guns. Weren't they it was, Yeah, he was using a bump stock. I think it's close enough to Yeah, well no, it's a good analog. But it is interesting to note and

that guy. What's interesting about that guy's um? Well, of course his act was horrific and evil. Obviously, he used a bunch of air fifteens with like shitty bump stocks, and he had planned something like this for years apparently. Yeah, he had Tanner right in the set up too, which is yeah, no one knows, I mean as we know, no one currently, I don't know anyone knows what his motivation was, at least it hasn't been released. But he had been planning something like this for a very long time.

And what's ironic about that is that if he had bided his time, he could have actually had a real select fire like belt fed machine gun. He just did a millionaire. Yeah he could have done that, and uh, um, this could but he just went with this bump stock kind of garbage, which is weird. Um, that's a whole another topic, but it is, and it it is like that is one of those cases when you talk to people in the right where it's like, after that shooting, Um,

Donald Trump and his administration banned bump stocks. UM, which is more gun control than we got out of eight years of Obama. You know, oh boy, you point that out at least on the center. In fact, um. Uh, there's always this narrative that you know, this political party will take your guns, and this polargically party waved. But the truth is, statistically and historically speaking, both tend to air on the side of trying to add more restrictions over time, like if you do it over time like

Obama didn't. In fact, Obama open things up. I think he liberalized concealed carry of pistol or firearms in national parks. Actually he actually made guns a little easier to deal with. UM. But then, via essentially executive order edict, you've got Trump banning bump stocks, which, whether you like bump stocks or not, I think the way that went down is questionable legally speaking, but that's another topic it and and obviously the bump

stocks were also somewhat questionable. They were speaking right right totally totally, but but that's that's an interesting precedent with what he did with just like Fiat edict um. But that that said, like historically, over time, there's always been more restrictions, not less, from both sides. And when you point that out, the people that just kind of drink the kool aid from one side or the other, I want to just immediately knee jerk on you. And you're like, no,

this is weird. This is coming from all directions. Really, yeah, and I think it is. It is a big part of it is just that, like as a general rule, people who are rich and powerful do not want poor people to be armed. It doesn't tend to work out in their favor. The only time they want poor people armed is when they send them to a war they

decided to. Uh yeah, Obviously the history of gun controls would have lay tied to racism and the Black Panthers and a whole stuff around California's gun laws being started to curb black people from promoting play out arms, and so it would be we would be You could argue in some ways that Reagan had a big role in inventing our modern concepts of like what gun control means and what kind of gun control laws like liberal states tend to go after on open carrying bands, on you know,

concealed carrying of arms, that kind of stuff. Yeah, it's deeper than this, and there's always nuanced It's really hard, right, But like, um, like California, which is kind of one of the flagship states of gun control. UM, and I think that their methods are bizarre to me and almost on not understandable. But like you talk about Reagan, pretty much they were like, guns are cool, and then the panthers walked around with some guns. Are like, whoa fucking sorry,

we better do something. And uh. Of course that the image of the panthers with their guns out walking down the street, which was their legal right, um, and it was brad and it motivated um of course a lot of things in California, which now we see where where that has led in California gun control laws. UM has also changed the narrative for so many people that are unwilling to look at things from a truly broad historical perspective.

That's only one tiny thing the Black Panthers did, and the rest of their actions are so lost to just the pictures of them standing around them on carbings. And that's another example of leaving out like the Sinaical mission, we'll talk about one thing but not the rest, and

therefore the historical narrative is only one thing. And it is also there's a lesson in that for people who are on the left and who are advocates of gun ownership about what happens in terms of media and in terms of how your movement is thought about and remembered when guns are a part of it, Because that's always going to for a variety of reasons, and we can

say a lot of those are very unreasonable reasons. But if you are a political group who is armed and makes that a visible part of your activism, that is going to really dominate a lot of conversations. It doesn't mean you shouldn't be, but it means you have to go into that understanding that like, that's just how it

works in this country. Yeah, you will immediately get you will immediately from at least some part of the perspective, whatever whatever side you're on, you will immediately get someone slinging extremist militant at you. Yeah. But by the way, I mean, those are real things too. There are those. I'm not saying there aren't extremists. We'll talk about them all the time. Yeah, this country is full of them, as is the world. So that's not that's not an

unreasonable thing that does exist. But the minute you go ahead and stand with that gun, you're going to get that label, whether it's truly something you earned or not.

There's a very deep conversation that we've talked about, we've had in in pieces on this program and other shows that we've done on Cool Zone about like WIN makes sense to be openly armed and WIN makes sense to be openly armed as part of a group, because that is a very fraught question as like the what happened in the chat has made abundantly clear, but in you know, a bunch of cases Kyle Rittenhouse and whatnot, there's a

ton of different reasons why choosing to be openly armed. Um, there's a debate to be had about like how that influences everyone around you had that influences influences the demonstration, And I've seen and heard it used in in good ways in an irresponsible ways. I've seen people carrying guns at political events in order to intimidate others. I've also seen people carrying guns at political events to create essentially a buffer where it's like, Okay, there's going to be

people fighting at this event. There's going to be clashes. If we're standing here as a group with guns. There's a place people can run back to and the fighting won't continue because nobody wants to push that. And that's yeah, without talking about specifics of intent to any of those situations you already talked about, because I can't, but yeah, I think I think it does, Like it always comes

back to this thing of intent. Right. So to me, um, you're right for the firearm, absolutely true, regardless, like even if I disagree with you, this is a right, like we said, it's protected like the First Amendment, it's the second. Um. But I think the problem starts to come when you've decided to bring the firearm solely for the intended purpose

of intimidation. Like that's that's where I start getting like, this is this is troubling, right, But if you're bringing it for personal defense or community defense, or there's a need because your community is really at risk. I mean one of the examples of a civil rights one was this is on someday, I'll do a video about this.

A community knew that the clan was coming to intimidate them, and they armed up with surplus m one garren's and steel pot helmets literally dune fighting positions and fought them off. The clan ran for their lives. No one was killed, but they literally used m one grands to uh to stop the clan from infiltrating their community. Um. That was not used as a weapon of intimidation. It was used as a weapon of community defense. I think that's intent

goes everywhere. Yeah, that's dope too. Um and yeah, I uh, I think um one thing that that that kind of I think there's a conversation that needs to be had when we start talking about when is reasonable and what situations are reasonable to carry a gun opener concealed about also what should be carried. Um, I've certainly seen because I don't I think that the most harmful thing is

certainly people carrying gun to intimidate. I've also seen people carry guns as a fashion statement, which is not the same thing but as bad. For example, people on the left people at a protests bringing a loaded mosen um too because it was the gun the communists use, which is like, you don't you don't want to be in a firefight in a dense urban environment with a motion negat did you bring? It is a gun that doesn't

function without a sizeable hammer, you know. And of course people on like I remember outside of this anti mask rally, these two guys who are up and carrying a r is, one of whom had an a r tin with with a hundred round drum was talking about it. We had like four hundreds something rounds on him and it was like and in case stuff pops off, and it's like,

what are you number one? Like, if you're talking like that, you've spent no time thinking about what actually happens in the situations in public areas in which gunfights occur, because none of them that have happened in any time in the recent future have involved people needing to four hundred rounds of ammunition or or drum magazines or whatever. Like

you are. You are not in Fallujah. You are in Salem, Oregon. Um. The extent to which a firearm can be useful for UH self defense and that does not like bragging about the number of bullets you have is just like weird and gross. You know, this is gonna come off maybe a little strange or even counterintuitive, But when I hear someone like that, at what you just described in that

particular person. First of all, that guns barrel would burst in four d of rounds, But that's a whole other topic probably, But that said, UM, when I hear that, I almost have like, Um, it's kind of sad because the reason that's sad is that person is doing that one because they've been so the idea of the firearms and talisman like that. To me, that person is acting like that's a talisman. Secondarily, the reason they have four in a round is because they've been sold a pretty

big bill of fear. And that's that's sad for anyone to live a life based on fear. Yeah, yeah, I would agree with that entirely. Um, do you have anything else you wanted to get into and this, uh, this conversation, well, I don't know. I mean, we're just here to talk about like community. I just I think one thing that's really important and it's something that um is a positive and I'm happy to see this is that it was kind of a happy accident with my work. I didn't

even think about it. It is hard to happen, but this is a much the people people that love first of all, just the sport. There's a lot of us. There's a lot of us of all spectrums across the board, UM, people that believe in the right from the person be purposes of personal defense and community defense there across the board. And I think that one of the things that we need to do is not let the narrative be only one, which is we see so much of UM very much

just like right wing. I'm gonna usually say Christian white males need like completely dominating this conversation as though, and they think they owe as a result own the space. Now it would be in their interest too, from the perspective of preserving firearms rights, to be inclusive and have everyone that believes in that a particular thing work together to make sure we don't lose a right, because the

right unexercised is lost. Right. So even if I disagree with you on economic policy, but we agree on firearms right, we have an agreement there and that makes us somehow interestingly in the same space. We have something in common versus something diversive. And I think that part of the conversation at least within reason. I mean, there are people that are legitimately dangerous, you don't negotiate with them, but within reason, like agreeing on that topic means well, we've

got something in common here. There's probably other things too, and maybe that could be a place where we kind of try to make that conversation better not worse. And so by being more open inclusive and saying, hey, there's people here and people there and here we are all together doing this together. Um, perhaps conversation can be had that's better than what we've been having. Maybe it can be actually a community builder versus a community destroyer. Yeah, yeah,

I would like to see that. Um well, I think that's as good a note as any to uh to close out on Carl. You wanna you wanna throw your plug ables up before we were right out of here? Yeah? Sure, I mean so I run in range TV. You can find me an in range dot tv. Um completely viewer supported. Like I said, I don't want to sponsors or anything. I like. I like the idea of the people liking watching it support it. So if you like it cool, come check it out all over the place. YouTube bit

shoot decentralized video contrat distributions. Another thing I believe in strong would the corporate oligarchy. But yeah, come out if you want to have a little bit different take on fire and stuff, or you're just in the confluence of civil rights and guns and stuff. Come check out in Range TV. I'd appreciate I always appreciate new viewers, and thanks for checking it out. Awesome. All right, um yeah, check out in Range TV, and uh check us out somewhere.

We won't tell you where, but you can find us if you keep us in your hearts. C I Burnett ex all right, this is this is me Christopher Wong, realizing that I have done like sixteen consecutive actual real introductions and that if I keep doing them, everyone's gonna expect that I do a real introduction every time instead of like randomly yelling something. So yeah, we'll welcome to it could happen here. I am trying to make my

job function as it should and not professionalize it. Um. And this is This is a podcast about things that are bad, but it's also occasionally a podcast about things that are good and how, in fact, there can be a society beyond this one and talk about some of the shades of what that could look like. I have with me the co host of the General Intellect Unit Kyle and June, which is a podcast on the emancipation network. That is I told this is the tagline the podcast

of the Cybernetic Marxists. I am. I am very excited. Yeah, so it's really exciting to be here. Absolutely, thank you for coming on. Um yeah, I guess okay, we should start at the the very very beginning, because I don't think most people know any of this. What is cybernetics, right? Um? So cybernetics is I guess a term that comes from what is it the kaibernetes, right steering, Uh, the idea of steering a boat, um so, using your ore to

navigate the waters. Um and so essentially it is a science of con troll and that sounds really scary, but what it means is that it's that kind of connection between the steers person, the oar, the boat, their body, and the water around them and getting all of those things in sync in such a way that the steers person is going where they want to go, the ship or the boat doesn't capsize and they don't lose the

ore um. And so that's what control means. It's a kind of balancing a kind of connection between the organism and the environment in such a way that it can

survive and thrive, and that's what cybernext is focused on. Yeah, the thing I love about them the Steersman, therefore, is that like it's all about it's control in the sense of regulation, but all also like very importantly in cybernetics, it's almost always self regulation UM because like the one of the kind of core principles again like the because the term usually calls to mind this like kind of terminator like UM, like cyber gothic kind of domination. It's

actually not with the field is about at all. It's UM because one of the core insights of cybernetics is actually that any given system UM, the only thing that can really control it is itself because of the sheer

complexity of systems. So that like UM, like the kind of like top down external domination of an organism that we all fear is kind of like actually, if you look at the cyber cybanetics literature, that's not not actually really possible because the the the the external controller would never have enough complexity to match what the organism is

capable of. UM. And you know, organisms are self regulating system The steersman with his boat is a self regulating system that like regulates its upright position in the water and regulates its course that's directed towards its goal. Um. So it's it's that's why it's so important. I think.

Well that's the why we think it's so important for the left and like people who are concerned with these like you know, visions of a politics of autonomy and liberation that really need to look at this stuff, because it turns out there kind of is a science of like autonomous, self guiding organic systems you know, sEH no terminator here, Yes, and yeah, I mean you know when you see uh, scary videos of militarized robots and they're learning to you know, jump and fire weapons and all

that kind of stuff, there certainly is cybernetics involved there, but that is a kind of domain application of cybernetics. Rather than defining what cybernetics is, it's really kind of

holistic systems thinking in general is what cybernetics is. Yeah. Yeah, that that's that's that's that's probably worth emphasizing, right that, Like um, um, cybernetics in some ways is kind of like out of fashion these days, like it it kind of evolved into systems thinking, and like, um, I guess a lot of its lessons got kind of absorbed in general, but we find there's great value in going back to them, the kind of originators and like focusing on that field.

It's like we on the show. We got into the cybernetics angle by reading Andrew Pickering in his book The Cybernetic Brain, in which um, he kind of acknowledged that like there's he kind of split it into two, like there's American cybernetics like which had that kind of like um dour kind of military domination sort of flavor to us that like it's kind of an earned reputation there.

But Pickering was more concerned with British cybernetics. Um. It's like a lot of British thinkers that and had a very different flavor there where it was more open ended. It was kind of had more of a focus on kind of liberation than like politics and stuff. And in fact, some of those like Gray Walter was like explicitly an anarchist,

like wrote in Anarchist um like journals and stuff like that. Um, and for him, like those two things went hand in glove right like that like um liberatory politics as like um the politics of like human flourishing, like as human human beings, as autonomous units flourishing in their own contexts, and of like social systems that would enable that kind of flourishing. To him, that was just hand in glove

with cyberan attics. There was no real distinction there. It was just like, yeah, these these two things fit each other perfectly, which you lose later with like general systems theory sort of stuff. You know, it's like, there's there's plenty. I don't know who am I thinking of here, like them that the Talipe, that guy with the like black Swan sort of stuff, Like he's big into systems and stuff, but like isn't so much um, isn't so much into the liberal Tory politics. I guess, you know, a lot

of that angle is kind of lost. Yeah, And I think this is awesome. This is you know, this is sort of a product of, I guess, the broader ideological course that's going on while sucho Cybernie comes in and out of fashion. And I think I think we should go back a bit to the beginning to sort of situate this because I know, like when when I, like before I ever did any reading, let's ever next, Like

my imediate assumption was that it was. It was you know this, this is the thing that was entirely just based off of computers, right that this is like this is and that's not really true from might understandtanding of it. Can we go back and sort of like talk about where this came from a bit and how it's sort of moves over this over certain sages. Yeah, yeah, I think you can kind of trace it back in it's

sort of European origins to UM. You could probably say Hagel, uh, you know, his his move towards like UM understanding being not just a substance but as subject, I think is a move towards a kind of cybernetic understanding, where you understand the whole system as a holistic entity as opposed

to just an individual interacting with an external environment. UM. And you can also see this come up in say there was a ecologist x skill in the German ecologists in the early twentieth century, I believe, who was trying to understand, you know, the organism in its environment. The sort of precursors to ecology can be seen as precursors to cybernetics UM. And then when you get to the kind of development of cybernetics as a science or as a discipline UM in the mid twentieth century. It's not

exactly about computing, it's UM. It's more about balancing a machine with its environment. So UM. Sort of prototypical UM machine of this kind was the servo mechanism, which was used to help guide a like an anti aircraft gun in shooting down enemy aircraft, so making sure it tracks properly with the target and doesn't lose the target and is assisting the operator in operating the gun instead of us being a inanimate object that has trouble tracking what

it's a very fast moving target. I mean, you can even think back to like the you know in World War One when they discovered, hey, we could actually like synchronize the timing of the propeller and the timing of our gun on the front of this plane so that our guns aren't destroying our propellers and shooting and we're we're we're shooting our own planes down with our guns when we're dog fighting, right Like it's uh, yeah, that's

the system's understanding, right, So that's UM. That's that's Norbert Lenard Rice and working on the automated gun turret stuff, and that's he coins the term cybernetics to like um given name to the thing he was starting to discover.

And it's like he was kind of pulling together a bunch of threats there, and like one of those kind of important insights is that like um, like they couldn't get an improvement in like targeting and accuracy without like basically making the gun turret and agent of its own that like and the like the turret and the gunner would be cooperative agents that in combination would achieve their goal. But like there was there was there's something strange and

spooky about that. And I think that then the sort of feedback mechanism inside the turret gives it a sort of weird agency that combines with the agency of the gunner to like going to the whole system towards the goal. Um. Yes.

And what it ends up becoming then is a kind of boundary space where the distinction between human and machine uh starts to become ambiguous because they both start to possess they're both understood to have a kind of agency, they're both understood to have kinds of like functions, and then you kind of get this sort of like human

machine interface idea. And you can start to bring in all of these different ideas from like anthropology, from physiology, from math, from ecology, uh, and they all start to interact in this domain of cybernetics. And like the core, the core idea of them that kind of ties everything

together is that of feedback. UM. So like weener realizes that what he needs to do achieve this goal is is a feedback mechanism, and that would is error correcting feedback, right like if the if the gun is slightly too fair to the left, it corrects itself right words and so on. UM. But that, as you said, that that connects across all sorts of things, right, Like you start to realize that's present everywhere in ecology, in neurology, in UM,

like that learning is based on feedback, you know. So it's really funny to read to read Norbert Leaner like in the fifties basically describing what would become machine learning, and he's just like he just off the cuff, is like, yeah, like if you could if a machine could like UM, or if if any system could just like UM analyze its own performance and then feedback onto itself, it would it would learn any old pattern you wanted it to and he's like yeah, he turns out he was completely correct.

And that's that's where kind of like gets into it. Like you get later thinkers like Ross Ashby, who was um and like other folks like in or in and around psychiatry, we were like really interested in how the

brain worked. And that's that's the other thing that feeds into like cybernetics is like, um, it's it's why Pickering called his book the Cybernetic Brains, because like the brain and like nervous systems show up so much in that field, right that like the brain being a kind of learning and adapt an adapt adaptation machine attached to the body or whatever, and like, um, yeah, do you know there's there's something fascinating there, and like, um, the I mean

there's something kind of possibly troubling and kind of melting down the distinctions between living organisms and machines or whatever, but like there's also something very compelled and just link recognizing the same patterns happening at all these different levels, right that link, Um, like you get similar behaviors and similar kind of outcomes, and then you know it turns out like you can kind of do a science on these things and and come up with an even better

explanation to my frameworks based on your observations across many fields. Yes, and so it is in a sense about computers. But the computers are really just understood to act like a kind of brain, and that's connected to a nervous system which is connected to you know, like actuators of some kinds, some kinds of like machines that actually do things in

the world. So it's not about like say computer science specifically, it's more about, like, well, computers are a useful way to do cybernetic design because as they can act as a control system and they're flexible. It's not that this is about computers really. Yeah, absolutely, And like that you brought you brought up something very important there that like, um in all cases of like cybernetics, like the systems that we're considering are not like isolated like braining a

box kind of things. They're all things that are directly engaged with a world, um Like. So it's it's not that kind of like monadic kind of rationalism of like computation just happening in a box somewhere and like per perfect intelligence or that kind of kind of stuff. These are always, like the separantations are always working with systems

that were engaged in real time emergence situations um. And because of that, they rapidly kind of like acknowledge that for so many of these important like systems, the only way to figure out what it's going to do is to let it do it um because you can't like pre compute all the possible outcomes you know, of these like very sticky and complex real world situations, the best way to figure out what it's going to do is

to let it do it and watch. Yes. And I think I think that's an interesting sort of like if if you look at where a lot of the sort of like techno fetishist like social attempts to sort of like manipulates side the technology have gone, It's like, yeah, you get like like blockchain smart contracts, and it's like the blockchain smart contract is like, Okay, we are going to think of literally everything that could possibly happen and attempt to put it in like a very small amount

of code. And if anything like literally anything at all happens that you know that we didn't expect, where now everyone is now screwed because we have just made this thing beautable and put it in such a way that

we can't change it. So I think that, yeah, that's a I think this is a useful sort of I mean corrective just just in the way that we've we've we've now like like we've gone backwards, like we've we've gotten into this place where you instead of we need to let these systems play out, we need to let them control themselves, We've gotten to like we think that we can actually just sort of like you know, turn turn the entire system into code that we can break

ahead of time and have you know, the basis of some sort of social system off of Yeah, I mean it's I think it's something that like the serpetitions and like maybe Pickering would described as like a kind of perversity of modern caught like the modern mindset like that that kind of like rational like um kind of mindset right like um, And like to the sarpetitions that that whole thing with like the blockchain stuff will be just

truly laughable because it's immediate, it's immediately obvious to them that the problem there's like okay, proposing we're going to use a blockchain to regulate some sort of social process or whatever, smart contracts, whatever, and it's like that thing has nowhere near the fidelity required to regulate social processes. Because social processes are unimaginably complex and have just incredible variety.

There's a there's a there's like a law that's at the House of Cybernattics called Ashby's law of requisite variety, And in short, it basically states that given a system, um, the only thing that's really capable of regulating is regulating it is itself, because a regulator needs as much variety as the thing it's regulating if it's gonna like actually

succeeded it um. And so that's that's the kind of thing that nudges everyone towards like like when you get to someone like Stafford Beer is his whole model of like organization pushes all a lot of the intelligence downwards to the to the bottom layers, because there is basically the people on the ground on the shop floor are the people who are best informed to actually deal with

their own situation. And that's that sounds like a banal observation, but like it for Beer, that was actually quite a step forward to like just admit that like trying to trying to like in his context, was like often the organization of a firm, like at our company, Like trying to manage a company from the boardroom is just fucking dechrius, Like, no nobody there has enough information to act on. They're

all dumbasses anyway. So for Beer, it was just a like this is where it starts get interesting and it connects to the politics, right that, Like for one of these scientists just observing reality and like you know, using you know, pretty pretty good stray intuitions and like scientific frameworks, just looking at it and going like, oh, it is obviously the case that the best way for society to

organize is bottom up self organization. Um. And that that like it's not just a moral point, it's actually a technical point as well. Then like, um, these these top down, bureaucratic kind of micro tyrannies are not only morally objectionable, they're also technically inferior to the kind of like cyber

communism we want to institute. Yeah, and I have like one off one of my what if one of my favorite stories about So I worked as a maintenance worker for a while and one day my boss was like, there was some problem with the sink, and my boss was like, no, we don't need the plumbers. I can do this. And so he goes in there and it's it's what it's like. It's it's like a sink in like a building, right, So it's it's just one of those things where there's like a pipe that connects to

the top of the sink to like the wall. And he goes, Okay, here, look at this. I'm gonna I'm gonna turn this valve and this is going to turn the water off. And what he instead does is he take he takes the pipe off of the wall and just like a torrent of water is just now shooting out of this pipe because he has removed the thing.

He's removed the pipe from the wall. This is you know, this is this is why I think like, yeah, go this this, this, this this, you know this this is like a particularly funny example of how these sort of top down management systems. And this guy like like used to be a maintenance guy, right, but he just like most a plumber and so you know, and he accepts into it and he's like oh no, no, no, no, no, hold on, I know I know how this system works, it's gonna be fine. And it just there's a guys.

The guys are of water has so much force. It's like it's like pushing our tool cart across the room. It's like a fighter hydrants. Now I wanted to I guess Beers is an interesting way to go to go into the sort of the politics of what this actually

looks like. Do you want to talk about and I know I briefly talked about this in an episode in The Liberalism while back, But do you want to go into sort of more detail into what Beers was up to and the eventually failed attempt, because of military coup, to try to implement like a cybernetic system for organizing essentially an economy. Yeah sure, Um yeah, So Stafford Beer was a UM management consultant UM he and a cyberneticition.

He got his start sort of doing operations research UM, which is kind of a precursor to cybernetics UM that is kind of like interested in logistics and organizing systems UM in the British military UM in World War Two. And then he came out of that and became a corporate UH consultant for Operations Research and Management UM and so in working in the corporate world. Um, he saw all of the things that were really screwed up with the status quo UM way of doing business and of

organizing things. You know, the way that autocratic power of management creates all kinds of ridiculous problems, The way that managing organizations according to org charts, which are there to assign blame more than anything else, creates all kinds of perversities. The way that organizations fail to adapt to their environments because they get into these kinds of strange neuroses um.

And you know, just sort of going through all of that and more often than not being unable to intervene in an effective way uh to um address these problems, and just sort of like seeing how these little instances of perverse corporate culture are indicative of the broader problems

of our society as a whole and of capitalism, right. Um. And so you know, he had a basis from his time in India during the Second World War in uh kind of like contra uh kind of like you know, Eastern or specifically Indian um, spirituality, yoga, all this kind of stuff. So he kind of had a cult countercultural side to his personality. Um, and he was always doing tinkering strange experiments with cybernetics. He wasn't just the straight

laced corporate guy, uh. But it was a combination of that sort of countercultural background with his growing frustration with corporate systems that led him to start to develop ideas about how things could be different. And this kind of meshed up with the thoughts that were happening in Chile

during the Chilean Revolution in the early seventies. Um. So they reached out to him uh to come and help out with organizing their economy as they were undergoing this revolutionary process of trying to sort of throw off the shackles of imperialist dependency and create a society that was focused on the flourishing of workers, uh, and of society as a whole, as opposed to one that was based on sort of you know, resource extraction where everything flows

to the top. Yeah. You want to explain some more about how that went well? So, um, yeah, it it went well and then it went badly, I guess. Um. But from from from the reading we've done and from our research, it seems like if basically, if the if the US hadn't sent in the fascist to kill them all.

Um this this would have worked like it was working, and it was that the project was actually going pretty well explained pret what like I think it becomes it's called product cybers but what what exactly, like what was

it doing? So? Um So, like Beer's big kind of innovation is what we call the viable system model or VSM, and it's a model that's, um it's a model for these like autonomous social systems that is kind of taking It's not I wouldn't say it's entirely based on like the structure of the human body, but it's like taking a lot of lessons from biology and neurology and neuroscience and and cybernetics and just kind of meshing them alltogether.

Um So, basically, like it's like if your body is basically a bunch of autonomous organs that all take care of their own business, plus a nervous system that synchronizes them and unifies them into a workable hole, then you can kind of see the whole system as having this

kind of mixture of vertical and horizontal aspects. Like on the one hand, it has this horizontal aspect where the autonomous like system one units are are well autonomous, more or less, like the heart takes harrish, takes care of its own thing, the lungs take care of their own thing. But then the nervous system meshes them together in layers so that it can say, oh, hold on too much oxygen, dial it down a bit, and then the organs responds

dynamically to those those signals. Right, So it's kind of like up down feedback loops right where them the lower levels of the system are the smart bits that are doing all the important work, but there's this supporting infrastructure of the nervous system and the brain that unifies the whole thing and keeps it all on the rails um so,

and importantly, it's a kind of recursive model. So like a human being is an autonomous unit, and then that it's that unit is composed of more autonomous units, like the organs and the muscles, and then each of those is composed of cells which are autonomous units, and then you know, so on. But like that latter goes upwards as well, so that like a team is an autonomous unit composed of human beings. A firm, or like a

department is a autonomous unit composed of team. A firm is composed of departments like a sector as composed of firms, and it's the same kind of structure at each layer. Um. So that the kind of upside there is that like, um, you don't like you kind of have a unit fairly unifying like set of principles and like a science for doing this kind of like co coordination of autonomous units

at every level, at every every layer of society. So like in principle, the sort of like the Serbanetic principles that get applied to cohering members of a team are the same story principles that get applied to like sectors in an economy. Um, with the same kind of you know, bottom up kind of feedback going on as well. Um. So Stafford was an invite to Chile to by the all end a government in so that that was like

v right, Um that that that election happens. So he arrived in late vent I think, um, I mean certain on the timeline, but we're looking at those those first few years of the seventies as as the time when this is happening. Yeah, yeah, I d elected in setting n seventy. Yeah, so it's towards the end of that year that he's he's invited and he's basically kind of given the task of like, hey, do all this stuff but with this entire economy, and he's like, yeah, sure, cool.

UM so puts together Project cybersen UM And there's kind of long story there of like and them building out this kind of infrastructure and like it's it's all highly experimental UM and highly tensive. Like they one of the big problems they run into is that like they don't have very much in the way of like hardware, especially because they're under embargo. So they had like, um a pretty what what at the time was a pretty crafty old mainframe that they ran the around the software on UM.

But like step step one was like UM installing this like huge communications network amongst all the factories and UM like setting up like the workers committees and stuff and would feed information into us. And they would kind again this like feedback thing where you kind of take signals from the economy, integrate them, and then go, oh, you're producing too much steel, route some of your product over to this this factory and it will be better used there.

And then you know, you guys over there turn up this dial. You turn them down this dial. So and then if that plan doesn't quite work out, then you've got another layer of feedback tomorrow to say, Okay, that plan didn't quite work here's an adjusted plan. So it's it's just like both bottom up and top down sort

of loop of feedback. That's like I think that the phrase pickering is is reciprocal adaptation, where at the economy and its firms and its workers are all kind of adapting to each other in real time in a kind of in a in a full system. Um uh yeah, anything, no that I mean, that's that's essentially what Cyberson was. It was a system designed too largely, I think, at first supplement the market, although Beer later realizes that like, actually, if you have a good system of this kind, you

probably don't need a market. Um. But essentially it was like, Okay, our economy has been one that has been built around dependence too, uh, you know, especially the United States, and it's been organized in that way, and we need to reorganize the economy both to promote the well being of the workers, the autonomy of the workers, realized the ideals of socialism in that way, and also to create a system that is less dependent on those existing structures of imperialism,

and so having this reciprocal adaptation um, having systems in place to connect things that were previously disconnected would allow you to move in that way of increasing autonomy and increasing freedom Um. And that was generally the idea of cyber sin Um. Yes, yeah, And there was something very interesting like when we were reading the reissue of his book Brain of the Firm, where he has a section

at the end that that documents this whole experience in Chile. Um. There's a really interesting parents where towards the end of it he's like, and this is like getting up towards the coupe where he's like, um, he and the other cybersin operatives like on the people are putting this together realize that like the workers and like people in towns are like just on their own, just like using this stuff and these kind of principles to just like abolish

the value form basically like but notably without the involvement from above, like as in Beer and Company, stumble upon this just happening where they're like, oh my god, they're just they're just dismantling the market, and it's like it's all just kind of happening, and that's there was something

really wonderful to that. Then like it it indicated like there was there really wants something to it that like you could like as in people working, people could use these tools and this like new way of organizing themselves. Two just like liquidate market relations and wage relations like spun spontaneously. But it's a spontaneity that's that's not really

it does. It's it feels very different from the kind of spontaneity you often get in like the way leftist sort of like anarchists talk about it often, like the kind of spontaneity is like a magical sort of thing that is like where freedom just arrives from out of nowhere. But this this was like installing infrastructure to enable freedom and then it actually kind of happening until the fascists

showed up. You know. Yeah, what I think is really interesting about it is that so you know, you have you have like you have this sort of central control center from which a lot of stuff is being run. But you know, yeah, it's it's it's it's it's a weird system because it's trying to link together like a lot of different kinds of firms like you have something saying in private firms, but you have a lot of

you have a lot of state run firms. You also have firms that throughout this whole process, people like workers just taking over factories. They're setting up these sort of like callum industrial cordons. I think I'm remembering my Spanish rights like yeah, they they you know, they start setting up their own institutions, and it's it's this becomes this

way of sort of like networking these groups together. And the thing that's the other thing thing is it's interesting is you know, so you have you have them on the one hand, like just getting rid of markets and going like okay, well we can just coordinate production through

this and like not have markets. And then the second thing they do is it's the freedom immediately becomes political in the sense that like yeah, like one of one of the things they do they there that that's what's going on in this period is that and there's Chile has a very very right wing like it's basically like the even today it's like it's like really like one of the only like union like huge unions left in Chile is the truckers unions and those guys are extremely

right wing there in this period of being backed by the CIA. They're being trained by f l c i O as I say, like every episode, but like yeah, and and they're you know, they're intentionally doing strikes, trying to oversaw the government by blocking production, and you know, like the workers are like, Okay, hold on, we can just use this symenetic system to figure out where these blocks are, figured out where materials needs to move through, and we can just you know, we can just stop

the kind of revolution. We can just sort of like we can we can just we can just fight our way through it. And and it's interesting, is like this happens and so then that that like the the original plan of using sort of of using these truckers is like the sort of right wing like the first attempt fails, and once that fails, it's like they have to go to the military, and the coup eventually works. It's hard

to resist who outright, isn't it. M Yeah, Yeah. The thing with the truckers strike is not like yeah, it's you can very well imagine like the CIA and stuff going into a thinking that this is what we'll do. That's right, this will sell it up but not realizing that the workers actually had in their hands a like

vastly more sophisticated system for out maneuvering them. Yeah, and that system works like a charm, like like clockwork, just like and even like you really accounts from this thing, like both in eating Medina's cybernetic revelation areas and in Beer's on account And there's like the sense that was

actually kind of spooky and weird. But I'm like even the people involved didn't quite expect it to work out that way, and that like they were surprised at how effective it is, but that it gets back to the core of cyberneticscent like feedback is weirdly effective at getting things done. You know, these like highly tuned feedback systems, they give you a lot of power to out maneuver

this comebacks, you know. Yeah, And I think in some sense, like this is like people talk a lot about Chile is sort of like the sort of foreclosed future of like an elect told democratic socialism. But I don't think that was the potential of the moment. The potential of the moment was this. And it's interesting to me that well because Beers kind of traces out a political history

that never quite happened, which is so okay. One of the one of the sort of big political trends over the course of the twenties century is you have all these people who were sort of like they they basically got turned into planning bureaucrats during in June World War two, because every government basically turns into a giant planning engine. And then you know, some of them go into some of them, you know, essentially stay on in the government

doing planning stuff. Beers like goes into corporate world, and the corporations are also you know, they start doing they also start doing this planning stuff, and you know, but Beers is interesting because he he pivots like he pivots in a direction that the world doesn't, which is he

pivots towards Okay. The solution to sort of you know, the kind of like decay of these like authoritarian planning systems, whether whether they be like the corporate versions of it or the sort of like state administered like total economic planning from the top down versions, is oh well, okay, we need to have planning from the bottom up and distributed planning. Yeah. Yeah, And he like everyone involved with

iverson gets murdered. The only reason Beer survives because he wasn't in the country and it's it's just really interesting, like like it's just kind of not a story. Everybody got murdered, but some of them did and some of them were in exile. Uh, some of them were imprisoned. Yeah, it was, it was, it was, you know, it was not a good time. Beer got out early and he knew things that we're getting we're getting bad, and everybody around him knew things were getting bad. Um. Yeah, like

he was on him. He was on like a kind of I guess, like it's almost diplomatic mission to like try and get some of the blockade stuff. Like he was trying to think he was trying to flog like a container ship full of iron or something, you know, shopping shopping it around to try and trying to help out the likely in mine to the world that's what it wants. Yeah, but um yeah, it's um hold on,

I had a thought there. Um. And then like after afterwards, um, like Beer spent a fair bit as time like trying to get his his comrades out of out of Chile and get them out of prison and got got them resettled in UM, in the UK and so on, and

yeah America as well. UM, but yeah, I think that um, this is like, that's a very interesting point about the the you know, the sort of the real value of this moment being that movement towards autonomy, that that reorganization of society, not towards uh neoliberal engineering of markets and uh sort of reinforcement of private tater ships, um, but towards a kind of like holistic control system that is still informed by you know, the principles of autonomy and

UH and and and science. Um. It's it's definitely like an answer to the crisis of the seventies which was not taken up. And in that sense it is a foreclosed future, but of course one that we can take

lessons from now. Yeah. I think there's something else that's very interesting me about this, because you know, if if you look at how like if if you look at how the socialist block sort of responds to to the crisis and seventies, and you know, they're sort of decaying the eighties, like they have this option available to them, right, they have they have they have made a lot of ways, they have a lot they have a lot better technology than with the lands are using that have more resources,

and every single one of them goes no and instead just sort of like transitions, you know, instead of I think it has to do with there. There there's a line this this is This is like slightly before this, there's a line in um a debate Maw and Joe and Li are having in and I think it's seven. This is like the peak of the sort of workers led part of the culture revolution, like the works have taken Shanghai, and Maw and Joe and I are talking and they're they're trying to figure out, like what are

they gonna do? You know, they they set off this force,

it's now become uncontrollable. And there's there's this line where they're talking about, Okay, well if if we give if they give them, if you give them a commune, they have to have free elections, and Joe and La is like, well that would be anarchism, and then they're just like, oh god, we can't do that, and they never do in the end, you know, the end result of this whole sort of that whole sort of processes that trying to like instead of doing, instead of sort of like

devolving any level of control down to like any of the workers who are doing things, they're like, Okay, well we'll just just we'll just you know, we'll we'll we'll do capitalism instead. Well, well you will, you know, we'll create markets, will sort of like maintain our firm structure.

But you know, the countries into it. Yeah, yeah, And it's it's this, it's it's a very interesting thing to me too, because like there have been other like you know, like they're like lots of socialist parties have sort of various like degrees of radicalness have come to power like since nineteen seventy three, and to my knowledge, not a single one of them has ever picked any of this stuff back up, like even even you know, like like the most radical sort of like like you know, like

like like early Chavas never like touches this like even like I don't like I don't I don't think like I don't think the easy Lends ever done it, Like I mean, they have fetological issue is there, but like it's it's it's it's interesting to me that like basically no one who's ever taken power since has ever attempted

it again. M h. Which get is changed because this is you know, one of one of the sort of like this, you would think this is like this is at least a potential solution to sort of this this this this problem of the stagnation and sort of collapse of the old sort of bultis there's a plenty of economies, but no one takes it up. But I'm interested to think what you too think about that, like why this

doesn't happen. Yeah, there's a I think there's an interesting dimension of Beer's work in Chile that kind of I think um might provide some answers to that, which is that you know, he he was in charge of setting up Cyberson and Cyberson was kind of a system are optimizing the economy, but he had other concerns and other briefs that he was working on at the same time.

And what he came to realize was that there was a layer of management and experts in the organization of the economy that were happy enough to sort of work on a cyber sin that was designed to improve production numbers, but they had real resistance to the idea of worker autonomy because of the because of wanting to maintain their their job privileges, and because of the prejudices of their

their habitats. I guess you could say that what they learned when they were educated as engineers or managers or whatever. And you know, where the people who know things, the workers don't know things, they shouldn't be in charge that kind of thing. And so he starts to he starts to realize that in order to really make cybersen effective as an engine for autonomy, what needs to happen is that um, sort of what you are describing with the Shanghai commune, Uh, the the workers need to learn the

cybernetic principles themselves and implement them through autonomous action. UM. And so he starts to try to kind of like right up, like right pamphlets that can be distributed to the workers so that the information that he has as theory is not being filtered through a bureaucracy, but is instead, like you know, involved in an educational process of self

mode of mobilization among the workers. UM. And so you know this really UH doesn't mean that expert knowledge is irrelevant, but it does mean that it does imply threatening the social privileges of management and expert knowledge, because in Beer's conception of management, management is something that is done by anyone who has the power to affect an organization or change in organization. So if the workers are able to change their organizations, they are also managers. That's not something

exclusive to experts t Beer management as a function. It's not a person. In Beer's ideal worlds, like management would just be these like decision nodes that emerge among among workers. I can like the management manager would never be a person. A manager would be like a kind of structural information processing like, um, thing that happens among people. Um. Yeah, and so like when you see in for example, the uss are the option of creating a planning network, a

computerized telecommunications planning network throughout the whole union. Um, it's basically shot down for two reasons. One, it would be very very expensive for them to develop. It would be on the order of of doing, you know, their nuclear weapons development, perhaps more expensive than that. Uh. And Two it is simply at odds with the system of like playing the command economy that had that had grown up

in the wake of the revolution. Right, It's simply at odds with the power of all of the factory managers, the planners, all that kind of stuff. It just kind of makes. It threatens their identity and it threatens their position of power. And so I think that when you look at the socialist countries and why they didn't adopt this system, I think it's because they it would require the people in power to really rethink their entire role

and identity as members of society. Um. Yeah, And then it's kind of there's dreadful irony really and that like it's it's stafford me or somebody who comes out of like bourgeois like management stuff and is deep in the pocket for that he's the one who actually sincerely pursues the most radical projects in like socialist history that we've ever seen, vastly more radical in its intent, and it's like kind of it's the beginnings of its impact than

anything any Leninist has ever done. And it's basically because he actually did want real freedom and autonomy for working people, and your average lendiness just doesn't, you know, Like again, like to go back to the example from earlier, right that like when when under pressure, they will they'll do capitalism before they'll do anything that even resembles um autonomy

for workers. They'll take that path rather than doing the right thing, you know, that does speak to the character of the thing, and it's it's it's it's it's it's that class interest basically off those kind of functionaries, right like. And the thing that makes Beery different is that he sincerely actually wanted to do it, you know. And the worker's autonomy thing wasn't just a smoke screen for him,

you know. Yeah. And when when he starts to come up with these ideas of like thinking like, okay, like an economic planning system is not adequate, we need to go beyond that to thinking of out the constitution of the social body, he he quickly finds that he's being marginalized within those circles of planners in the Chilean government because this is not something that they are enthusiastic about.

They're actually quite concerned about this idea. Even if I end a would be you know, all for it, right because he was he was very sincere about his interest in an autonomy. UM, there were still many people around

Beer who did not particularly like the idea. UM. Yeah, absolutely, And I think if we look at it, you know, in terms of why hasn't it happened since then in in all of these intervening decades, I think you also have to look at, um, the international system and the way that countries figure into it, because we have all of these um, neoliberal structures of management and organization that were created in the eighties and nineties and early odds UH that a socialist government has to contend with if

they are to embark on a program like this, which isn't to say it's impossible, but what it does mean is that there are all these sort of um, highly complex regulatory and organizational structures that have roots deep in our societies right now, and it is the path of least resistance to not attempt to engage in a in in uh an effort to kind of, you know, let the market atrophy as you develop an alternative structure for social organization UM, because all of these structures are there

and you have to kind of like route them out and replace them with something new, as opposed to having all these ready mades of what's already there, the market centered solutions, the the the kind of autocratic solutions, UM. You know, all of the management systems that have been developed with an autocracy in mind instead of something that is truly democratic and uh kind of self just dating

mm hmm. And I think as well. And there's there's a kind of other thing that like, um, like the left has been kind of in a very weak position for quite a while now, like since then, since the seventies, right, and like, um, yes, like we we're just we're just starting to come around to maybe being on possibly an upswing.

But also like I think there was this kind of long depressive phase at the end of them, at the crossing the centuries, right, where a lot of like leftist kind of and this this this actually gets into like why some of the reasons why we started a general intolact unit that like we felt like we needed to bring this kind of like systems thinking and like technical seriousness back to the table after the kind of weird depressive phases where like you know, like say the alter

globalization stuff for the occupy stuff, where people kind of take an almost explicitly anti strategic kind of turn and like a kind of anti technical turn. You know, there's that kind of depressive hangover of like oh my god, like capital and it's it's it's technology, is is hegemonic? Like how the fund are we ever going to get out of this? Like it would have been heard to make an argument for a scientific and like technical kind of fusion with with the humanist kind of impulses of socialism.

But that's I think we're getting to a point where we can start actually having that conversation again, Like we're we're seeing a bit more of a turn towards that, and it kind of turn towards like this kind of serious kind of like more and more serious kind of discussion of like hey, like okay, like okay, like we we we we fucking hate the current order of things. We want to we want to see it gotten rid of what would we actually replace it with, like functionally,

how would things actually work? Like I think those kind of conversations are coming back on the table in a way that those were just impossible in the nineties, like after the Berlin Wall came down or whatever. They were impossible a couple of years ago. You know, Yeah, the the market as the fundament of society basically seemed to be invincible at that time. Um, and there was a lot of just sort of wrongheaded assumptions about what was and wasn't true about it and about society as a whole.

And you know, we've had a lot of chaos in the years since then. That was um that affected not just the countries that we were you know, being restructured by the I m F, but actually came in affected

the core of the world economy as well. Uh. And I think that that that's sort of like, you know, in the same way that World War One kind of disproved the idea of the white man's invincibility and superiority, like having those like market chaos dynamics come home to roost in the core of the world system has has undermined that invincibility. That that that idea that oh, the market is just naturally the best and there's nothing that

could possibly be better. At the same time that we have all of this technological development that's happening, um, you know in our economy that could be used for something different as opposed to you know, I don't know, making n F T s or something. Yeah, absolutely right, that

that's all super important. I think that that kind of refines, like it might might be his thought is refining in my head now like that like right now, Um, that that kind of market chaos and especially even like the chaos of like the system's response to COVID and stuff, really puts um like in general and for the left in particular. It puts like the question of governance back on the table in a way that it had kind

of been off the table for a while. Like I think there was there was a period on the left where like left activity was kind of like railing against governance. Like it was like we we want freedom from governance and that sort of thing. Right, And I'm not going to say those are necessarily bad impulses, right, but I think they're also kind of a bit wrong headed as well. Right, But like the kind of reality is that, like, for for human life to flourish, and for our lives to flourish,

we need governance. And like because like governance actually like as a word has the same route as cybernetics does. So kaibernetes, the Greek word becomes kubernettes, becomes cybernetics. Right, but that's also the root of governor, so kuberner, kubernator, those are the roots of governance. So government and some cybernetics are one and the same kind of concept. Um And this question of like if we intend to create a world of self governance, um that is effective, it's viable.

In Beer's terminology, like viable self governance, that what we're proposing is opposed to the chaotic vortex of nonsense that we have to put up with right now. And that's back on the table in a big way. That like, because I think especially with with COVID, people look at like just the sheer idiocy and ineptitude and chaos of our governments and realizing like, oh, those are decrepit completely screwed up systems and in parat because their goal is

the maintenance of capital accumulation. So this gets us back to the goal directed behavior of cybernetics, right, Like the steersman steers the boat towards a goal, right, and it's it's always about or like a you know, a cybernetic device like a thermostat has a goal temperature that is trying to regulate the temperature of the water towards um You know, we have these vernance systems that are completely awful. They're just like not suitable for like the regulation of

human life, for flourishing. They're only suitable for the regulation of this insane system that just keeps capital accumulation going, like that's the control variable that it regulates. And we're now in a position. We're on the left, Like more and more of us are saying, like what we're proposing is not like a sort of magical escape from governance. We're proposing, really, you know, we should have sane governance. And it turns out that same governance is bottom up

self organized governance. Um. And that's that's both the moral position and a technical position, and I think they're both of those. The moral and technical valences feed off each other. Like we're we're we're able to be the serious people in the room. This this is a very big change of pace, right for us, because like for a while we were railing against like the very serious people of like the Centrists and like the fucking Blair rights and

the Clintonite sort of people. We're the serious people now saying why what this what this system actually does is absurd and ludicrous, and it needs to be dismantled and rebuilt with a totally different like feedback circuits, a different kind of goal orientation, um. And it needs to be oriented towards human flourishing. And that's it turns out there's

a science of doing that, and it's called cybernetics, you know. Well, and we also have a runaway ecological crisis where we learn about we see that you know, like the capitalist market system is absolutely leading us all to death and the earth to death, and so it is human flourishing, but we also are concerned with the flourishing of life in general. Right, Um, So I think that that that is something that wasn't as much on the horizon in the seventies. You know, I certainly think you know, people

worth thinking about it. But breaking down this barrier between economics uh and uh and ecology, I think is a very cybernetic impulse. And I think one then, you know, we need to keep working at because like you know, whenever we think about these things as separate domains, were

already uh, we're already engendering more destruction of the environment. Yeah. Yeah, I think cybernetics will also help us in that kind of link um on a kind of for left projects, like on an aggressive footing of like if we recognize that like the capital and its kind of government system is it is cybernetic, Like it has its own feedback circuits and like saying that the explosive feedback circuit that we're on with with ecology, right, Like, how do you

intervene in a system to halt and disrupt those circuits so as to so as to disintegrate the system. Is um is something like you can you can learn a lot from cyber NICs to to lessons and how to intervene there. The last thing I want to talk about is just what is the society that is non capitalist and based off of sort of cybernetic governance principles. What

does that look like for just a person? Because I think you know this, this is in one of the big sort of like political challenges of the last you know, fifty years. It's just the complete foreclosure of the ability to even just sort of imagine assistant that's not this mhmm, yeah,

I think it. It means UM In the first instance, it means a different orientation to your workplace and your community, right, because when you grow up in a society where UM power is exercise as autocratically, it has an infantilizing effect on on you as an individual UM and uh, you know, maybe your relationship to work is your workplace is one of sort of emotional detachment or of tantrum throwing, right, because these are these are reactions, These are natural reactions

to being in an abusive environment. Um. But if you are in a system where the work of management is not only open to you but expected of you, you have a different orientation to that workplace, to the community you're in because it's your responsibility. If you don't do it, you know, you're going to lose your autonomy and also you're going to have real problem ms that you have to grapple with as an individual. So there is a

responsibility that comes there. But also like that means an opening up of horizons in terms of well, things don't always have to be the same. Things don't always have to be handed down to you for management on high. They can actually change. Like you can see the possibilities in front of you, you can plan for the future in your context, and you can have that meaningful freedom in your life and be you know, a a full

human being in that sense, right, um. And so I think that that's a very core every day change that you could see, um, in terms of you know, sort of your horizons of where you might work or what

you might do. You know, you could expect that there would be more possibilities for each person and to be like quote unquote entrepreneurial right to to have initiative in their life and be able to envision and create things around them that uh, you know, they can't do right now because they either are stuck in a job that doesn't give them that freedom, or they are actually not even able to have a job right now where they can have a reasonable expectation of survival because their workplace

is oriented around just making sure the work gets done and you know, the consequences be damned. Um So I think that you know, that is another area that's important. Um And that sort of freedom of management um extends all the way up to uh, you know, working in

different minds of capacities or jobs. Like some people in kind of a middle middle ranking area in a corporation these days might get shuffled around from department to department to try to kind of get a well rounded understanding of what the corporation is, uh and how it functions. But you know, we can kind of expect that these roles would be more open to everybody because again, you know, a system in the v s M is not a person. A system is a function and that function should be

fulfilled in a way that is as flexible as possible. Um. So, there's a lot less kind of well, I'm stuck in accounting and that's my life now, and that's all there

that will ever be. Of course, there are limits to education, their limits to specialization, all of that kind of stuff, Like you know, it takes time to learn these things, but you could expect some more flexibility be there without having that terror of oh yeah, you know, in the neroliberal era, everybody's expected to have like fifteen jobs in

the course of their quote unquote career. But also each of those jobs is going to be interspersed with a period of absolute terror as they live with unemployed in a society without a safety net. Right, Um, I think that that's that's you know, those are real consequences for

everybody's life. I think, yeah, yeah, absolutely, And I think like, at a very very high level, the way Beer puts that is that we are trapped in this kind of crazy system that like its control variable as profits, like that's the little variable that it's it's like doing feedback onto to maintain um. Whereas what we're proposing is like that the sort of cybernetic future will be a society

that's optimizing flourishing. Like what what Beer be the word he uses you demony, which is borrowing from Aristotle just did like flourishing. Um And yeah, a lot a lot of stuff flows out from that. Like to imagine a world where, because we we all feel it right that like everything around us is kind of like micro tuned as like a little feedback loop to keep money and

profit flowing and to keep capital accumulating. Les imagine a world where that's just not true anymore, and the the sort of social infrastructure that you grow up in is an infrastructure that instead optimizes for the flourishing of life. Yeah. Um. And I think you know, when we we we look at sort of the broader patterns of society today, we see all of these hair brained schemes that you know, very rich men are embarking on, and they're they're setting

the agenda for society. You know, we're that you know, Mark Zuckerberg is telling us that the metaverseus the future and you just have to get on board with this,

even though anyone can see that this idea is patently ridiculous. Um. And in a society where that kind of management, that kind of money power doesn't exist anymore, Like you don't have to live under that kind of future horizon anymore, where it's like eight men with absurd amounts of money cook up, you know, ridiculous schemes and everybody has to follow them, just like they were following the orders of Pharaoh back in the day. I think do not be

ruled by pharaohs is as kind of places. And he too, leave off unless you tell if anything else do you want to get to? Okay, there's there's one little line from Beer's book at what it's actually a set of presentations called Designing Freedom, that I absolutely love. It cracks me up every time I read it, so I'm just gonna beat that for the listeners. It gives you a sense of his absolute like ridiculous radicalism, like these off

the fucking chats with this stuff. Um. At some point, he says, I'm quoting here, every time we hear that a proposal will destroy society has been we should have the courage to say, thank God at last, Yeah, a real maniac. Yeah. And and and you have this this dictum of if it works, it's out of date. So you know, it's it's like like, yeah, don't be complacent,

you know, don't be a traditionalist. I think also that there's been there's been really horrific consequences of sort of the right being the ones to like take the urge for creative destruction, just like you know what was that line. There's some I forget some some venture capitalist things like move fast and break things, and it's like, yeah, so when they move fast the things they breaks us. But you know we can move faster and break things that

are bad. Yeah, it's to create of and playful kind of motive being right that like you you might be able to work, wake up in the morning and think, God, you know, it would be really cool if we could have like like a child care nurse ory just like like out in the out in the common area between these buildings and stuff, and like go to your go to your local like your your workers council or whatever, and have a really plausible like the way of actually

getting that and like collaborating with people to make that happen, and then being like, Okay, well we'll try it as an experiment for twelve months, we'll keep we'll see how it goes. And then there's a feedback cycle where it's like, Okay, some aspect of this design didn't really work out. We'll we'll go talk about it some more and then it aerate on that. And that's that's like as it's it's an entrepreneurialism that doesn't bear much resemblance to what that

word means right now. It just means that human beings, living real things, real workers, will be able to actually control their environments in this the substance of their lives and in a meaningful way. Yeah, and like this, I think you know, back in the nineties early odds, sort of before the two thousand eight crisis, in the hoary days of your um it's there was a lot of

talk about flexibility and dynamicism and adaptation. But what that always meant was we make decisions about what's going to change and you have to adapt, right it was it was it was, you know, always this arbitrary power from outside that would just be changing the social fabric, and you had to be flexible enough to cope with what

you were being subjected to. It's very different if you know the planning is being done by you for you, and you're moving towards adaptation and flexibility out of a sense of oh, yeah, this would be better and I'm going to adapt to be in a better state to to work with my environment, uh, in a more healthy and a more flourishing way as opposed to just like, oh yeah, you've got to work three jobs now, so figure it out right. That's a very different kind of flexibility,

very different kind of adaptation. And you know, those things have sort of become dirty words in some ways, but they are really core to the way that we all exist as organisms in the world, and they don't have to be just synonyms for abuse. Mm hmm exactly. Yeah, I think okay, we can take this as a place

to leave off. Yeah, do you two have stuff you want to log and I know you you want to plug, but plug the things that you want people to listen to because they are Um yeah, we're General Intellecting us. Um you could to General Intellecting a totness and it's got all the episodes on there around Twitter, ask g nice pod Um, yeah, you can find us on all the podcast things. Um. We're also part of a podcast network called Emancipation and so that's emancipation dot Network on

the web. Um, and yeah, some really excellent shows on there. We were collaborating with Swampside Chats and um, Mortal Science from Alpha to Omega Jumps in Utopia. They're they're really wonderful shows that are all um it's it's a variety of different sort of takes on things, but like um, there's a sort of common there's a sort of spiritual common grounds they all have. Um yeah, we we all

were all interested in thinking systematically. We're all interested in emancipation, as the network name says, and we're all interested in sort of building something going forward, trying to construct an alternative as opposed to simply getting caught up in day today politics or getting caught up in uh dum mentality. Yeah. So yeah, it's it's systematic, it's critical, but it's also constructive and I think that's what we're all trying to do there. Yeah. Yeah, Well, thank you too both for

coming on. Thank you it's been wondering. Thanks for having us. Yeah, this has been Make it happen here. You can find us that happened here pod in places. There's also stuff at Coals on media that you can also find in those same places and possibly also different ones. We have a we have a website. Everyone asked me for my sources every single week and they get posted there once

a month. So yeah, go go to Culson Media dot com and you will find all of the sources so you don't have to DM me every week, all right, by h Hey, We'll be back Monday with more episodes every week from now until the heat death of the Universe. It Could Happen Here is a production of cool Zone Media. Or more podcasts from cool Zone Media. Visit our website cool zone Media dot com, or check us out on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

listen to podcasts. You can find sources for It Could Happen Here, updated monthly at cool zone Media dot com slash sources. Thanks for listening.