Darts and Letters

The psychological establishment has long pathologized diverse forms of sexual identity. In the mid-century, a brave movement of gays and lesbians fought back and claimed: no, actually, we’re healthy. But in the process, did they define other identities unhealthy? This is episode two of Cited Podcast’s returning season, the Rationality Wars. It tells stories about the political and intellectual battles to define rationality and irrational. For the rest of the series, visit citedpodcast.com. You will be able find this on all the relevant podcatchers (Apple, Spotify, etc.). If you use something else or you cannot find our feed, you can manually add our RSS feed.

Every protest movement has been dismissed as a mere ‘mindless mob,’ caught in a psychological frenzy. Where did this idea come from, and why does it last? As we mentioned last week, we are returning as Cited Podcast with a new season called the Rationality Wars. It tells stories about the political and intellectual battles to define rationality and irrational. You will find the first few episodes of our new season here, but not the entire season. For the rest of the series, visit citedpodcast.com. You will be able find this on all the relevant podcatchers (Apple, Spotify, etc.). If you use something else or you cannot find our feed, you can manually add our RSS feed.

This week, we play a trailer to introduce our new series, the Rationality Wars. The Rationality Wars tells stories about the political and intellectual battles to define rationality and irrationality. Behind every definition of rationality, somebody benefits, and somebody is harmed. We ask: what does it mean to be rational?; what does it mean to be irrational?; and most of all, who gets to decide? However, note that we’re launching this new season on our old podcast, Cited Podcast. We will be posting the first few episodes on the Darts and Letters feed so you do not miss out, but we will not post the entire season. So subscribe to Cited Podcast. Website: https://citedpodcast.com/ Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/cited-podcast/id558228325 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6pMLdKYpGooLKis7aORHSi RSS: https://citedpodcast.com/feed/podcast/

There’s a story you can tell about the post-Occupy left gravitating towards a more state-oriented kind of politics, exemplified by the enthusiasm around Bernie Sanders, The Squad, and others. However, this misses autonomous and anarchist-inflected (and sometimes, explicitly anarchist) social movements that have brought enormous energy, and enormous change–from the movement for black lives, to organizing for Indigenous sovereignty, and so much more. In this episode, we examine the theory and practice of anti-statist organizing. First, we look at the work of the late libertarian socialist Murray Bookchin. Bookchin broke with Marxism, and later anarchism, and eventually developed an idiosyncratic ecological and revolutionary theory that said radical democracy could be achieved at the municipal level. This Vermont-based theorist has been enormously influential, including in an area formerly known as Rojava. There, the Kurdish people are making these ideas their own, and developing a radical feminist democracy–while fighting to survive. We speak with Elif Genc about these ideas, and about how the Kurdish diaspora implements them within Canada. Next, what is mutual aid? Peter Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid: A Factory of Evolution (1902) examines how cooperation and reciprocity are core to nature. To anarchists, this should be generalized to radical political program, and a radically new way of living. Darts and Letters producer Marc Apollonio speaks to Payton McDonald about how the theory and practice of mutual aid drives many social movements across North America. Payton is co-directing a four-part documentary series called the Elements of Mutual Aid: Experiments Towards Liberation. Special thanks to the writer and activist William C Anderson for helping this conversation come together. Finally, how do social movement scholars understand (or misunderstand) autonomous social movements? There’s a tendency to dismiss movements that do not make clear tangible demands, and deliver pragmatic policy victories (see: Occupy). However, Max Haiven and Alex Khasnabish say that this misses something key to radical social movements: their radical imagination. These movements do not want to just improve this system, they want to imagine, and create (or prefigure), a different system. We discuss their book the Radical Imagination: Social Movement Research in the Age of Austerity, the blind spots of social movement theory, and whether there might be a new style of organizing emerging that is somewhere between the the statist and the anti-statist. (Programming Note: We released a much longer version of this conversation on the New Books Network, here. The interview discusses the wider history of social movement theory, as well as whether the reactionary right has its own sort of radical imagination, among other things). This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It’s part of our mini-series that we are producing which looks at the radical imagination, in all its hopeful and its sometimes troubling manifestations. The scholarly leads are Professors Alex Khasnabish at Mount Saint Vincent University and Max Haiven at Lakehead University. They are providing research support and consulting to this series. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

Programming note: As we mention in the top, we have been posting less frequently this summer. Plus, we only have one more episode in September before we take a longer break. You can find a full production update on our website. Anyways, onwards to this episode. Psychedelics have gone from the counterculture, to the mainstream. However, can you turn take such an ineffable thing — a tool for personal revelation, cosmic oneness, spiritual enlightenment, whatever people have called it — and make it just another product in late stage capitalism? From something that is potentially radical, to something that is brutally commodified, instrumentalized, hyped, and turned into the next meme stock craze. The venture capitalists and techno-optimist libertarians are certainly trying, but not everyone is happy about that. On this episode, we look at the deep rifts in and around psychedelic medicine, as different camps vie for the future of these drugs. First, we go back to the beginning. Historian Erika Dyck tells us the little-known story of an earlier period of psychedelic research, led by pioneers in — believe it or not — Weyburn, Saskatchewan. Dyke’s book Psychedelic Psychiatry: LSD on the Canadian Prairies charts the early days of this medical research, and reveals important lessons for our current tensions. The book shows that deep rifts have always existed in psychedelic research, because the drugs sit uncomfortably in-between many different ways of knowing. Then, muckracking psychonaut David Nickles is calling out the mainstream commodification of psychedelics, as well as the bullshit and abuse within the underground. Nickles is an underground researcher, harm reduction advocate, and journalist, who is also managing editor of Psymopsia, a psychedelics watchdog group. In 2018, he excoriated the psychedelic research community for playing nice with the emerging VC-backed psychedelic firms, like the Peter Thiel-funded Compass Pathways (Nickles’ talk is summarized here, but the full talk is available on Youtube). Since then, Nickles says things have only gotten worse. He documents much of that in Power Trip, an investigative podcast series on psychedelic therapy, produced by New York Magazine and Psymosia.  This is part of a series looking at medical controversies and the politics of medicine. It received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors to the project, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

The World Economic Forum has become the bugbear of the right-wing in Canada, and beyond. Conspiracies swirl about how this shadowy, globalist cabal that wants us to live in pods, eat bugs, and “own nothing, but be happy.” It’s tempting to dismiss these impulses as mere conspiracy theory and faux populism. Even if that’s true, there are many things wrong with the WEF–as any good leftist would (or should) tell you. Yet, it seems that we have let up a bit. The WEF is yet another example of the scrambled ideologues of our moment. Conservatives condemn the WEF, and news organizations like Rebel cover it doggedly; at the same time, left-leaning NGOs speak there, and progressive news organizations say little. What’s going on? On this episode, we examine the shifting political discourse surrounding our global financial elites. How can the left operate in this ideologically confusing moment? First, we take it back to the heyday of the 90s global justice movement. Activist, author, and academic Raj Patel revisits the Battle in Seattle. Then too, there were some reactionary forces pushing an anti-globalization line against the WTO. However, the real politics there were different: it was built on global justice and global solidarity. Could we bring back the spirit of the 90s? Then, we go to Davos and look for left-leaning protesters organizing against the WEF. Each year, there is a planned “protest hike,” quite far from the actual WEF site, because Swiss authorities push demonstrates away. Yet, the WEF also invites individual activists in. Producer Marc Apollonio speaks with three Swiss organizers — from Strike WEF, the Young Socialists of Switzerland, and from Greenpeace — to learn about how they are pushed and pulled by the WEF. Finally, academic and documentarian Joel Bakan is well-known for his hit documentary The Corporation, which was released in 2003–not long after the Battle in Seattle. Today, he tells us the politics are completely different: corporate leaders, including those at WEF, tell us they’re actually the good guys. His new follow-up film The New Corporation: The Unfortunately Necessary Sequel says that this new warm-and-fuzzy branding makes the corporation even more dangerous. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It’s part of our mini-series that we are producing which looks at the radical imagination, in all its hopeful and its sometimes troubling manifestations. The scholarly leads are Professors Alex Khasnabish at Mount Saint Vincent University and Max Haiven at Lakehead University. They are providing research support and consulting to this series. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

What’s safer than baby powder? Parents have been using it for over 100 years to powder their baby’s bottoms, and they’ve found one brand especially trustworthy: Johnson & Johnson. Yet, numerous studies have revealed the presence of trace amounts of asbestos in this talc-based powder. Thousands of parents now claim that this asbestos is responsible for their cancers. In 2018, an explosive Reuters investigation catalogued the extent of this evidence, including the fact that J&J knew about the asbestos since the 1950s. Yet, J&J continued to sell the powder, right up until 2023. J&J disputes the tests, and calls the allegations spurious. However, the courts have weighed in, and in several cases they have sided with parents. Producer Marc Apollonio guest hosts today, speaking with one of those claimants, Manon Lavigne. Also in the program, we speak with Dr. David Egilman, the scientist and expert witness who has studied asbestus in talc, and helped parents secure billions. Egilman is also something of a muckracker, having assiduously document what Johnson & Johnson knew, and how they influenced the FDA. Now, over 38,000 lawsuits are being brought against the company. Johnson & Johnson is proposing a $9 billion dollar settlement for these claims, and all claims into the future. However, it depends on the courts accepting a controversial bankruptcy procedure called “the Texas Two-Step.” This strategy is being used to address a raft of personal injury complaints against a number of companies, but critics call it nothing more than a ‘sham bankruptcy’ that is being used to let corporations off the hook. The fate of the Two-Step is being decided right now, and there are billions at stakes for 100s of thousands of people in a variety of cases. Financial Times pharmaceutical correspondent Jamie Smyth recounts the history of the move, and discusses its legal status today. This is part of a series looking at medical controversies and the politics of medicine. It received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors to the project, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

We’re excited to announce Academic Edgelords, a new podcast that Cited will be producing in alternating weeks with Darts and Letters. This is a scholarly podcast about scholarly provocateurs. Gadflys, charlatans, and shitposters sometimes get tenure, believe it or not. This is a leftist podcast that takes a second look at their peer-reviewed work, and tries to see if there’s anything we might learn from arguing with them. We are hosted by: Victor Bruzzone, Gordon Katic, Matt McManus, and Ethan Xavier (AKA “Mouthy Infidel”). On this episode, we read the ultimate Academic Edgelord: Ted Kacynski, who just died. This domestic terrorist was also a real scholar, with a few peer-reviewed works in mathematics. We read his manifesto: Industrial Society and its Future. Why has Kaczynski become so popular with young people? He is just one extreme proponent of an anti-civilizational political theory called anarcho-primitivism. Few call themselves anarcho-primitivists, yet the basic ideas have become widespread, thanks to worsening environmental degradation and the ongoing techlash. You probably saw some anarcho-primitive thinking on Twitter right after Kaczynski died; many people lamented his death, and praised his arguments. What makes his thinking appealing to some? What does it get right about technology, and what does it get very wrong? We also discuss the broader anarcho-primitivist tradition, with the help of Chamsy el-Ojeili and Dylan Taylor’s critical but generous review article from April, 2020, “the Future in the Past”: Anarcho-primitivism and the Critique of Civilization Today,” in Rethinking Marxism.

Could an artificial intelligence diagnosis what ails you? Medical futurists offer a techno-utopian vision of perfect personalized risk assessments, diagnoses, and treatment recommendations. Yet, recent stories belie this optimism. Many of these robot doctors are rather stupid, and they seem more interesting in cutting costs than providing care. We explore the world of AI in medicine with STAT News investigative reporter Casey Ross, and hematologist and philosopher Ben Chin-Yee. This is part of a series looking at medical controversies and the politics of medicine. It received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors to the project, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

Paulo Freire offers activists and academics everywhere a lesson in what it means to be a radical intellectual. He is known as the founder of critical pedagogy, which asks teachers and learners to understand and resist their own oppression. His subversive books have been banned and burned in many countries, including his native Brazil, where the military dictatorship of the 1960s imprisoned and then exiled him. On this episode, we learn about Freire’s life and the basics of his foundational text, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, with help from professor emeritus John Portelli. Then, we explore how Freire’s legacy is still shaping our ideas of teaching and learning today. Academic/activist/artist Deborah Barndt takes us to York University’s faculty of Environmental and Urban Change, which is rooted in the work of Freirean scholars. Next, we learn about how Freire’s pedagogy is put into practice to advocate for disabled learners, with Mark Castrodale, a teacher, disability officer, and scholar of critical disability and Mad studies. Finally, social worker Sharon Steinhauer tells us the story of the University at Blue Quills, and how an act of Indigenous resurgence led to the beginning of a network of decolonial universities in Canada. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

That was a bit of a 180°, wasn’t it? The COVID-19 lab leak theory went from being dismissed as mere misinformation, to now a credible matter of debate amongst media, scientific, and intelligence organizations. What’s changed, and what does this teach us about science journalism and science communication? Is it time to let go of our obsession over “misinformation”? First, Jacobin staff writer Branko Marcetic lays out the political problems with the idea of misinformation. Later, Nicole M. Krause, a PhD candidate focussing on science communication, looks at conceptual problems in the research itself. What’s “True,” and who gets to decide? Further reading: From Marcetic, his latest in the Nation is on the Twitter files. If you want to dig into Krause’s research ideas in science communication, a couple of things we’d recommend: on public pathologies in the public understanding of science, on misinformation and the infodemic (open access), and on the ethics of misinformation (open access). The Steven Shapin article we read about science communication with “warts-and-all” is worth checking out. This is part of a series looking at medical controversies and the politics of medicine. It received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors to the project, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

Online masculinity is getting weirder and weirder. We’re way past mere misogyny and sexual predation (though, that’s still certainly there). Now, we’ve also got bro science, ball tanning, ball eatin,’ piss drinkin,’ and who knows what’s next. Eat your hearts out, Hugh Hefner and the old kings of male revolt–in fact, these kings of this new manosphere will literally eat hearts. However, perhaps these mockable male influencers are onto something, in a roundabout way. There is just something broken in the hearts of men, as Barbara Ehrenreich once put it. If there wasn’t, male influencers wouldn’t be as popular as they are. This new mansophere offers a simple remedy for whatever ails: yearning for old gendered hierarchies, obsessing over self-improvement and dieting, and ceaselessly grinding under capitalism. In response, we ask: what’s really wrong with men, and how might we fix it? We’ll speak to Annie Kelly of the podcast QAnon Anonymous, and discuss their fantastic new mini-series MANCLAN, which introduces us to the innovations of the new manosphere. Then, socialist megastreamer Vaush turns the critical gaze inward: was it actually the left’s inaction that enabled Andrew Tate, Tucker Carlson, and the Liver King? Finally, we argue that the crisis of masculinity is inextricably linked with the contradictions of our political economic order, and always has been. Nicholas Lemann — professor at the Columbia Journalism School and staff writer at the New Yorker  — takes us on a cultural and intellectual history of male angst, reviewing key touchpoints like David Riseman’s the Lonely Crowd (which Lemann revisits in this article), Barbara Ehrenreich’s the Hearts of Men, Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone, and more. More: On our Youtube, you’ll find bonus, extended versions of our interviews with Annie Kelly and with Vaush. You might also want to check out Southpaw podcast, and Men at Work, which we mention in the podcast. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It’s part of our new mini-series that we are producing which looks at the radical imagination, in all its hopeful and its sometimes troubling manifestations. The scholarly leads are Professors Alex Khasnabish at Mount Saint Vincent University and Max Haiven at Lakehead University. They are providing research support and consulting to this series. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

The story of the Fountain of Youth is as old as history itself. Herodatus, the father of ancient Greek history, wrote of a mythical spring that extended the life of its bathers. Today, entrepreneurs, scientists, and health influencers are still searching for that mythical spring. Longevity and anti-aging research has recently blossomed, with a number of tantalizing discoveries. Still, this research hasn’t delivered any magic bullets. Yet, that hasn’t stopped a cottage industry of folks hawking a plethora of dubious supplements and bizarre health regimens. Guest host Jay Cockburn tries to makes sense of what’s real, what’s hype, who could benefit, and who would pay. Do we even want to live in the world the longevity researchers are looking for? Should we keep looking for that fountain? We’ll hear from: CEO of BioViva, Liz Parish, who has stepped outside of the regular drug approval process and experimented on herself; Dr. Charles Brenner, a scientist and vocal critic of the claims of life extension; and Dr. Keisha S. Ray, a bioethicist who reminds us that while the rich look for fanciful new ways to live longer, the poor lack access to basic health care. This is part of a series looking at medical controversies and the politics of medicine. It received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors to the project, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

For seven years, from 1968 to 1975, one eighteen story high-rise was the heart of Canada’s counterculture. Rochdale College in Toronto, ON, was jammed full with leftist organizers, hippies, draft dodgers, students, artists, and others just looking for a good time. Although, Rochdale wasn’t really a “college.” It was something much bigger: a political, educational, communal, artistic, and psychedelic experiment. During its time, it was endlessly lambasted by conservatives and leftists alike–until it reached its inglorious end. Today, like much of the counterculture, it’s often remembered for its problems: its ideological contradictions, drug-addled hedonism, bourgeois individualism, sexism, suicide, and more. However, is that the whole story? Were the kids in the hippie highrise onto something, …or was it indeed just one giant waste of time? We investigate with a special documentary presentation, produced by Marc Apollonio. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The Darts team is working on another big episode! In the meantime, we’re sharing this one from our friends at PlasticPills – Philosophy & Critical Theory Podcast. They do a great discussion of OpenAI and its implications in academia. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The idea of moving to Canada figures prominently in the imagination of many disaffected Americans. Most recently, it was comedian Marc Maron who said he’s on his way to Vancouver, BC. Usually, they don’t come. However, between the mid-60s and early-70s they really did–and in the 10s of thousands. Yet, when these Americans made their way, they did not always find the Canada they expected. First, many of them were unjustly turned away at the border. We tell the story of how student journalist Bob Waller helped to expose the policy with a dastardly sleuth and legendary piece of stunt journalism. Then, draft resister Joseph Jones tells us what it was like to assimilate into Canadian academia as the new kid in school. Jones was also cataloguer and reference librarian at the University of British Columbia from 1980-2003, and he still keeps a vast archive of materials about Vietnam War Resisters in Canada. Finally, how did the war resisters help shape radical culture and Canadian national identity? Historian Donald Maxwell surveys the flow of people and of ideas, revealing that the American radicals sparked a surge in nationalistic sentiment in some of Canada’s elite academic institutions. Maxwell is author of the forthcoming book from Rutgers University Press Unguarded Border: American Émigrés in Canada during the Vietnam War. Darts and Letters producer Ren Bangert is guest host today. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.        

In this special bonus, we’re sharing the latest episode of Kino Lefter, the socialist film podcast! Our host Gordon and producer Marc join Kino Lefter host Evan MacDonald to discuss our latest episode, a retrospective on the 2004 documentary Discordia. If you liked our episode, you’ll certainly like this one. Marc, Gordon, and Evan talk much more about their experiences with campus activism, where they think things are today, and the lessons they took from the movie. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Henry Kissinger once said “the reason that university politics is so vicious is because the stakes are so small.” Was he right? We investigate. Our case study is one of the most politically-engaged campuses in Canada: Concordia University, in Montreal, QC. This marks the twentieth anniversary of their tumultuous 2002/03 year. School started with a planned speaking event from Benjamin Netanyahu, the then former (and now current) Prime Minister of Israel. Pro-Palestinian protesters clashed with police, and this event came to be know as “the Concordia Riot.” The fallout from that day defined how the school year proceeded, with heated council debates, media stunts, lawsuits, arrests, explosions, and a contentious student election. This was all captured in the extraordinary National Film Board documentary Discordia (2004), directed by Ben Addelman and Samir Mallal. What you see in the film is indeed vicious, but were the stakes so small? We track down the people involved to find out. What did it all amount to? What did it mean personally, professionally, and politically? Where did everyone end up? Plus, you’ll hear the inside story from the directors themselves. Finally, we’ll ask a current a Concordia student activist how the events in Discordia compare with student activism today. Is student activism in the doldrums? This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Forced by the courts, the Canadian government has recently instituted an expansive Medical Assistance in Dying regime (MAID). You need not be terminal to seek MAID, and in March, 2023, you might even be able to seek MAID for mental health issues. The usual Left impulse on MAID has been to honour people’s wishes, and afford them dignity and autonomy over their own bodies. Yet, a string of cases in Canada has troubled this impulse. There have been news reports of at least 14 cases in which patients seek MAID because they lack access to proper housing, health care, or disability supports. This means that MAID is not just being used to address the suffering resulting from illness–it is being used to address the suffering from poverty. Is MAID letting the government off the hook from providing what they should be providing? Should we respect people’s choices on harm reduction grounds, even if those choices are severely constrained by an unjust social and political context? Should we give doctors this power over the mentally ill and disabled, given the racist and ableist nature of our crumbling health care system? We’ll debate this and more, with perspectives from either side. Professor Trudo Lemmens argues that MAID sends a disturbing message: disabled lives aren’t worth living. Next, Dr. Derryk Smith of Dying with Dignity says just the opposite: excluding certain people from this civil liberty is tantamount to stigmatization. This is first in a series of episodes we’ll be releasing, from time to time, on medical controversies and the politics of medical expertise. This series is receiving funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Dr. Maya Goldenberg and Dr. Maxwell J. Smith are scholarly advisors, with research from Yoshiyuki Miyasaka. For a full list of credits of Cited Media staff, visit our about page.

In the creative industries, Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow say there’s often a ‘chokepoint’ between creators and their fans. Corporate behemoths — be they streaming apps, publishers, tech giants, or others — put on the squeeze, exploiting their market power to extract rents, push down wages, and push up prices. On this episode, guest host Jay Cockburn asks Cory Doctorow how these monopolistic (and monopsonistic) corporations put on the chokehold, and how we can loosen their grips. With Rebecca Giblin, Doctorow is co-author of Chokepoint Capitalism: How Big Tech and Big Content Captured Creative Labor Markets and How We’ll Win Them Back. If you like this episode, you can also check out our other episode with Doctorow, the one about radical thought in science fiction writing. Darts and Letters is a production of Cited Media. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page

The collapse of the crypotcurrency exchange FTX has caused major shockwaves throughout the financial world. This has brought new attention to the ongoing reckoning around crypto, and urgency to the calls to reign in and regulate these emerging technologies. FTX’s collapse has also sparked a philosophical reckoning about the ideas that inspired their CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried. Bankman-Fried is a major proponent and funder of Effective Altruism, a philosophical and political movement that demands we give to the most effective charities. Effective Altruism started out concerning itself primarily with global poverty, inspired by the work of do-good utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer. Today, it has become something a little different. Now, the movement tells entrepreneurs like Bankman-Fried that they should ‘earn-to-give.’ Most recently, effective altruists have become increasingly focussed on longtermism, a strand of extreme utilitarian thinking advanced by Oxford-based intellectuals Nick Bostrom, Toby Ord, Will MacAskill, and others (and generously funded by Bankman-Fried). Longtermism tells us we should worry about the interests of future people — trillions of future people, 1000s of years into the future, and in planets far away. On this episode of Darts and Letters, we examine the complicated moral math of longtermism, and ask whether the utilitarian logic of Effective Altruism leads inevitably to this kind of thinking. Our guide is Émile P. Torres, a former longtermist who is now one of the movement’s sharpest apostates. Torres calls longtermism a ‘secular religion,’ and one with apocalyptical, eugenic, and potentially genocidal implications. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page

Today, right-wingers attack science and liberals defend it. Science good, anti-science Republicans bad–that’s the prevailing narrative, especially so during the March for Science in 2017. However, it’s not so simple. Perhaps science should be defended from reactionary attacks, but not uncritically defended as inherently good. That’s the message of Science for the People, a radical movement of scientists and educators who argue that science has always served capitalism, patriarchy, and empire. So, science doesn’t need to be simply defended–it needs to change. We examine the group’s Vietnam-era origins, with the story of one of its founders, physicist Charles Schwartz. Schwartz’ work initially supported the US war effort, but he became a thorn in the side of the military and scientific establishment for over two decades. However, in the 1980s Science for the People went dormant. Since the mid-2010s, it’s back. We then speak to a current member, and also the historian who brought them back together. Sigrid Schmalzer is co-editor of a collection of the group’s writing, entitled Science for the People: Documents from America’s Movement of Radical Scientists, 1969-1989. We cover how the group came back together, how this incarnation is different, and how they traverse the complicated politics between pro-science liberals and anti-science reactionaries. —————————-CREDITS—————————- This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale.   For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

We have been talking a lot lately about the idea of techno-utopian thinking, but we’re coming to a somewhat surprising conclusion: there isn’t as much of it as there used to be. Our Silicon Valley tech bros have quite a curtailed vision. If they do have a utopia, it is a utopia of sustaining the unsustainable. We speak to Paris Marx of Tech Won’t Save Us on the shifting politics of Silicon Valley. We’ll traverse the intellectual history of hippies-turned-arch-capitalists, and focus especially on their ideas for transportation policy. Do they have a radical vision for a different transportation future, or is it a vision of maintain the status quo? Marx is author of the book Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong about the Future of Transportation, out now from Verso Books. This is part of a wider series on techno-utopian thinking, produced with professors Tanner Mirrlees and Imre Szemen. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

[You can access the full Technocracy Now! series now: part one, part two, part three] The first two episodes of this series told stories of technocrats who tied themselves to a muscular state. They believed the state could remake society, if it had the right expertise. However, the state under neoliberalism doesn’t have the technocratic ambition it used to. This just isn’t a period of grand New Deal-style programming. There is still a state, but it increasingly outsources its functions. Is technocracy dead, then? No, technocracy is just moving into the private sector. More and more of our lives are governed by unaccountable private tyrannies—tyrannies that employ ruthlessly efficient technocratic systems, with even less democratic input than the technocracies of old. For instance, many modern workplaces function like technocracies. The Amazon warehouse is the most technologically-sophisticated and totalizing manifestation of this. Their algorithmically-managed systems micro-manage workers’ every step, turning their bodies into machines. Alessandro Delfanti, author of The Warehouse: Workers and Robots at Amazon, takes us inside the new frontiers of digital Taylorism. Plus, what is the future of technocracy? An emerging slew of Peter Thiel-funded neo-reactionaries want to install a Silicon Valley CEO as our new techno-monarch. Sam Adler-Bell of Know Your Enemy argues that this marks a shift in the right-wing of Silicon Valley. They were once crudely escapist libertarians, but now they want to run our governments like their technocratic workplaces. We discuss Bell’s latest New York Times essay on Peter Thiel and Blake Masters, their broader intellectual trajectory from seasteaders to techno-populists, as well as Bell’s New York Magazine article on the liberal technocrats who want to defeat the neo-reactionaries with policies addressing disinformation. (Programming note: we have a short video documentary version of the seasteading section, available now on YouTube). This is part of a wider series on techno-utopian thinking, produced with professors Tanner Mirrlees and Imre Szemen. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

[You can access the full Technocracy Now! series now: part one, part two, part three] Last episode, we looked at the technocrats of the industrial age: Thorstein Veblen, Howard Scott, and the “industrial tinkerers,” as Daniel Bell put it. But Daniel Bell went on to say we were entered a new age — a “post-industrial age” — where a new kind of technocrat would vie for power. They would develop new intellectual technologies that could be codified into complex ways of understanding, predicting, and maybe even controlling global systems. One such intellectual technology was cybernetics, the darling of mid-century technocrats. It was a theory that proposed you could understand human affairs by understanding certain mathematical relationships in a system, and the nature of how feedbacks circulated in that system. On part #2 of Technocracy Now, we tell stories of cybernetic technocracies.(Programming note: we also have a video version of this introduction, available on YouTube). First, Joy Rohde tells us the story of Charles A. McClelland, a liberal political scientists who proposed a cybernetic computer system that claimed to predict conflicts before they happened. With this information, US policy makers could usher in a new age of peace and stability (and forever ensure a US-dominated global order). The project never accomplished everything it set out to do, but it is now being resurrected behind closed doors by Lockheed Martin. It’s a techno-utopian dream of mathematical certainty in an uncertain world. Then, why not cybersocialism? In Salvador Allende’s Chile, they were building a cybernetic computer network that connected factories to state planners. It seems technocratic, but Eden Medina says that these these cyber-revolutionaries saw it as anything but. Medina is author of Cybernetic Revolutionaries: Technology and Politics in Allende’s Chile. The book recounts the short-lived Cybersyn Project. It promised using science to develop a more rationally-ordered economy. However, it also promised to guarantee the freedom and autonomy of workers. The project was destroyed in the brutal coup of 1973. However, did it work, and is it a dream worth resurrecting? This is part of a wider series on techno-utopian thinking, produced with professors Tanner Mirrlees and Imre Szemen. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

[You can access the full Technocracy Now! series now: part one, part two, part three] Technocracy is the idea that experts should govern. For the common good, presumably. It makes a certain amount of sense, given how irrational our politics seem to be right now. So, technocracy is seductive. In fact, it’s an idea as old as politics itself. We begin the first of a three-part series telling stories of technocracies past, present, and future. In this first part of this episode, Ira Basen tells us the story of Technocracy, Inc. This 1930s movement aimed to install non-democratic North American “technate” where we only work from the ages of 25 to 45, for 16 hours a week. It might surprise you to learn that Elon Musk’s grandfather was one of its leaders. Basen produced an extended CBC: Ideas documentary on the movement, and it’s worth checking out. (Programming note: we also have this full story produced as a video documentary, on YouTube). Then, perhaps the most influential intellectual today: Noam Chomsky. What is the place of technical expertise in a radical left project? Chomsky’s famous “Responsibility of Intellectuals” is one of the best critiques of the liberal technocratic intelligentsia. However, his lesser-known writing on Mikhail Bakunin’s predictions about how the Marxist intellectual vanguard would “beat the people with the people’s stick” offers a warning to left technocrats. We have a wide-ranging conversation with Professor Chomsky on his critique of intellectuals, the place of technical expertise in a radical left project, his anarchist theory of expertise, and his thoughts on popular reason and popular intelligence. (Programming note: we also have this extended video interview, also available on YouTube). This is part of a wider series on techno-utopian thinking, produced with professors Tanner Mirrlees and Imre Szemen. For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Technocracy is the idea that experts should govern. For the common good, presumably. It makes a certain amount of sense, given how irrational our politics seem to be right now. So, technocracy is seductive. In fact, it’s an idea as old as politics itself, and it emerges just about everywhere — left, right, and somewhere in between. From Plato’s philosopher kings, to Soviet economic planners, the cybernetic dreams of Cold War liberals, and today’s algorithmically-governed workplaces. So next episode, we begin a three-part series telling stories of technocracies past, present, and future. We’ll start with the purest expression of technocracy: Technocracy, Inc. This 1930s movement aimed to install non-democratic North American “technate” where we only work from the ages of 25 to 45, for 16 hours a week. It might surprise you to learn that Elon Musk’s grandfather was one of its leaders. The movement was short-lived, but many of its assumptions live on through the New Deal, Cold War liberalisms, and the dreams of our new technocratic overlords. Like Elon Musk’s proposed ‘Martian technate,’ Peter Thiel’s floating platforms in the ocean where Silicon Valley “seasteaders” give government an ‘operating system update,’ to the emerging neoreactionaries that hope to install a techno-monarch. This is our biggest production yet, so we’ve got some of our biggest guests. Including Noam Chomsky, who has long been a critic of unaccountable expert authority. Part 1 of Technocracy Now! starts Monday, 3rd October on our main feed, but you can listen now on our Patreon. Episodes will be released weekly for the next three weeks. —————————-CREDITS—————————- For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Researchers with the best of intentions still get things wrong. “Who made you the expert” is a valid question that research subjects might ask… and frankly, they’re right to ask that. If you’re, say, a drug user in Vancouver’s downtown east side you probably don’t want some guy from Harvard telling you what paternalistic research he’s doing on you. You want to be a partner in research done with you. So what does it look like when the old paternalistic ways are dispensed of? Garth Mullins hosts Crackdown, a podcast about the drug war in Vancouver covered by the drug users themselves. Gordon talks to him about being the researcher and the researched in the downtown east side, a place where activists and academics have come together to develop better methods. We also talk to Michelle Fine of City University of New York. She’s a leading proponent of “critical participatory action research“. That’s a way of researching that de-centres the academic. We find out the theory, and what that means for expertise more broadly. Special thanks to Samona Marsh, one of the authors of Research 101: A process for developing local guidelines for ethical research in heavily researched communities, and also to Liz Dozier of Chicago Beyond. Liz and Samona’s work was really important to this episode even if we couldn’t get their voices to air. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CREDITS—————————- For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Recently a major outage took nearly a third of Canada offline. No phone, no internet… even access to 911 got shut down in some places, all thanks to Rogers Media Inc. But why does one company get so much control over a vital service like the Internet in the first place? This is the story in the USA as well as Canada – our digitized lives are all being held captive by a tiny number of huge corporations. We at Darts don’t necessarily believe the market is the solution here. But if the market isn’t, what is? How do we make a more democratic, socially driven Internet? Gordon Katic interviews Ben Tarnoff, author of Internet for the People, to help us answer these questions – and most importantly, we ask whether the internet is indeed a series of tubes. Read Ben’s book, and keep up with his work on his website. —————————-CREDITS—————————- For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The term “metaverse” was coined in a 1993 science fiction novel. Since then, it’s grown from a dystopian literary concept to a reality that corporations want to sell you. Strap on some VR goggles and escape your tired analog life! Except that the systemic issues we already have seem to be creeping into the metaverse, too. As the lines between virtuality and physicality continue to blur, companies like Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta are setting their sights on virtual worlds. It’s a new frontier, full of potential – and full of our valuable data. Metaverses like Second Life or World of Warcraft can be positive and even game-changing experiences on the individual level, but when it comes to the navigating a virtual society with a capitalist backdrop…things get a bit dicey. On this episode, guest host and producer Ren Bangert explores the metaverse. First, we hear a love story from the glory days of Second Life, told to us by Sandrine Han – a scholar of virtual worlds and a long-time Second Lifer. Then, writer and game developer Ian Bogost takes us on a deep dive into the corporatization of the metaverse. We’ll hear how the metaverse has grown from a dystopian warning from science fiction to a sinister data-mining reality – and how even the shiniest of tech utopias are still functioning under the same old capitalism. ——————-FURTHER READING, LISTENING AND WATCHING—————— Check out Ian Bogost’s article “The Metaverse is Bad” in The Atlantic. Ian’s got lots of excellent reading content listed on his website – perfect for a deep dive into game theory. For a further imagining of democracy in a metaverse, check out Eliane Boey’s short story “The Forgotten”. You can read it in Clarkesworld Magazine, or listen to an audio version on the Clarkesworld podcast. Watch the Wall Street Journal’s Joanna Stern get trapped in the metaverse for 24 hours. It’s a an emotional rollercoaster. Han, H. C. (2013). Visual learning in the virtual world: The hidden curriculum of imagery in Second Life. Immersive Environments, Augmented Realities and Virtual Worlds: Assessing Future Trends in Education. http://www.igi-global.com/chapter/visual-learning-virtual-world/74048 Stephenson, N. (1993). Snow Crash. New York: Bantam Books. ——————-ABOUT THE SHOW—————— For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Canadian media is full of galaxy brain columnists. Luckily there is a show who reads their crap so that you don’t have to: Big Shiny Takes, aka Jeremy Appel, Eric Wickham and Marino Greco. We’re featuring this episode because your esteemed host and editor Gordon Katic made an appearance to discuss the latest unfathomably smart take: Matthew McConaughey has a moral obligation to run for president of the United States. It’s stunning intellectual work like this that has led Big Shiny Takes to become the world’s first anti free speech podcast. They’re also our colleagues, as part of the Harbinger Media Network It’s a different vibe to our usual programming, but we think you’ll like it because Big Shiny Takes is witty and anarchic and smart. The team really deserve a lot of recognition for doing the lord’s work: shit-talking columnists. ——————FURTHER READING, LISTENING, & WATCHING————————- If you enjoyed this then check out the other episodes Big Shiny Takes, subscribe to the show and never read another opinion column in your life. You too can be free! If however you prefer masochism then you can read the Toronto Star Article yourself: After his moving speech on gun control, it’s time for Matthew McConaughey to give up Hollywood for Washington, by Vinay Menon We also featured Eric, Marino and Jeremy on a previous Darts episode. EP41: Canada’s Dumbest Public Intellectuals. This was one of our more fun episodes, also featuring drug legalisation campaigner and the left’s best psychedelic TikTok star Hilary Agro. Also Kate Jacobs of fellow Harbinger podcast Alberta Advantage and the man behind Harbinger Media himself: André Goulet. ——————-ABOUT THE SHOW—————— For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The January 6th hearings continued this week, so we took it as an opportunity to revisit how academics tried to explain the events. Many likened it to a kind of psycho-social pathology; terms like deindividuation, psychosis, groupthink, and mob mentality were thrown around liberally. This is basically crowd theory, a line of thought developed in the 19th century by French physician Gustave Le Bon. However, Le Bon was a reactionary bigot. He feared the masses, derided popular intelligence, and condemned democratic rule. Plus, his ideas are largely discredited.  Left wing scholars do not like Le Bon–at least not when it comes to understanding leftwing movements. Yet, when it comes to the right, something changes. Is it OK to apply reactionary ideas to reactionary movements, out of political expediency? We think no, because these ideas will end up inevitably being applied to movements for social justice. In fact, they long have been. On this episode, we explore why academic always fear the mass, whatever the politics. First, social movement theorist James Jasper takes us on an intellectual journey — throughout the western philosophical canon, to Le Bon and beyond — revealing how publics have long been seen as irrational and emotional. Next, historian Joy Rohde takes us into the academic-military-industrial complex. The US military has played a major role funding these kinds of ideas, because they serve the interests of empire, white supremacy, and elite control. ——————FURTHER READING, LISTENING, & WATCHING————————- If the politics of emotions and social movements is of interest, you have to check out James Jasper’s book, The Emotions of Protest. Especially relevant is the appendix, which offers a wider history of emotions and rationality as it pertains to social movements. We highly recommend Joy Rohde’s book Armed with Expertise: The Militarization of American Social Research During the Cold War, or the shorter encyclopedia article that offers a concise history on the entangled relationship of US empire and US social science. For more on the discredited work of Gustav Le Bon, check out Stephen Reicher’s work, including this tweet thread, and a BBC4 documentary that featured his work. Stewart Ewan’s classic PR!: A Social History of Spin focusses especially on how the ideas of Le Bon and others influenced Freud and his nephew Edward Bernays, the father of modern public relations. Adam Curtis’ documentary the Century of the Self also tells this story, especially in the second part. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. The lead producer is Jay Cockburn, and our assistant producer is Ren Bangert. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and we have marketing and video editing from Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the relationship between activism and academia. Our scholarly advisors on this series are Professors Lesley Wood at York University, Sigrid Schmalzer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, as well as Sharmeen Khan, Sami McBryer, and Susannah Mulvale. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

The suspect in the Buffalo shooting had a manifesto, as mass shooters often do. However, this one was different. It was littered with references to peer-reviewed scientific research that, he purports, supports his white supremacist beliefs. It’s part of a broader far right subculture, with ‘journal clubs’ and the like, in which research is read closely and appropriated, says population geneticist Jed Carlson (check out this thread in particular). What are scientists to make of it? Plus, there’s a much wider intellectual history of race science and the right. Mitch Thompson of Press Progress details this ‘scholarly’ work, much of it CanCon, and how it undergirds conservative austerity politics. Marc Apollonio is guest host this week. ——————-ABOUT THE SHOW—————— For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The pickup truck is the symbol of rural conservative masculinity. So, it often takes centre stage in the tired culture wars between reactionary neo-populists and liberal moralists. Like today, with Canada’s right crudely embracing the truck–and tweeting furiously about those ‘Laurentian elites,‘ and ‘Toronto columnists‘ who thumb their nose at it. But, if you really want to piss off the libs: don’t just post about it. Why not hang some big veiny nuts from your truck? Today on the show, we talk about the political history of trucks and trucking. Matt Christman (@9:23) of Chapo Trap House tells us why conservatives love their trucks, why we love to hate them, and wonders how we might break out of these tired patterns. What does the world look like when you see it through a windshield (@26:15)? Chase Barber is a logging trucker in BC, and viral Tik Toker posting about all things transport and green energy. Plus, Justin Martin of Freight Waves breaks down the state of the trucking industry. Then, Shane Hamilton (@33:26) argues that you can understand a lot about about modern political economy through the history of trucking. He is author of Trucking Country: the Road to America’s Wal-Mart Economy, which covers the history of long-haul trucking–from its heyday in the 1960s and 1970s, to the exploitative debt peonage of today. Finally (@57:35), nobody is happy with the state of our roads and highways. But Gabrielle Esperdy tell us, at one point, it looked like it might become a utopia–an autopia. Today, EVs offer us the promise of a new green autopia. Esperdy is author of American Autopia: An Intellectual History of the American Roadside at Midcentury. ——————FURTHER READING, LISTENING, & WATCHING————————- Everything you wanted to know about truck nuts, but you were too afraid to ask: Vice’s article on the the truck nuts war, Above the Law’s discussion on the constitutionality of truck nuts, and Slate’s investigation that reveals truck nuts consumers aren’t who you think they are. What to make of that ‘freedom convoy?’ Listen to Matt Christman’s extended discussion on the Bottlemen, which also covers some of this 70s trucking culture. Plus, Tanner Mirrlees’ article on the toxic rightwing petro-populism of the convoy. There are some great trucking movies we talk about in this episode. Some, less great. Check out the imitable Humphrey Bogart in the classic They Drive by Night (1940). In the 1970s, things got a bit politically weirder: Smokey and the Bandit (1977), and most of all, Convoy (1978), typify the era. ——————-ABOUT THE SHOW—————— For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

Why does the democratic establishment always avoid turning left, even when it might mean a political win? Gordon asks David Sirota. Sirota is behind the smash-hit Netflix movie Don’t Look Up! He is also host and co-writer of an excellent podcast series called Meltdown, which documented how Obama’s lacklustre response to the financial crisis set the stage for Trump. We cover a range of topics: from the limits of technocracy, the political co-option of science and expertise, the critical reaction to Don’t Look Up, and whether or not Ideocracy (2006) has bad politics. ——————FURTHER READING & LISTENING————————- Some things we talked about: From Sirota, we talked mostly his work on Don’t Look Up! and Meltdown. We also talked about the Lever, which Sirota runs (it was formerly called the Daily Poster). From there, check out his article on how Biden is Jokerfying America. More good stuff: check out Champagne Shark’s episode with Sirota on Meltdown, Luke Savage’s coverage on Jacobin, the Useful Idiots’ episode on Don’t Look Up! at the Oscars, and especially Nathan J. Robinson’s essay on why critics of the movie totally missed the point. ——————-ABOUT THE SHOW—————— For a full list of credits, contact information, and more, visit our about page.

The war in Ukraine has brought nuclear technology to the forefront. There’s the threat of nuclear weapons, and the danger of nuclear power plants melting down under military fire. Yet, the nuclear industry also promises to deliver us from our dependency on fossil fuels. It’s an interesting duality with nuclear: is it the end of the world, or is it salvation? Professor Jessica Hurley, author of Infrastructures of Apocalypse: American Literature and the Nuclear Complex, walks us through the history of nuclear dystopia and nuclear utopia, and how they have always been closely connected. Also: happy Earth Day, even though we are not feeling particularly optimistic about the state of our planet. The war in Ukraine has brought environmental politics front-and-centre, with countries racing to extricate themselves from Russian oil and gas. Yet, in Canada, we are seeing industry push to ramp up dirty tar sands production. How will the war change energy policy? We wonk out and get into the nitty-gritty of the state of climate policy with, Mark Winfield.  ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. The lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and we have marketing support from Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is part of a series of episodes on the politics of technology and techno-utopian thinking. We had research advising from Professor Tanner Mirrlees at Ontario Tech University and Professor Imre Szeman at the University of Waterloo. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

We look at the mind behind Russia’s imperial vision, Aleksandr Dugin. Political theorist Matt McManus walks us through this far-right thinker’s strange and often contradictory ideas, from: his geopolitical clash-of-civilizations narrative, his flirtation with left-wing postmodernism, his Nietzschean great man-visions, his rejection of all things liberal, and his more ancient and mystical imagination. ——————FURTHER READING & LISTENING————————- This episode is inspired by the Pill Pod’s take on Duggin, with Matt McManus and friends. Their episode has a deeper dive into what Duggin means for postmodernism, Bruno Latour, and the left–check it out! Duggin is a kind of postmodern conservative, and McManus’ book the Rise of Postmodern Conservatism analyzes this emerging intellectual milieu in detail. We used the book Key Thinkers of the Radical Right in preparation, and in particular Marlene Laruelle’s chapter on Duggin. It encapsulates his ideas, and gives a more detailed biography than we had here. Note: Unfortunately, a lot of academic work is paywalled and not readily accessible to people outside the academy. If you ever see anything in our reading list that you cannot access but would like to access, simply email the show and we will do what we can to get them to you. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US———————— To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS————————— Darts and Letters is hosted and executive produced by Gordon Katic. Marc Apollonio is managing producer. Our lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. We work primarily in Toronto, Ontario, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

Can genetics play a role in crafting left social policy? Or should we not touch those ideas ever again–even with a 10 foot pole? Paige Harden’s new book, “The Genetic Lottery: Why DNA Matters for Social Equality” makes a forceful case for an egalitarian politics informed by DNA. However, geneticist Joseph Graves critiqued the book in the pages of the Lancet, arguing that we do not need sophisticated genetic knowledge to make a more socially just world. Managing producer Marc Apollonio guest hosts, talking to both. ——————-PROGRAMMING NOTE—————— You may have noticed the last couple weeks we have been posting less frequently. For the next few months, we are switching over to releasing every two weeks because of funding reasons. We think it will be temporary, and regular host Gordon Katic will be back next week with a more detailed update. Still, now more than ever, we need your support! If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. —————————-CONTACT US———————— To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS————————— Darts and Letters was hosted and produced this week by Marc Apollonio, who is also our managing producer, with editing from Gordon Katic. Our lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. We work primarily in Toronto, Ontario, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

DNA offers us the promise of an objective forensic science. Rather than following our own racially-biased hunches, technology can deliver us the unvarnished truth. Yet, we always interpret technology through our own particular lens, and within a society that produces technology in a particular sort of way. In this episode, we look at how forensic DNA technologies relate to our ideas about race and criminality. We see how DNA led to the imprisonment of an innocent man, Farah Jama. Then, we look at the frontier of forensic DNA and artificial intelligence. A new technique promises to draw an image of a suspect based solely on what we see in the DNA, but critics say these pictures are entrenching stereotypes about race and crime. First (@3:44), Kimani Boden is a Melbourne-based attorney who served as Farah Jama’s appeal lawyer. He takes us through the trial, the circumstances surrounding the story, and the use and misuse of DNA evidence. He points to race as a factor, reminding us that the criminal justice system is rarely as unbiased as some would have us believe. Then, (@20:07) Stephen Cordner is the former director of the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine. He was the head of the VIFM, which oversaw the sexual assault centre related to the case, at the time when this story was unfolding. He discusses what went wrong, how we might be more sceptical of DNA evidence, and how we might prevent similar wrongful convictions in the future. Finally (@27:13), Amade M’charek is professor of the Anthropology of Science at the University of Amsterdam, where she researches forensics and race. She argues that legal systems around the world need to be more critical of forensic science, taking us through the state of forensics and the challenge of new and evolving technologies in the field – including an emergent technology that uses DNA to produce composite images of potential suspects. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Australian author and journalist Julie Szego wrote the book on Farah Jama’s ordeal. Check out The Tainted Trial of Farah Jama. Read through the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology’s Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative’s page on Farah Jama. Get to know Amade M’charek’s research on forensics and race. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US———————— To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected] or tweet Gordon directly. —————————-CREDITS————————— Darts and Letters was hosted and produced this week by Marc Apollonio, who is also our managing producer, with editing from Gordon Katic. Our lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Roland Nadler provided research assistance and David Moscrop wrote the show notes. Special thanks this week to Julie Szego. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. And we are backed by academic grants that support mobilizing research. This episode was also a part of a mini-series on the state of forensic science. The scholarly lead on that project is Professor Emma Cunliffe. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

Imagine reading or watching The Minority Report and thinking of that as a model for the criminal justice system. Well, plenty of forensic types are doing just that. Can you figure out if you are a criminal by scanning your brain? On this episode of Darts and Letters, guest-host Jay Cockburn and our guests explore the study of the criminal mind, from the history of madness, to spotty personality tests, to the emerging neuroscientific frontier. First (@7:23), what do you see in this image? Wrong answer, off to jail! We look at the state of forensic psychology, and how to improve it. Tess Neal is associate professor of psychology at Arizona State University. She studied the quality of hundreds of assessment tools and processes used to understand individuals and found that the quality…varies. A lot. Then, (@24:34) what might neuroscience tell us about criminality – and how dangerous is that as a source of assessment tools? Roland Nadler is a PhD candidate in law at the University of British Columbia and a Darts and Letters researcher. This is Minority Report type stuff and the implications are, to say the least, potentially very disturbing with technologies ripe for abuse, error, and systemic injustice. Finally (@46:08), the history of madness is extraordinary, and it comes with warnings for the current and future of psychological and neuroscientific techniques in the criminal justice system. Andrew Scull is a sociologist and the author of Madness in Civilisation: The Cultural History of Insanity, From the Madhouse to Modern Medicine. He defines madness and guides us through its history throughout the last several hundred years. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Read Tess Neal’s co-written paper “Psychological Assessments in Legal Contexts: Are Courts Keeping ‘Junk Science’ Out of the Courtroom?” Then, see more of her work on her faculty page. Get to know Roland Nadler and his work through his graduate school page at UBC, and read about his work in Vox on neurointerventions and prisoners. Check out Andrew Scull’s books Madness in Civilisation and Desperate Remedies; also, see his work in the Los Angeles Review of Books. Plus, have a look at more of his work on his faculty page. Dig more into the lit on the topic with Ben Green’s “The False Promise of Risk Assessments” along with Emily Murphy and Jesse Rissman’s “Evidence of Memory from Brain Data.” ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected] —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters was hosted and produced this week by Jay Cockburn, with editing from Gordon Katic. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. Roland Nadler provided research assistance, and David Moscrop wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. And we are backed by academic grants that support mobilizing research.. This episode was also a part of a mini-series on the state of forensic science. The scholarly lead on that project is Professor Emma Cunliffe. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

*Programming note: This is a rebroadcast. You can learn much about a media and political culture by examining when it panics, and who it panics about. And we’ve always panicked about video games, from the early arcades until this very day. Whether you are a prudish Christian conservative, or a concerned liberal-minded paternalist, demonizing video games has long been good politics. On this episode: guest host and lead producer Jay Cockburn travels back to the 90s, and looks at the story of Mortal Kombat. The game was violent, gory, glorious. It was a youth rebellion in miniature. Parents rebelled against the rebellion, staging their own petulant counter-revolution, and politicians embraced it. It triggering a moral panic and even congressional hearings into violence in games. But why did it happen, who did it serve, and what does it tell us about our own culture? First (@14:21), Liana Kerzner is a game developer and critic, YouTuber, and gamer. She takes us through her discovery of Mortal Kombat and the visceral attraction to…just how cool and groundbreaking the game was. Then, she looks at the moral panics around games today: panics about sex and nudity. Then (@22:52), Cyril Lachel is a journalist and the editor in chief of Defunct Games. He explains the history and evolution of gaming in the 1990s as Sega tries to differentiate itself from Nintendo as an edgier system for its gamers as they enter their teenage years. Plus, he points out what parents and politicians got wrong about video games and how gaming media evolved around the time. Finally (@39:34), Henry Jenkins is Provost’s Professor of Communication, Journalism, and Cinematic Arts at the University of South California. He tells us why moral panics keep coming back time after time, starting with comic books in the 1950s. Then he takes us through their generational politics and sociology. Plus, he takes us back to his appearance before the congressional hearings into video games. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Visit Liana Kerzner’s Patreon Page and her YouTube channel. Also, read some of her past blogging. Have a look at Defunct Games’ YouTube channel to go back in time to look at games that are now, well, defunct. To listen to more with Cyril Lachel, hear him on Super Gamer Podcast. Pull up Henry Jenkins’ website and peruse his academic and media work at USC. Plus, check out his latest books Comics and Stuff and his co-authored Popular Culture and the Civic Imagination. ——————-EVEN MORE FURTHER READING AND ACADEMIC SHOW SOURCES—————— Ferguson, C. J., & Colwell, J. (2017). Understanding why scholars hold different views on the influences of video games on public health. Journal of Communication, 67(3), 305-327. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12293 Ferguson, C. J. (2015). Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 646-666. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615592234 Ferguson, C. J. (2014). Violent video games, mass shootings, and the supreme court: Lessons for the legal community in the wake of recent free speech cases and mass shootings. New Criminal Law Review, 17(4), 553-586. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2014.17.4.553 Ferguson, C. J. (2007). Evidence for publication bias in video game violence effects literature: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(4), 470-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2007.01.001 Kline, Stephen (n.d.). Moral panics and video games (source) Markey, P. M., & Ferguson, C. J. (2017). Internet gaming addiction: Disorder or moral panic? The American Journal of Psychiatry, 174(3), 195-196. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2016.16121341 Markey, P. M., & Ferguson, C. J. (2017). Teaching us to fear: The violent video game moral panic and the politics of game research. American Journal of Play, 10(1), 99-115. Quandt, T., & Kowert, R. (Eds.). (2015). The Video Game Debate: Unravelling the Physical, Social, and Psychological Effects of Video Games (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315736495. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected] or tweet Gordon directly. And if you haven’t already, subscribe to our show wherever you get your podcasts. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW——————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. —————————-CREDITS—————————- This week, Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Jay Cockburn, who is also our lead producer. Our editor and usual host is Gordon Katic. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio.. David Moscrop wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This episode received suppo

Guest host (and regular lead producer) Jay Cockburn gets ready to enter the world of e-sports, with a lesson in Super Smash Bros from a top player and professional coach. Find out why he won’t make it (spoiler alert: he doesn’t have that reaction time he used to); but also, find out why he might not want to make it. Unfortunately, e-sports have many of the problems that ‘real’ sports do, and some are even worse. E-sports have lower pay, more stringent IP regimes, singular corporate control, and less labour organizing. However, could things be changing? Jay talks to Alexander Lee, esports and games reporter at Digiday. He takes us through the booming world of esports: the good, the bad, the repetitive stress injuries, and what to do about it. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Check out Alexander’s work at Digiday, including his take on holding companies as the future of esports and the competition between traditional and esports. Also, be sure to read his piece in The Nation on endemic exploitation within e-sports.Plus, visit his website to see more of his work and his media appearances. Learn more about Jay’s Smash Bros. coach, Dabuz, and book a coaching session with him at Metafy. And check out his YouTube channel and team. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is usually hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. This week, our lead producer Jay Cockburn hosted. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This episode had support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. It is was part of a wide project about the emerging politics of video games housed at UBC with advice from Lennart E. Nacke at the University of Waterloo. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

College athletes are workers, and they deserve to get paid. They put their bodies and futures on the line for the profit of their schools, without seeing real compensation for their labour. However, things are changing. For instance, a 2021 Supreme Court decision upholding a lower court decision that found the NCAA were being anti-competitive in capitalizing on the name, image, and likeness of their players, while not letting the players do the same. Plus, a November memo from the National Labor Relations Board that noted student-athletes have been misclassified as ‘student athletes’ – they are, in fact, employees with a right to organize. On this episode of Darts and Letters, we go downfield to look at university labour and the battle for union rights. First (@6:40), get to know the College Football Player Association. It’s not a union, but it’s growing a membership base and who knows where that will lead. Ed Garret, a brand ambassador with the group and former cornerback at the University of Mexico, takes us through his time (and injuries) in college football and the working conditions college athletes face on the field, off the field, and in the classroom. Then (@30:39), labour organizing isn’t just for college athletes. And it’s on the rise on campuses across North America. We talk to JP Hornick, bargaining chair with the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, and Glynis Price, president of the Concordia University of Edmonton Faculty Association, about their strikes. Then, Helena Worthen and Joe Barry are scholars, organizers, and the co-authors of Power Despite Precarity: Strategies for the Contingent Faculty Movement in Higher Education. They tell us about successful labour strategies in academia, and why university workers are no different from other workers. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Read the NLRB’s memo on employee status for college athletes and see more on the push to organize from In These Times. See more on the NCAA Supreme Court decision. Also, check out the College Football Players Association and the National College Players Association. Have a look at Joe Berry and Helena Worthen’s Pluto Press book Power Despite Precarity: Strategies for the Contingent Faculty Movement in Higher Education. Dig into stories of on-campus unionization and other strike efforts across North America: a University of California lecturer strike, a Howard University housing protest, a student workers strike and Columbia University, a faculty strike at Ontario Tech University, OPSEU vs. CEC, and a Concordia University of Edmonton faculty and administration strike. Then peruse the list of student employee unions. And have a listen to episodes 20 and 21 of Between the Lines: A Podcast About Sports and the Law to learn more about college athletes and labour rights. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. The lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This episode had support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. It was part of a wider project looking at neoliberal educational reforms. The lead is Dr. Marc Spooner at the University of Regina and Franklynn Bartol at the University of Toronto. They provided research and advising on this episode. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

Has the pandemic taught us anything? As we look forward and imagine what the future might look like, we like to think ‘next time will be different.’ But, if we don’t take a serious look back, it won’t. Not as long as the people who made this pandemic so bad face zero consequences. In this episode of Darts and Letters, John Nichols says it’s time for a COVID reckoning. His new book is Coronavirus Criminals and Pandemic Profiteers: Accountability for Those Who Caused the Crisis. Nichols, who is also national affairs correspondent of the Nation, retraces his reporting – revealing how so many suffered while others made out like gangbusters. Plus, we ask: could it have been different? ——————PROGRAMMING NOTE—————— There will be an extended video version of this interview on our YouTube channel this Monday. Subscribe today, if you don’t already. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Check out John Nichols’ book Coronarvirus Criminals and Pandemic Profiteers. Plus, have a look at his work for The Nation, including “The Making of a Coronavirus Criminal–Criminal Presidency,” and “There is No Military Solution Out of This Ukraine Crisis.” For more, have a look at Nichols’ other books with Verso. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. The lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. We produce this program in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

Welcome to 21st century techno-utopianism. Driven by a new tech-bro/crypto culture, supported by online hordes of true believers, and couched in philosophies of meritocracy and technocracy, techno-utopianism is born anew. But this thinking, while different, is not really new. As Darts and Letters sets out on a series of episodes to explore the persistent belief that technology will save us, we start by looking back to past utopias: rising, shimmering images of a future of wonder and plenty, out towards the horizon. For that, we visit the world’s fairs of techno-utopias past. First (@10:42), what exactly is a world’s fair and what purpose does it serve? Rob Rydell is an historian of world’s fairs at Montana State University–Bozeman.. He argues these events provided “the cultural ballast for stabilizing and advancing capitalist industrializing societies.” During the 1920s and through to the 1940s, this function was essential to the United States and the rest of the capitalist West as they stared down fascism in Europe. Next, (@32:55), what’s left once the circus leaves town? Or, more precisely, the fair? Jade Daskow is a photographer based in New York. Her project Lost Utopias features photos of old fair grounds, many of which are left in disrepair. She takes us through the disused utopias that have turned into dystopian relics that betray the promises of techno-utopian visions of the future. Finally (@47:30), when all is said and done, should we be pessimistic? Optimistic? Is there some promise in techno-utopian visions? What does it even mean to ask that question? Jennifer Slack is Distinguished Professor of Communication and Cultural Studies at Michigan Tech and the co-author, with J. MacGregor Wise, of Culture and Technology: A Primer. She takes us back to the future and breaks down the meaning of progress, technology, techno-determinism, and more. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Check out Rob Rydell’s books on the history of world’s fairs: All the World’s a Fair, World’s Fairs: The Century-of-Progress Expositions, and Fair America: World’s Fairs in the United States. Plus, see more of his work on ResearchGate. Visit Jade Daskow’s photography project Lost Utopias to see what remains once the fair leaves town. Then, visit her homepage to have a look at her other projects, including The Architecture of Activism. Have a look at Jennifer Slack’s co-written book Culture and Technology: A Primer. Then, see her faculty page at Michigan Tech to peruse more of her work. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. The lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It is the first in a series of episodes on techno-utopianism. We had research advising from Professor Tanner Mirrlees at Ontario Tech University and Professor Imre Szeman at the University of Waterloo. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

Last year was a rough one for academia – inauspicious, to say the least. The Covid-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on students, universities lurching between open and closed, leaving students strained and uncertain about their futures, and stuck in Zoom classrooms. Meanwhile, mental health struggles soared. Students paid full tuition price for this cut-rate experience. On the research side, there have been at least 72 retracted papers on Covid-19 and a total of 32,000 retractions. And, of course, universities themselves kept alive their long, esteemed tradition of operating like cartels – with a handful of them facing a lawsuit for alleged violations of antitrust law related to the amount of financial aid they paid out. All of that is bad. But wait – there’s more! In this episode of Darts and Letters, we take two of the most frustrating aspects of the  higher education world: endless culture wars around free speech and identity, and the continued corporatization of the curriculum. First (@7:00), what is an anti-woke, free-thinking academy and who does it serve? Derek Roberston is a writer and contributing editor at Politico. Last November, he wrote about the new ‘free thinking’ University of Austin. He takes us through the tensions, contradictions, controversies, and ideological commitments underpinning the “fiercely independent” new school and its quest for free inquiry–and maybe Elon Musk’s money. Then (@29:57), purpose-built micro-credentials are en vogue right now in higher-education, leading many to ask: What? And why? Canada is on board, with Ontario investing tens of millions into microcredits alongside several other provinces. Gavin Moodie is an adjunct professor at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto. He breaks down microcredits and explains them as an outsourcing of job training built for the hodge podge, ephemeral gig economy – or “gig qualifications for the gig economy.” ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Read Derek Robertson’s piece on the new University of Austin in Politico. You can read some of his past work here and check out his website for more. Also, check out the University of Austin’s statement regarding Steven Pinker and Robert Zimmer stepping down as members of the school’s advisory board. Check out Gavin Moodie’s work on microcredits, co-written with Leesa Mary Wheelahan, “Gig qualifications for the gig economy: micro-credentials and the ‘hungry mile’.” Plus, check out more of his research here and here. See also his popular writing for Times Higher Education. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. This week, our subscribers get a bonus interview with Jeff Beall, the founder of Beall’s List. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. The lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. This episode received support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It was  part of a wider series of episodes about neoliberal educational policies. The lead researcher is Franklynn Bartol at the University of Toronto and our academic advisor is Dr. Marc Spooner at the University of Regina. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

Happy new year! We’re a few days behind, but as we catch up after the holidays and prepare to enter the third year of the plague, we wanted to bring you a few resolutions from, and for, the left by way of the Darts and Letters team and a handful of our past guests. This episode features offerings from: Robert Greene II Victor Pickard Nora Loreto Hilary Agro Jasmine Banks David Moscrop Jay Cockburn Gordon Katic ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected]. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. Our lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

Note: As the one-year anniversary of the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol approaches, we are revisiting an episode on Steven Bannon and traditionalism with a rebroadcast of this bonus episode from late January 2021. In this bonus episode, host Gordon Katic speaks with Ben Teitelbaum, author of a fascinating new-ish book called War for Eternity. He spent over 20 hours with Steve Bannon, as well as a wider network of far-right thinkers and strategists. Honestly, the things they say will surprise you. These proto-fascist thinkers of today are Traditionalists, with a capital T. They’re nothing like old-school conservatives; they have a lot more in common with hippies and new age gurus than people like William F. Buckley. We touched on this school of thought in the last episode, but in this bonus episode we really dig in. Why do their bizarre ideas appeal, and what can we do to combat them? —————————SUPPORT US———————— This is a bonus episode. And for now, they’re free. Patrons get them a day early, but they’re kind of irregular. We’ll make them every week if enough of you chip in. Go to Patreon.com/dartsandletters. And if you can’t do that, please do us a favour and help us get this show to more people. The best way you can help is to share this with a friend. You can also rate and review Darts and Letters on whatever podcast platform you use. —————————-CONTACT US———————— To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter and Facebook. If you’d like to write us, email [email protected] or tweet Gordon directly. —————————-CREDITS—————————— Our lead producer is Jay Cockburn, our chase producer Marc Apollonio, and our research coordinator is David Moscrop. Our composer is Mike Barber, and our graphic designer is Dakota Koop. Our host is Gordon Katic. We receive funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Our lead academic advisor is Professor Allen Sens at the University of British Columbia. We are also supported by a wider project looking at the rise of far political ideologies – that project is run by Professors Andre Gagne, Ronald Beiner, and A. James McAdams. Darts and Letters is made in two places: Toronto, Ontario, and Vancouver, British Columbia. Toronto is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat People. Vancouver is on the unceded territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations. This is a production of Cited Media. We make other fine shows like Cited Podcast and Crackdown. You can find both of those and others wherever you find your podcasts.

Setting goals for the new year? Learning a language? Going for a run? Delivering food? Picking packages off a warehouse shelf for delivery? There’s a game for that. Or, at least, a gamified system designed to nudge you in a series of pre-programmed directions in the service of the state, techno-capitalist overlords, or any number of other groups and entities that chart the course of our hyper-connected, cutting-edge, dystopian 21st century lives. This week on Darts and Letters, guest host Jay Cockburn and our guests take us through gamification of…everything. Also, on a quick programming note: host Gordon Katic is off this week and we are all off next week for the holidays. Happy holidays! We’re back ahead of the new year on our regular programming schedule. First (@5:01), we met Dave from Knoxville, Tennessee, on a subreddit for Lyft drivers, though he also drives for Uber. He tells us how the rideshare companies use quests to keep their “independent contractors” on the roads. Then, (@9:03) is gamification inherently dystopian? Not necessarily. Sebastian Deterding is Professor of Digital Creativity at the University of York and a translational designer. He knows gamification. Deterding tells us the long history of gamification (from Plato, to war games, to today’s app economy, and more), and explores the contrasting philosophies of gamification. Next (@23:48), gamified workplaces sound like hellscapes. Paris Martineau is a journalist with the Information, where she covers Amazon. She dives into the gamified warehouse workplace, including PvP (that is, worker versus worker) showdowns, and the tracking and surveillance that comes with the territory. Finally, (@28:26) it’s one thing to study or write about Amazon warehouses, but what is it like to work in one? Mostafa Henaway is a community organiser at the Immigrant Workers Centre and a PhD candidate at Concordia University who studies Amazon. He took his work one step further when he took a job in one of its Canadian warehouses. He brings us inside the bizarre system, from the automated application to the alienating, monotonous, minutely-surveilled-and-tracked warehouse floor. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— Visit Deterding’s website and check out his publications, including his co-edited book The Gameful World: Approaches, Issues, Applications. For more of his work, visit his academic page at the University of York. Read Martineau’s work on Amazon for the Information, including “The Deadly Toll of Amazon’s Trucking Boom” and “OSHA Investigates Fatal Amazon Warehouse Collapse.” See more of her work here and visit her website. Read Henaway’s gripping story of what it’s like to work at Amazon, written for the Breach. Plus, visit the Immigrants Workers Centre to learn more about their efforts to protect worker rights. Check out his academic work on Google Scholar. ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected] or tweet Gordon directly. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters was hosted and produced this week by Jay Cockburn, with editing from Gordon Katic. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. This is a production of Cited Media. And we are backed by academic grants that support mobilizing research and democratizing the concept of public intellectualism. The founding academic advisor of the program is Professor Allen Sens at the University of British Columbia. This episode was also a part of a wider series looking at the politics of video games housed at the University of British Columbia and Waterloo University. It was given support by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.

As we prepare for a series of 2021 retrospectives looking at the highs and lows of the year, the bests and the worsts, Darts and Letters is embracing the chaos, looking to the printed word, and scouring the stacks to find the dumbest books that found their way to print. We did not have to look far. In fact, the hard part was choosing from a bursting cornucopia of awful. In the spirit of the new year, this week we feature a roundtable with three guests and two call-in friends, each of whom makes the case as to why their book is the dumbest of 2021. First, (@4:09) the two Michaels and Meng affair gripped Canada and the world for the better part of three years. Could a single book capture the intricacies, context, and implications of that behemoth geopolitical moment? Washington Post columnist, podcaster and Darts and Letters show-notes writer/guy writing this sentence David Moscrop argues…maybe. But it’s certainly not The Two Michaels: Innocent Canadian Captives and High Stakes Espionage in the US-China Cyber War by Mike Blanchfield and Fen Osler Hampson. Then, (@17:39) some argue trust is the glue that holds society together. But what if a book mangled the concept and mobilized it with a series of vapid phrases designed to superficially inspire centrists as only such a book–and maybe an episode of the West Wing–could? And what if that same book was written by one of the least trustworthy people in politics? Jacobin staff writer and co-host of the podcast Michael and Us Luke Savage makes the case for Pete Buttigieg’s Trust: America’s Best Chance. Finally, (@29:01) the left needs to understand and contend with serious, right-wing books that seek to chart the course for the future of the ideology. Scholar, PillPod podcaster, and writer Matt McManus has found two offerings that are…not that. But they need to be reckoned with in their own way anyway. He takes down Ben Shapiro’s The Authoritarian Moment: How the Left Weaponized America’s Institutions Against Dissent and Mark Levin’s American Marxism. ——————-FURTHER READING AND LISTENING—————— First and foremost, check out our selections for dumbest book of 2021: The Two Michaels: Innocent Canadian Captives and High Stakes Espionage in the US-China Cyber War by Mike Blanchfield and Fen Osler Hampson  American Crisis: Leadership Lessons from the Covid-19 Pandemic by Andrew Cuomo Trust: America’s Best Chance by Pete Buttigieg A Promised Land by Barack Obama The Authoritarian Moment: How the Left Weaponized America’s Institutions Against Dissent by Ben Shapiro American Marxism by Mark Levin   Read David Moscrop’s work at the Washington Post and listen to his podcast Open to Debate. He’s also got a book: Too Dumb for Democracy. Dig into Lyta Gold’s podcast Art for the End Times and listen to her Darts and Letters episode from earlier this year “The Founding Grift.” Check out Luke Savage’s work at Jacobin and be sure to listen to Michael and Us – and support it on Patreon. For more, also see his stuff at the New Statesman. Read Daniel Bessner’s book Democracy in Exile and listen to his podcast American Prestige, which you can also support. Listen to Matt McManus’ podcast PillPod and have a look at his book The Rise of Post-Modern Conservatism: Neoliberalism, Post-Modern Culture, and Reactionary Politics. Plus, see more of his work at Jacobin.   ——————-SUPPORT THE SHOW————————- We need your support. If you like what you hear, chip in. You can find us on patreon.com/dartsandletters. Patreon subscribers usually get the episode a day early, and sometimes will also receive bonus content. Don’t have the money to chip in this week? Not to fear, you can help in other ways. For one: subscribe, rate, and review our podcast. It helps other people find our work. —————————-CONTACT US————————- To stay up to date, follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. Also, we have a new YouTube channel, where some videos of these interviews will be available next week. If you’d like to write to us, email [email protected] or tweet Gordon directly. —————————-CREDITS—————————- Darts and Letters is hosted and edited by Gordon Katic. Our lead producer is Jay Cockburn. Our managing producer is Marc Apollonio. David Moscrop is our research assistant and wrote the show notes. Our theme song and music was created by Mike Barber, our graphic design was created by Dakota Koop, and our marketing was done by Ian Sowden. Darts and Letters is produced in Toronto, which is on the traditional land of Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat Peoples.