The first Reformation led to social phenomena like the English civil war, where people overthrew the corrupt Papacy and government. The Second Reformation allows people to directly experience the visions and revelations of prophets through psychedelic catalysts. By going deeper and dealing with the root cause of the crises, writer Daniel Pinchbeck believes we can create a completely different shared reality.

Western elites have been embracing mysticism in recent decades. The coming together of this and a revived esoterism could break the materialist capitalist logjam, leading to a completely different shared reality. Daniel Pinchbeck discusses how the ecological emergency could be tackled – along with the dangers of people becoming dispossessed in the wake of automation – and how we can imagine things in a radically different way.

Links

• Daniel’s books
• Daniel’s Substack newsletter
• The Liminal Institute
• The Soul of Man Under Socialism – Oscar Wilde, 1891
• Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria
• Psychedelic Future of the Mind: How Entheogens are Enhancing Cognition, Boosting Intelligence, and Raising Values, by Thomas Roberts
• At Work in the Ruins – Peripheral Thinking episode 18, with Dougald Hine
• Transition towns
• Dark Money: How a Secretive Group of Billionaires is Trying to Buy Political Control in the US, by Jane Mayer

Welcome to Peripheral Thinking.

The series of conversations with academics advisors, entrepreneurs and activists, people all championing those ideas on the margins, the periphery.

Why is this important?

Well, as the systems on which we've depended for the last 50, 60 stroke thousand years, crumble and creek people increasingly looking for new stories, new ideas, new myths, if you like, that might guide and inform how they live and work.

So in these conversations, we take time to speak to those people who are championing the ideas on the margins, championing the ideas on the periphery, those ideas which are gonna shape the mainstream tomorrow.

Uh, and our hope is that you are a little bit inspired, a little bit curious enough to take some of these ideas and bring them back to the day-to-day of your work and your life.

Daniel, thanks for joining me on peripheral thinking.

Thank you Ben.

Thanks for having me.

I've kind of followed your sort of writing, uh, your writer, author, think I followed for a, a few years now, but just, just for the benefit of some of my audience who've not listened, just, uh, I mean, what, what, how would you sort of describe some of the key things that you write about most frequently?

I guess, I mean, I've written a number of books.

The first book was about psychedelic shamanism.

That came out in 2002.

And, um, before there was a big psychedelic movement or renaissance for that book, I visited different indigenous cultures and went through different, uh, initiation processes with psychedelics, uh, such as Ayahuasca, ni Boga, and, uh, Uh, mushrooms and so on.

So that, you know, that's sort of set a lot of my interests.

I mean, consciousness, uh, metaphysical, uh, ideas, prophecy.

My second book was around, um, different prophecies from Meso American cultures and sort of comparing those with, um, western prophetic systems like the Judeo-Christian apocalypse tradition.

And then I wrote a book called How Soon Is Now, where I was looking at, uh, the ecological emergency from a, trying to look at it from a systems design perspective and trying to kind of, um, integrate the kind of insights you get from psychedelics about how the world could be transformed.

Um, you know, you, I could ask you, give you this very, you know, incredibly strong feeling that the world could be totally different, that we could, you know, recreate everything, you know, that and so on.

So, it, and it does seem, you know, with the ecological emergency that there are a lot of things that we would need to change to avert, um, you know, catastrophe that we're not doing at this point.

That, I guess that's a, a kind of good segue.

Just a, just a total reminder, which is, uh, totally unrelated.

Okay.

So I listened to, uh, The Return of Quetzalcoatl as an audio book.

Uh, and I, um, I, I really, really enjoyed it and I totally recommend, uh, any, anybody who's not, uh, read it, listened to it, to, to, to do that.

The thing that I was kind of reminded of is that I then shared it with a friend of mine, and I actually contacted you to say, I've shared this and I wanted to pay some extra money because I'd shared the audio files.

Uh, and, uh, I, because we, you were offering that via the, the Liminal Institute.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Uh, so yeah, so I was gonna contact you just a, a point to say, I, I'd like to give you some extra money, cuz I'd shared the book because I was trying to work out how to kind of buy that online, but I could.

But anyway, I just, as you were sort of talking there, uh, I was reminded of that and maybe we can work out some way of doing that at some point afterwards.

sure.

That sounds great.

you

Uh, but yeah, no, great, great, great, great book.

Really, really sort of insightful.

But yeah, so, um, the, the kind of the, the last point, the kind of thread, which was a, a probably a, a kind of more useful thread for the purposes of the, the kind of listeners, the kind of idea that, you know, the, the kind of opportunity, the invitation to kind of imagine things in a, in a radically different way.

Uh, and, last Monday morning, so I guess not, not a coincidence, a kind of mayday offering in a sense.

Uh, a kind of a kind of invitation to paint a picture for, uh, an alternative kind of political vision was what sort of landed in my email inbox last Monday morning.

Uh, and I'm kind of curious if just kind a little bit of an overview of, uh, of kind of, yeah.

What, what you sort of offered up there, what the, kind of, what that writing was about, which essentially is about, uh, kind of envisaging a different sort of political, uh, political universe in a sense.

Uh, yeah, now I'm trying to remember what I wrote back.

Um, but yeah, but I think it was continuing, you know, kind of the ideas from, uh, How Soon is Now.

I mean, one, one of my big influences was a, uh, social oncologist called Murray Chen, um mm-hmm.

Who said that the sort of the ownership of the planet by, you know, private interests was basically antithetical to, you know, a harmonious future to an ecological future and so on.

And yeah, I mean, I actually tend to tend to think that's true.

And, uh, in a way it's a, you know, very radical idea.

I mean, even communism was like state owned enterprise, but what, what if there was like a kind of no ownership society based on, uh, which is what you have in a lot of indigenous cultures.

They didn't really even have this idea of like, you know, legal possession or something.

But essentially, you know, there's an idea of usufruct, which was also used in the Middle Ages where, um, you know, if somebody's productively using something, you know, a garden, a house, a tool, You know, they should have the rights to keep using that thing for as long as they're using it productively.

so yeah, so I mean, you know, another approach is, uh, Jack Valet, uh, from the Venus Project you might've heard of, and he talked about the idea of, uh, you know, he saw a future of like the resource resource economy, where essentially we would, you know, reapportion resources rationally and allocate them fairly.

Uh, I mean, you know, his vision also kind of shaded towards a kind of like, I, you know, communism or something very much like that.

Um, yeah, we know that more and more people, young people in the US are, you know, quite interested in, in sort of socialism.

Another big influence for me has been Oscar Wild's, one political essay, the Soul of Man Under Socialism, where, uh, he talked about, you know, how in the past, like, you know, who the artists were, mostly people who had, uh, family money.

And so they were the ones who had the time to cultivate, you know, to wonder about the world, to cultivate their unique vision, their unique son, uh, uh, self.

And, uh, that he would like to see a future where everybody had that opportunity, whether they became artists or not, to at least have the experience of like, you know, what he called cultivated leisure as as, as a, as an alien.

So, and he said that the only way that could actually happen obviously would be if we got rid of most forms of human drudgery, most, which, which are ultimately forms of slavery, whether, you know, wage slavery or actual slavery.

And so he said the only way to do that would be, you know, mechanical.

Like the machines needed to replace humans and do all the drudgery.

And you know, I think we've all been kind of waiting for that.

Like we thought, you know, probably in the fifties, you know, people thought, oh, like all these shiny new appliances.

And, uh, industrial tools will liberate humanity.

But actually because of the economic system, they ended up trapping people, uh, more and more into the system, you know?

So, you know, even though in theory, you know, there, there were all these devices, labor saving devices, um, more efficiency, you know, incredible efficiency in agriculture, you know, whereas in the fifties, like in the US you'd have a family where the, the, uh, the man could work and, and his job would be enough to buy a house and take care of his family, you know, now you have a situation where, you know, both people, you know, middle class people have to work or working class people and still don't have enough money and go into debt.

And I think the average American has like less than $600 in their savings account.

Um, so money has obviously accumulated, wealth has been extracted, you know, as people like Thomas Pickney, right?

You know, to the top of the financial hierarchy, leaving most people really, um, stressed out and anxious and just locked into a, uh, destructive debt-based system that's also, you know, ruining the, the planet.

Uh, so, you know, a lot of times when people on the left or whatever are talking about systems change, it doesn't feel that it goes deep enough to me that we really have to go to the, and that's what I love about, like somebody like Murray Chen is that we really have to go to the root of this whole thing and then, you know, maybe it's like a really deeper transformation, even though obviously that would cause amazing upheavals.

And it's very hard to imagine how it could happen because, um, you know, every, every country has its very powerful military.

And now they're gonna add on to that.

You know, I mean, surveillance, ai surveillance, uh, robot drones, you know, the York police are now starting to use robot, uh, dogs.

I mean, so it, it feels like we're moving more and more in the direction of technological totalitarianism.

Uh, but, you know, we don't necessarily have to move in that direction.

Uh, but it would require a kind of large scale awakening, you know, and, you know, breaking what William Blake talked about as like the mind forged medicals, uh, to see that we can actually envision and create a completely different, uh, shared reality.

one of the quotes, which was just coming to mind at that end bit, I can't remember who said it now, but it's something like, the imagining the end of the world is easier for people than I imagining the end of capitalism.

And it's kind, it's that sort of scenario.

Cause I guess I kind interesting the, there's a, like I said, there's, there's a couple of articles which you've, uh, essays you've written which talked to this.

And, uh, I'll share all of those in the, in the, in the notes.

And it's kind interesting kind of really reading the comments and this discussion in the comments to also kind of help me sort of understand, um, kind of a little bit more I think about what you, uh, what you're sort of talking about.

And I, and I kind of, uh, there's, there's quite a lot there about the kind of the thinking, the where the, as far, the extent of the thinking that the sort of traditional kind of left has and where it kind of goes.

Uh, but I'm kind of interested in this.

So you are sort of this idea of kind of going deeper, finding a kind of more of a kind of depth around that.

And the, uh, the Murray Bookin, uh, kind of thinking writing.

So that, a kind of core of that, just to understand, I'm keen to understand just a little bit more about that.

I appreciate your, your kind of relaying it on his behalf.

So the, the kind of core of that is this idea of no ownership, yeah?

Yeah, that ba basically, uh, it's been a long time since I've read that book actually, actually.

Um, but um, yeah, that's ba basically it that you would need to, and in fact there is, I dunno if you've heard of Rojava in Syria, uh, it's a sort of anarchist Islamic, uh, feminist breakaway republic where the, uh, the leader of Rojava was in Jam and encountered book's work and redesigned their whole society around, uh, book's, principles.

Uh, but I mean, you know, under great duress, obviously, because they're in the middle of this horrible war there and so on.

But for, you know, I, I guess to continue the thought experiment, I mean, what, what even bookin is missing is, uh, this sort of, uh, shamanic agnostic, esoteric, uh, aspect of it, which, for me, if we're thinking about how to break the materialist capitalist kind of logjam, you know, we would also have to kind of have a revived mysticism and a, and a revived esoterism.

And I believe that we're seeing the power of that in the psychedelic movements, uh, where, you know, people are having massive kind of individual breakthroughs in terms of trauma and so on.

Uh, self discoveries are going on, and that's becoming more and more.

the, the system is figuring out how to assimilate, let's say, the psychedelic experience in a way that it couldn't do back from the sixties and seventies, uh, which has, you know, good and bad sides.

But, but part of the bad side is that it's pull it, it's sort of taking the psychedelic, uh, experience very much into a psychological framing, uh, and, and kind of ignoring, um, the mo for me, the more interesting aspects of it.

it's still, it's still a positive that, that these substances are becoming available to so many people.

I really like, um, this, uh, writer Tom Roberts.

I wrote a book called The Psychedelic Future of the Mind.

Um, and in that book, uh, he argued that, um, the re-discovery of the psychedelics, uh, since, since the 19 from the, you know, 1940s and fifties until today, uh, could be seen as the second reformation.

Uh, so in the first reformation, you know, Luther, uh, translated the Bible into the common languages.

German, it was, you know, they had the Gutenberg printing press so they could move, you know, that information to the common people.

And so for many, many centuries, people had only been able to read the word of God.

Uh, they were sorry.

They weren't able to read the word of God for themselves.

They just got the information secondhand from the priests who controlled the knowledge through the knowledge of Latin.

And so suddenly people were like, oh, I can actually read the word of God for myself.

I can read all the prophets of the vision, you know, the Britnor, the visions, the prophets have, and so on.

And this actually led to social phenomena like the English, uh, civil War, uh, where people were like, oh, we're, we must be living in this time of revelation and we have to overthrow the, you know, the corrupt, uh, you know, Papacy and government and all that stuff.

Uh, so this idea that, and, you know, that took a while for the reformation, it went on for quite a while.

But I mean, the, uh, the second reformation is that not only now can we just, you know, we don't, we no longer have to read the visions and revelations of prophets from books.

We can actually directly have that experience for ourselves through the psychedelic catalysts, you know, all of the stuff that's described in those books.

Um, you know, telesis, you know, voices speaking through your head, spirit possession, you know, healing.

Like all, all, all of this, uh, you know, transformation.

You know, all this is well documented in, in the psychedelic literature from the sixties till today.

So, um, so yeah, I, I think what has to happen is somehow the coming together of this, and, you know, it's not just psychedelics, we're also, I mean, basically, it's been a big shift in the Western elites to embrace, uh, mysticism over the last, you know, half century, you know, eastern mysticism, kabbala like Madonna and all these Hollywood celebrities gotten really to Kabbala, you Sufism, you know, all, all sorts, all sorts of fads.

And, and, and you know, obviously mindfulness meditation is huge.

One of the things that I'm doing right now is teaching a course on the, uh, history of the Western esoteric tradition, from the ancient world through the Renaissance and the enlightenment, the romanticist, uh, up to the present day.

And, uh, because I feel like in the angle European world, we've sort of been, uh, avoiding our own tradition.

We kind of people glo onto like, you know, the Indian tradition or the Bud Buddhist, uh, Tibetan Buddhist tradition.

And uh, but I think we need to figure out what's essentially kind of, uh, you know, part of our lineage, uh, philosophically and metaphysically,

What, what do you think that is about what, why, why it is that, uh, the kind of tendency is to kind of fix, to hold onto the eastern?

To, to look east rather than to kind of look in for, of a better phrase.

Uh, well, I mean, well, like, you know, Tibetan Buddhism as an example, you know, Tibetan Buddhism preserved a corpus of esoteric knowledge and, you know, technique that the west kind of lost.

and there were different efforts to revive a more kind of esoteric and hermetic side to Christianity like, um, pico me in the, uh, 16th, 16th century I guess.

And then the Rosa Crucian and the 17th century.

But, uh, ultimately, particularly, you know, when the scientific materialist worldview triumphed in the 19th century, uh, the occult an esoteric movements kind of seem totally lose their legitimacy.

And a lot of the main figures, uh, you know, who are, you know, re kind of recognized as the leaders of 19th Century and early 20th century occultism are very, uh, kind of, uh, chaotic, kind of discombobulated figures like Madam Latsky who founded Philosophy, or Alistair Crowley, who, you know, sort of represented as the, the figure of magic, you know, in the 20th century.

So, um, so it was like our, our, you know, and then, and then there was Christianity and the repression of the witches.

So it's like we, our, we feel sort of our, our tradition is a little bit like shameful or disgraced or something,

And I guess there's the, then the kind of layers.

Then on top of that, all of the sort of institutional distrust, which is sort of bubble up kind of rightly around the institutions of the kind of the, of say Christianity, particularly here in the, in the West.

So kind of making those things also quite sort of, the stories around those things sort of shameful the places around those things shameful.

Uh, and so for, I guess for, for those people with a curiosity, with a kind of mind to look for the, it's kind in a way safer to kind of, to, to look beyond than to spend much time in the immediate.

Yeah, exactly, exactly.

And um, yeah, I mean, you know, in, in some ways, you know, also Buddhism and yoga, um, you know, provided just very straightforward techniques.

Um, whereas the, you know, western system, because it isn't, you know, I mean there was like the mysteries, the rights of iuss, right?

The mysteries of Iuss, which now people think.

Was probably some type of, uh, you know, there was a potion called the Kik, which very well may have been a psychedelic, uh, drink as part of the sort of revealing process, the illumination process.

Uh, but we don't know that was a secret, you know, those mystery, uh, traditions were secret.

So we don't actually know exactly what happened there.

And, um, you know, whereas the, you know, Indo Indo Tibetan tradition and sort of the, the Zen tradition and the Daoist tradition are, are more perfectly preserved.

And so I guess one of the give we were, the conversation we were having earlier about this kind of idea that it's kind of very difficult for people to kind of imagine how we would get to a place where, uh, kind of society might be kind of organized politically in, in a completely different way.

I guess one of the sort of subtext to the kind of writing or, or the thingies, this idea that there also are sort of catalyzing events which are kind of, or which are kind of running through the systems of which we live, which will also kind of force this change somewhat.

So I think you kind of point to some of the kind of writers and thinkers in a couple of those articles, which are talking about ideas around the great acceleration.

I think it'd be kind of, uh, and so these sorts of things, which essentially.

Um, sort of describing the, the kind of scenario that, uh, you know, we are either kind of baked into some kind of, uh, baked into the trajectory of a, of a, uh, of a kind of species collapse, our species collapse.

Or at least that, that so much kind of fundamental change is, uh, is kind of, sort of so close and sort of so pervasive that actually maybe the kind of cracks open up, which create the opportunity for these sorts of new ideas to start to kind of bubble up.

Yeah, that's exactly right.

I mean, um, artificial intelligence, which is obviously the, the talk of the town at the moment, uh, according to Goldman Sachs, it's gonna make a 300 million people, uh, you know, kind of unemployed in the next years.

Uh, other estimates are as many as a billion people worldwide and 200 million in the United States.

So essentially almost everything that involves manipulating symbols and images and, you know, audio and so on, on screen, including what we're doing now is, is going to be, uh, you know, decodeable and synthesizable and artificially, doable and, um, So whole industries are gonna disappear, probably like for instance, like call centers.

And also the advancement in AI is leading to, you know, now in, in San Francisco they have, um, you know, driverless taxis.

Um, so that's gonna be become obviously extremely seductive for, you know, or, or stores without checkout people.

So that, you know, for, from the bottom line, short-term, bottom line, thinking of a corporation, that's amazing.

You've saved a huge amount on human capital.

Uh, but what does it do to society?

I mean, you, you know, in the US like we have, we have 3 million truck drivers that's like the largest workforce for people who maybe don't have a college degree, but still can get a decent job, you know?

So, you know, and then on the other side, you know, ironically, like, you know, these jobs are not so great.

Like, we don't really want human beings sitting at, at desks and cubicles in, in call center offices, 10 hours a day for $400 a month.

I mean, that's not, that's unpleasant.

You know, it's awful.

It's actually great that, you know, the machines can do this type of work and, you know, the, you know, driving people around, driving people across country, driving stuff, cross country.

Um, however, that is almost forcing, uh, social transformation.

Because you know what's gonna happen if you don't take care of those people?

Well, they're gonna become, you know, right wing.

They're gonna, they're gonna seek a strong leader.

They're gonna retract into, you know, very crude identity, um, kind of identifications and, um, we'll have fascism around the world.

So, yeah, so it's a, it's a really severe moment.

Uh, and then on top of that, you have the ecological crisis.

I mean, where kind of all bets are off at the moment.

Like we're seeing, you know, the level of ecological change is, you know, far exceeding, you know, what people imagined say 30, 40 years ago.

Not everybody, some people pro projected, projected this pretty, pretty accurately, but, you know, food sources are gonna become more and more unreliable.

Uh, droughts are gonna become more and more common.

Um, you know, famine is gonna become a big deal.

Uh, there's gonna be mass migrations, uh, some countries, you know, many countries in the South are gonna become too hot to live in for a good part of the year.

So people are gonna be migrating, you know, I mean, you know, I, I've heard some very uncomfortable estimates that, um, you know, 2 billion people may, pat, may die, you know, as a result of this, even in the next, you know, decades.

So, you know, it's clear that we're, you know, our civil, you know, social constructs, our political, financial systems, you know, are in no way able to deal with this and they can't adjust to it.

And, you know, the, the, the tragic thing is you have all these people doing kind of meaningless inessential work, whereas there is, you know, a tremendous amount of meaningful work that we could have been doing and should be doing to prepare now, uh, for the ecological catastrophe, but then also to build regenerative systems that, that would give us the best chance of, you know, dealing with what's coming.

So, you know, for instance, you know, rooftop gardens, you know, restoring wetlands, aquaponics, I mean, and that, that's also where potentially ai.

Uh, with its, uh, you know, kind of hyper rationality might help us, uh, break through some of these, um, problems.

so if we were to, kind of give it all the information it needs around what, what needs to happen to sort of keep, you know, the human species afloat, uh, potentially it could really help us.

I mean the, um, like for instance, uh, you know, the types of things that we should be doing.

I mean, first of all, yeah.

The Amazon, you know, according to estimates, may collapse as a functional ecosystem in the next 10, 15 years.

Maybe it's 10 years now.

So, you know, a huge amount of energy should be going to protect the Amazon, replenish it, restore it, uh, stop, you know, converting it into soybean plantations and so on.

Uh, aqua, aqua, you know, aquaculture in the oceans, like the, you know, Ocean acidification is one of the, uh, as as the ocean heats up and as it absorbs from co2, uh, the ocean is becoming far more acidic than it used to.

So that's leading to the, the, you know, destruction of the coral reefs.

Uh, but it also affects the lifecycle of the plankton, uh, the plankton or microorganisms that create 60% of our oxygen.

Um, so if their life cycle is severely affected, then we suddenly don't have enough oxygen to breathe.

So, you know, the way to reverse, uh, ocean acidification, the only way that I've seen of would be to create huge aquaculture projects like giant kelp farms and the, uh, growing the kelp would leach all the, the, the, as you know, the, uh, the CO2 out of the car, the extra carbon out, but also would be a nutritional, you know, kind of product that people could eat or we could do something with.

So, for, you know, planetary scales, You know, kind of, uh, I like to call it geoengineering, I guess it is in a way.

But that's the, the kind of projects that are soon gonna become necessary.

it's, I know it's more likely that the capitalist system is going to try to maintain itself to the very last gasp, uh, by, for instance, putting, um, kind of, uh, sulfur in the upper atmosphere or giant reflectors to reflect the sun back into space.

But those are clearly stop gaps.

They, and they also, uh, may have a lot of negative, uh, repercussions.

So we should be looking at more kind of like scaling up more holistic, uh, design science type and permaculture type solutions.

So essentially it's, yeah, Talking about the, uh, the, the, the kind of the opportunities of the technology, but kind of oriented in, in a different direction, essentially, kind of born of a different intent, born of a different motivation than what the capitalist system might choose to do, uh, if left to its own continuing devices.

Yeah, exactly.

I mean, it's a, it's actually a very like, you know, serious and severe moment.

Uh, but we don't treat it like that.

You know, we're kind of just like hacking along.

Uh, and, you know, it, it, it may be that it's our destiny to go extinct as a species.

I mean, I'm, I'm, I'm completely surrendered to that because that, that looks like the most likely, uh, outcome at this point.

I spoke to another guy on a podcast guy called, uh, Dougald Hine.

He'd been a climate activist sort of campaign.

I dunno, do you know Dougal, have you come across his work?

think I, I follow his,

Uh, and, and having this conversation in a sense it's like sense like, in a way these questions have become too big for, uh, us in a sense individually to kind of process.

And so, you know, we get sort of then stuck in the system of kind of the, the blinker view, kind of, you know, just going through the motions because in a way it's too big a question for us to, uh, to, to kind of easily process, which I guess is what just exacerbates things.

Yeah.

Most people just shut it out.

I mean, we, we've also grown up, in a system where we are kind of indoctrinated to believe in, um, authority structures.

You know, like we believe there's like, you know, scientists and experts.

Like we, we expect the experts to, you know, step in and, and, and do what's right and so on.

So, yeah, that's part of the problem.

We've been, we, I mean, particularly in the US we're extremely pacified.

And when people get, you know, enraged enough to do something, it usually, uh, you know, has to do with like their own particular, like working situation or whatever.

I mean, yeah, an Extinction Rebellion I think is, you know, was a good, was a good, you know, noble effort.

I mean, it still is and they've done a lot.

I'm still not clear with extinction of reality.

I feel the ti the name of it is a little bit of a tough, you know, kind of thing.

For a lot of people it's, it's quite negative.

And, uh, you know, they, Gail for instance, Bradbrook, you know, definitely understands the mystical aspects, but they don't really foreground that.

I mean, a lot of leftists are very, very, uh, materialistic like, or, or they're, uh, materialistic, but they, but they, they're still believers in the scientific, you know, materialist rationality idea.

Uh, and that, that's why I keep coming back in my work to, um, kind of, uh, like this philosophy, her Bernardo Castro, uh, who I've interviewed, uh, ones who wrote a book about, he's an analytic idealist, so he basically argues that it makes much more sense logically to understand that consciousness is the foundational reality.

And what we experience is the physical is a, uh, kind of projection or manifestation of consciousness on some level.

So given, given the sort of complexity and our, our inability to kind of understand and to sort of sit with these things and sort of, you know, I guess still the kind of leaning predominantly to the material rational for kind of huge chunks of kind of people who might also say that they were the kind of campaigner minded people.

Where, where do we go?

How, how to, how to sort of see these ideas?

How to give space, um, so that these kind of, the, the broad ideas that you are talking about here might start to take hold, might start to, might start to flourish?

Cool.

I mean, I made a, I made a deliberate effort in that, in that direction, uh, a number of years ago.

I had a company called Evolver and we had a, we had a nonprofit called the Evolver Network, and I, I still really like the model we came up with.

It's a bit similar to something in the UK called Transition Town.

Oh yeah, yeah.

I know.

Transition town.

Yeah.

I I'm not sure where, where it's, where that is now, that movement, but the idea is to create a template for local communities to self-organize, um, and to, you know, together go into a process where they, um, kind of explore different aspects of this kind of new system, new paradigm, and then actually implement that system locally.

uh, you know, that's what we tried to do with the Evolver network.

We had, at one point we had like 50 or 60 local groups of varying sizes.

And some of them, like the group in Boston, uh, incubated a, uh, local currency project, sorry, that was in Baltimore, that became the Bnot and um, group in Long Beach, California created like a time timeshare, time dollar system.

Um, you know, it's, it's, the problem is that it's been very hard under the stress of this sort of capitalist monolith to really explore alternatives.

It, it crushes, uh, alternatives, you know, just cuz people have to fight so hard just to survive.

Uh, ironically, because, you know, in theory post World War ii, we could have had a, um, you know, society of, of comfort and leisure, you know, in comparison.

So, yeah, so I think it would have to be a, you know, outside of the political system, a me means for people to gather, um, locally to share new ideas, to kind of have public forums so that a new paradigm kind of like begins to seem more rational.

I know that isn't happening right now.

I mean, maybe it never will happen.

Uh, but I, but I think that would be, that would be kind of the way to do it.

I mean, I, I guess that's a kind of desperate, you know, kind of hail Mary pass kind of a hope.

But, you know, if all these cognitive workers are laid off, um, as a result of, you know, rapid deployment of ai, you know, may maybe some of them will begin to, you know, have time to really think about the system in a, in a systemic way, and then they could become nodes of transformation in their local communities.

Yeah, so kind of harnessing the, harnessing the energy of the sort of recently dispossessed.

Yeah, exactly.

I mean, Antonio Negri was a political philosopher.

He wrote like these books called Multi Multitude in Empire when they, he and this political philosopher, uh, Michael Hart from America envisioned this idea of the multitude, like they saw that, you know, the proletariat, you know, was no longer kind of like the revolutionary subject for various reasons.

Um, so I thought maybe it was gonna be like, you know, cog cognitive workers, like programmers, hackers, um, you know, intellectuals and so on would become kind of like the new, um, the, the, the, the new revolutionary class.

Uh, and now, you know, people have been kinda like scoffing at that idea cause it didn't seem to happen in practice.

But yeah, maybe there's another go around, um, as these next, this next level of, uh, shifts take place.

But also just so taking that there, that the, those kind of numbers you were talking about there around the, the kind of AI job loss, I think you kind of offered, you spoke about the call centers that you speak about, the Phil, the Philippines were say 10% of the, essentially the country's wealth by a GDP measure, you know, coming from call centers, you know, essentially it's gonna, it's, it's hundreds of millions of people essentially also being displaced by a kind of sort of technological change.

And you sort of, you do kind of wonder what can bubble out of just that level of sort of disruption, that level of discontent.

It kind of feels like it is a, a melting pop for, for change, a melting pop for new ideas.

Yeah, I mean, I don't think it, unfortunately, I don't think it will come from, um, you know, those types of countries that have just, you know, been fighting to get to like a basic level of, uh, kind of, uh, you know, financial life.

Yeah, because the struggle for survival is, is too intense.

I mean, uh, you know, Lebanon like is a, is an, financially ruined, uh, society and, um, you know, people there, you know, they don't even have access to their bank accounts and so on.

I mean, you know, I, I don't think it's le and there are a lot of very well educated and very intelligent people there.

You know, I don't, and you know, I don't think it's leading to a, um, a renaissance of, you know, transformative social thought.

I mean, England would be a perfect place actually.

I mean, you know, what's happened with England, kind of, uh, as a result of Brexit, and obviously, you know, exacerbated by the, the, the energy crisis with the war and so on, and the number of, you know, intellectuals and leftists you have there.

You know, England would be a perfect place for there to be some, some movement in this, uh, direction,

And it's interesting thing about Brexit, I think maybe I was in the conversation with, with Dougald, he was talking about, I can't remember who it was now, somebody who'd written about Brexit and Trump and it being kind of interesting that the kind of key words in both of those, the, the kind of slogans with those were, were basically back and again, this kind of idea of everything kind of living in a time of everything looking backwards, everything living in a time of, of things really just kind of being in the rear, you know, the, the vision being in the, in the rear view mirror and the need for, um, something which kind of points to kind of future.

I think a little bit of what sort of Dougald's talking about of course is there, there isn't a real, there isn't a clear vision of the future and in a sense that is the requirement is this idea of kind of hospicing everything that has, that has gone, uh, so that we might start to kind of, so that we will kind of find ourselves kind of creating the conditions then to kind of allow what will come to come look, you know, allow what the next threads to, to grow.

But it's kind of interesting that this thing around kind of Brexit and what happens after Brexit and I guess around also with the, the same in, in the states.

And if you think about the kind of, you know, the, the millions and millions of kind of knowledge workers who, who lose their, lose their jobs.

There is a need isn't there to, for, for these kinds of new stories, these, these new threads to be present for them so that they can sort of, uh, gather around these ideas and are not just susceptible to, to the movement and the, the s the perceived clarity of the, the strong man narrative.

Yeah, I mean I, you know, but on the other hand it's very difficult.

I mean, I, you know, After, uh, the 2012 book.

I tried, I created this Evolver movement, but, you know, I had a, you know, another book idea, which was to do this book on systems change as a result of the ecological crisis.

And, you know, I spent 10 years on the book, uh, off and on.

It was really hard to finish it.

I got, uh, Sting and Russell Brand to write, uh, introductions to it.

And then I put it out in the world and it was like crickets.

I mean, I think, you know, it came out in 2016.

at that point, like I felt like I sort of, I sort of had to give up because, um, I didn't really know what else was, was, was, was, was doable.

I mean, I really tried, not that I'm perfect and the book was not perfect and I'm definitely not perfect, but, um, you know, at least I've made an effort to, to say like, hey, like, um, you know, the, these, these are the systemic changes.

We really need to make to avert, uh, you know, ecological Holocaust.

Uh, and, um, yeah, I mean, you know,

Earlier book, I mean, you know, it came out from a smaller press again, from Watkins in the uk, which maybe made a difference but couldn't get any reviews and the mainstream media couldn't, you know, just, um, where people were very excited about like prophecy and apocalypse and so on.

So what, what, do you think has happened there in saying the sense of, you know, what, there's, I guess something in the underlying story, which in the, in the kind of on say, on the more sort of prophecy side for sort of shorthand feels much more kind of resonant than the kind of what the, the sort of story which kind of feels resonant in, in, in the latter stuff is what, what do you think is kind of happening on that kind of, that level?

You made the reference in the mainstream media too.

Cause you were talking about Extinction rebellion.

There was a, a kind of four days of, uh, of action Extinction Rebellion organized in, in London, uh, a few weeks ago.

There was nothing on the mainstream news about any of that four days of activity in the center of London.

Nothing

I heard it was amazing too.

I heard, I heard, I heard, I heard there was, it was an incredible event.

Uh, yeah.

Well, I mean, you know, obviously the mainstream media is, um, you know, corporate controls.

And their main, you know, advertisers are car companies and, uh, oil companies and, you know, investment concerns like, you know, Morgan, you know, Goldman Sachs and so on, uh, chase Bank and so on.

So they're strongly incentivized, uh, you know, not to rock the boat.

You know, also, yeah.

And then another level of mainstream media, you know, we know is also quite infiltrated by, you know, the military industrial complex, the intelligence agencies.

If you go around like Operation Mockingbird and so on.

Uh, so yeah, I guess that's, that's the,

mm Yeah, that explains that.

Yeah.

I mean, you know, and then you have to think about, I mean, you have these, like the New York Times, you know, which I love the times I read it all the time, but.

You know, they have, uh, all these pundits who've made the wrong call like over and over again for decades and, you know, still can't really face like the ecological emergency properly.

Uh, but they fit in with the sort of consensus con consciousness or consensus trance you could say that, um, you know, allows for the success of the New York Times to continue.

I mean, even somebody like, you know, Russell Brand who's, you know, who's a, you know, I've been friends with and, you know, appreciate a lot of what he does.

You know, he is, you know, basically stopped kind of talking much about ecological topics, um, because he doesn't get as many followers, you know, if he, if he starts talking about, you know, what's happening to the planetary ecology.

So, you know, a lot of people just get, you know, kind of, uh, co-opted in various ways.

And so it's interesting, so the, so the, so the writing, so of your writing about the, the, your main writing about kind of 20 years ago, the, the kind of ideas around that which were kind of very culturally resonant, I guess.

So kind of the mainstream or relative mainstream culture at large were very drawn to those ideas, yeah.

And so I guess kind of, uh, were you sort of talking about the, the kind of the writing around sort of prophecy and a lot of the, the kind of work, the, the of sort of 15, 20 years ago, uh, when you were talking earlier, uh, and so is it, there's a distinction then you were talking about the, the kind of book that was written in 2016, which didn't get anywhere.

I'm just kind of, just curious to try and understand what happened around those two things.

Why you think one, you know, why, why, why some writing just connects and is resonant and another, like you say, kind of book that's written is just met with crickets, met with nothing.

Uh, I mean, in that time I'd kind of moved further from the mainstream, like when I, when I wrote, uh, Breaking Open the Head and even 2012, you know, I had recently been like a New York Times, uh, you know, magazine writer and was more part of the milieu.

Uh, and um, then I became more seen as like a fringe thinker.

So they, it was easier for them to ignore, uh, my work.

There are them, I guess maybe Paul Hawkin is somebody who, who his books on ecological solutions have, have gotten some traction.

But generally, um, it's a hard sell if you're talking about systemic, uh, solutions.

Just by nature of the complexity

Well, cause Oh yeah, most people, as you said, can't really take it in.

Like, I, I remember when I went around giving talks about how soon is now, uh, and I talked about how we would have to like structurally, you know, redesign the economic system, you know, so they're no longer rewarded, like externalities and so on.

Uh, I, I could feel that it was just hard for people to take in.

Cuz people are just dealing with like student debt and trying to get their kids into schools and, you know, all that kind of stuff.

Like, they don't have, they don't have the bandwidth, uh, necessarily.

You know, and if they do have a little bandwidth, then naturally they want to think about, you know, self-improvement or, uh, you know, mindfulness or healing or something like, um, there is, is it a lot of room, uh, in a lot of people's lives for, um, you know, deeply thinking about systems change.

It's like a strange decision to, to to, to make that a fun.

Yeah.

Yeah.

at the, at the end of, uh, one of the, the essays you kind of, you, you were sort of talking about, you know, so the idea maybe having a domain name, this could be a, a kind of place around which kind of people would gather, um, to sort of explore some of these ideas more.

What, what do you kind of imagine or kind of wishful in your kind of wildest or most optimistic moment in terms of when you kind of write something like that, you, you buy a domain name, this kind of potential kind of route forward.

What do you kind of imagine and hope might kind of bubble out of something like that?

Sure.

I think we should always live in hope.

Uh, you know, well, I mean, I don't, in a sense, I don't even like hope, but live in possibility, you know?

Uh, and I mean, I do know personally, like, you know, mega billionaires.

Like, you know, I, I spoke at Sege Brynn's, uh, dinner Burning Man.

You know, I was friends with Sean Parker was the first president of Facebook.

Um, you know, when I did Evolver, if we'd had, let's say a hundred million dollars to play around with and to try different things.

Uh, I think we could've had, like, you know, we could've beaten Facebook on, on, on a success level.

Uh, but it obviously wouldn't have been that much of a profit making, uh, you know, enterprise.

So, um, yeah, I guess the hope is that somebody I know who's worth 60, a hundred billion be like, oh, like, things are going to shit anyway, you know?

Yeah.

I've got my, like encampment in the mountains of Canada and I'm taking the life extension medicines that'll make me live forever, you know, according to Ray ksal.

But maybe I'll, you know, give, you know, a hundred billion to this guy just to see, you know, what, what could happen, you know, um.

What, what the alternative might be.

So, yeah, I mean, um, A very interesting book is, uh, dark Money by, uh, Jane Mayer, uh, where she, uh, a analyzed how the, uh, Koch brothers, uh, were able to, um, transform American society in, in like 30 or 40 years.

So, so back in the sixties, they realized they didn't really like, um, you know, civil liberties or, you know, free education or that black people were, you know, having better lives or whatever, you know, that women can get abortions or whatever.

So they were like, okay, we gotta stop all this shit, you know, but you know, we can see that society is really moving in this other direction, so what are we gonna do?

So they were like, okay, well, we're a bunch of billionaires.

We'll come together, we'll make sure that we all agree on what we agree on, you know, what we think is necessary.

And then we'll do it like a corporate takeover.

You know, we'll, we'll try different techniques, you know, so it's like, okay, we're gonna need, you know, how does the left do?

And okay, well, we need like, academic departments.

They actually bought like the economics department, university of Chicago, and filled it with like, Built in Friedman and all those types of people, and we need think tanks and magazines, you know, so they created the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, you know, we need, um, movements that look like they're popular movements.

Like the left has, like the Civil Rights Movement.

They created things like the Tea Party and they funded them and sometimes they would try and then they would fail.

Then they would come up with a different name or different strategy.

You know.

So they basically, the reason that we have a totally fucked, uh, information environment is, is largely because of, you know, the Koch brothers and people like them.

You know, who, uh, or you know, Peter Teal is another interesting character at this point.

So, um, yeah, so they figured out how to do it, you know, and they were like, okay, well, like the Supreme Court is vulnerability.

So we focus on the Supreme Court over like 20 or 30 years.

You know, we get a far right judiciary, we begin to influence local politics.

We, you know, gerrymandered and so on, and we create a.

Ultimately create a white national theocratic state, and fuck all of the majority of the, you know, people who don't want that, you know.

Uh, but the left never has the resources or the coherence to do the same thing.

So like, what I found a lot with intellectuals and thinkers in the, in the, on the, on the, even on the mystical left is, uh, an individuation need that makes it very hard for people to actually do anything together, you know?

And, and that's now kind of exacerbated by the tendency of contemporary social media.

So like, everybody, um, does best now, including myself, by just doing it on their own.

Like, I would much prefer to, like what I did back in, you know, 2010 is create a magazine with a thousand writers and a movement, but that actually destroyed me financially, you know?

So instead I have to be like, okay, like my survival depends on like building my newsletter email list and getting paid subscribers and you know, them being able to do my courses by myself, you know, so it's like the economics are forcing me to be highly individual, when I would much rather be collaborative and comu commun, you know, commun community oriented, which I was with Reality Sandwich where I didn't even have my own website.

You know, I published like Charles Eisenstein's work and you know, Eric Davis's work and all these other people because I believe there needed to be, you know, a movement, uh, around these ideas that, that was more important than me having a great personal career.

But I was totally, you know, kind of, um, screwed by that in some ways.

Yeah.

Well, just the need to work out how to sustain it.

The kind of the cost, financial, emotional, all of the rest of it,

Because here's we're, we're only really, you know, a as individual entrepreneurs, you know, uh, creative entrepreneurs we're really report, we're, we're really mainly kind of, uh, incentivized to and under this capital system to, uh, maximize our own, you know, individual self-interest.

I mean, it kind of feels like the, the, all of that kind of work, uh, you know, the, the pitch to the kind of, to the billionaire class or the billionaire class, you might be kind of minded to, to pay attention to this.

It's a kind of, it's a bringing together of two things, isn't it?

So a pitch, which appeals to their desire for individuation.

Their ego, using that, uh, as a, as a kind of hook to, to basically invest in the creating of the network, kind of refining everything that you've practiced over the last 10 years, knowing the gap which needs to be filled is a financial one, given that that's the context in which we're playing.

Uh, using, using that knowledge, going for the, going for the pitch to, to secure that a hundred million to basically really create the network, which you know how to create and is required to create.

But I, I don't even really think that it should be a, at this point, like a pitch to their vanity.

It's like, it's like, you know, literally, like, you know, we're looking at a situation where, you know, it's highly probable that, uh, you know, billions of people are going to, are gonna perish, uh, without, without, without a, a massive social transformation.

I mean, for instance, like, you know, we could resettle, you know, a billion and a half people in Canada, you know, I mean, Canada is gigantic.

Um, you know, rather than them not being able to get over the border, you know, in, in Mexico and being shot down by the board.

I mean, it's like, you know, I mean, that's the kind of thing, you know, that, um, uh, you know, the kind, the kind of systems level crisis, and we could, you know, restore and replenish the Amazon, but not as long as, you know, everybody's trying to create soybean plantations for cattle to feed the expanding middle classes, desire for meat, you know?

So you, you, yeah, you need, you know, a media outlet.

I mean, you need like a Fox, you know, Fox, a Fox for the good, you know, something like, like, like of that global power where, but it's, but it's solutions 24 hours a day.

It's like, look at this amazing project.

Look at how these, you know, these guys in Africa replanted their forests and now they have like shade and they're getting like nuts from the trees and, you know, and look at all these amazing things happening all over the world and how they connect and so on.

That, that's, that's to me what feels like it's, you know, and that could be directly connected to like a social networks that would be like, okay, like, you know, you know, here's an amazing project, you know, that I can contribute to.

And you know, like, um, I was really, uh, I had a friend who started a, um, thing that's, maybe it's still couch surfing.

I dunno if you remember couch surfing?

Well, I hadn't heard, I've read about it in one of your pieces.

I've not heard of it

before.

That.

So couch surfing, like millions of people for years we're going around the world and finding people that, you know, they felt were cool and, you know, staying on their couches.

And it was a noneconomic exchange based on just cur, you know, you know, natural curiosity, reciprocity, you know, generosity and so on, you know, and, you know, Airbnb then came and kind of like slaughtered that.

But you know, it, it's possible that we could rebuild a, uh, you know, kind of resource sharing, uh, kind of economy.

Uh, with ai it could be very, very specific.

Like, I need a power drill to, you know, fix my, you know, wall for two hours.

You know, I'm gonna go out and spend $300 to buy a power drill.

Or, you know, I put it out on the network and oh, it turns out the guy downstairs, you know, has like three power drills, like sitting, you know, in the basement, you know.

And there have been, small scale e efforts that have done this.

Like, you know, Berkeley Parents Network used to share resources and goods.

But to me that would be something that would also begin to like, create, you know, more social cohesion and more social trust, which we've totally lost.

I mean, that's why I'm unlike the guy who I've been arguing with on my comments, Tom, kind of really en enthusiastic about AI because I think, you know, I am, I guess sort of an accelerationist, and then I think we might as well exacerbate the crisis of capitalism to bring about a solution.

And I also believe that when you have things like natural language programming.

You know, like when we, we were, when we were trying to do evolver, we were trying to build a competitive social network to Facebook using Drupal, and we just didn't have the funding to be able to make anything that, you know, our, our version was like, uh, looked like a Sam dot, uh, kind of like mimeograph machine, you know, compared to Facebook, you know, but you, you need to be able to build something that, uh, is coherent, that looks good, that's marketable, and so on.

Um, and, you know, may, may, maybe there's that, you know, opportunity again,

Yeah, I mean that was the, the kind of idea that was sort of coming out, coming up for me as I was kind of reading it is, is all that it kind of really, well firstly, I was really appreciative of the writing because I think I probably the debate you having with the guy on your thing around, I, I think the, the, the kind of articles that I would sort of typically have surrounded myself in, like you talking about all the 10,000 articles which say that shit, this is not happening.

You know, blah.

You know, it's kind of all a very, very kind of, sort of similar sort of narrative, pointing out everything that is really wrong and so wrong, you know, kind of organizationally, structurally, economically, et cetera.

And actually, if you just take a thing like AI, uh, it was only in reading the articles you wrote, it actually, I kind of appreciate, it's like, oh, hold on a second.

Maybe there is like a, a catalyzing good actually, which could come out of this, which I'd not really, not really given myself kind of, sort of pause to thought.

So I was kind of really appreciative of, of that.

And, and the other thing, which I think is like, the other thing I was kind of thinking as a sort of reading this kind of need, which I think is what you were doing with, with the evolver network of, of, of kind of highlighting what is good, of making connections between what is good of supporting, you know, the, those, those courses, those programs, those connections, those communities which are trying to do things in a different way so that there is some momentum there.

You know, there is some momentum shared by all of the kind of good pockets of efforts that these people are undertaking.

And so how you bring all of that together into something so that it, it, it accelerates, I guess, or it gives it more, more mass as a movement.

You got it, Ben.

Feel free to take the idea and run with it.

I'm tired, I'll help you.

Now.

I'm kinda, look, I'm looking for my CEO in a way.

I wish I could find somebody who I could just be there kind of like, you know, like John Dee to Queen Elizabeth or something, and just like, you know, somebody younger.

Somebody who like, you know, is more charismatic that financial people love, you know.

Um, so no.

I mean, I, like I said, I think a lot of these ideas are, um, are, are great and you know, I think it is a, it is a time when we are, you know, we are, whether, whether, like the thing we were talking about, whether the change is actually gonna come from.

The millions of people in Philippines who are now going to lose their jobs and be returned back to the kind of, uh, the kind of place of desperation they were in before.

I totally kind of get that that is not where the change is gonna come from.

It kind of feels to me that they are kind of emblematic of the change, which just change, which is just kind of rippling beyond borders though.

Uh, and that level of kind of, of destruction, of transformation, that level of chaos essentially, uh, across so many different cultures in a way has to be a kind of, sort of seeding ground.

And I, and I guess in a sense there is then now a kind of need and an opportunity to be getting kind of new story, new opportunity out there so that people don't just kind of revert to, like we were talking about earlier, the, the kind of simple strong man narrative, which is kind of easy to communicate and quite pervasive.

So it kind of does feel that, you know, I think you make reference to a, a kind of knife edge stroke tipping point thing, and it kind of definitely feels like that's where we are.

Right.

And, and you know, I think it's, you know, not, not only a new story that's not gonna be enough.

I mean, that's kind of like what annoys me about certain, you know, like, maybe like sometimes like Charles Eisenstein or something.

I think, you know, beyond a new story.

We also, like, you know, people will do things when their lives become tangibly more awesome, uh, by doing them.

So it's like, you know, if, if there's, you know, a couch surfing or Burning Man.

Like, for all the problems of Burning Man, which I've written about at length.

I'm, I'm very disillusioned with it in many ways.

I mean, the amazing thing about it's people go there and their idea of what human beings can do, what our human potential is, is like immediately opened and transformed.

And also Burning Man shows that, um, you know, we are very, uh, permeable and flexible, and actually we don't know how quickly we can just totally adapt to a different, uh, idea, you know, a different way of being, uh, if it, if it's actually better.

Uh, so when you go there, you know, and even like if you take like a corporate, you know, sociopath, you know, lawyer, you know, head of a, you know, destructive company, you know, or whatever, to Burning Man, you know, within two days, you know, they'll be, you know, wearing, um, you know, kind of choos hugging everybody, you know, giving out their drugs, you know, cleaning up the camp and so on, you know, because they're, they're suddenly discovering that that brings them far more rewards than just continuing to be like, you know, selfish and egocentric and isolated and so on.

So, you know, but what happens with Burning Man is then that that new sense of agape or communal love that people feel, they extend it to their, the boundary of their privileged community.

Uh, but no further, you know, where, whereas I'm saying when we look at this, you know, crisis of extinction that threatens, you know, all life on earth, uh, we have to extend that boundary, uh, to our human family as a whole, you know, and, and even beyond that as much as possible to, to the larger community of life,

That idea of kind of extending it to the larger community of life also feels very kind of resonant for me.

Um, where, where, where would we point people to, to, uh, find more of your, uh, writings, thinkings, talkings?

The, uh, Substack.

Uh, danielpitchbeck.substack.com.

Uh, and uh, that's, that's the main thing that I've been going on about lately.

Um, and there are courses also at, uh, liminal.news.

Um, you know, you know, people sign up, I'll send them in for about new courses, but also they can, you know, check out old courses or, you know, audiobooks and so on.

I guess those, those are the spots, right?

I mean, I'm also on all the normal social channels like Instagram and Facebook under my name.

Excellent.

Alright, well we will include all of that, uh, in, in the notes.

Um, Daniel, thank you very much.

And you know, I, I am excited by these ideas.

So, um, let's see.

Let's see where these go.

I'm super keen to keep talking about them, so, uh, I will keep gathering around the

And yeah, it looks like you've read a lot of interesting books, uh, from your shelf.

Unfortunately, it's a little too fuzzy to to see exactly, but uh, it's always a good sign.

Thank you again for listening.

We really hope you enjoyed that conversation.

Um, as ever, if you like what we're doing, uh, if you think anyone, if anyone you know, would benefit from listening to this conversation, enjoy it or dislike it even as much as you have, please feel free to share it.

Uh, we really appreciate you taking the time to do that.

The sharing is the lifeblood of this sharing and liking.

I think are the, the currency of our modern time.

So if you take a moment to, you know, share it with somebody who you think would benefit, we hugely appreciate that.

Or even take some time to write a review.

Uh, irrespective, if you like what we're doing, you can find out more if you search up peripheral-thinking.com, you'll find your way to the podcast website.

You can sign up there, you can register there.

You can keep abreast of everything that we're doing.

We'd be sure to keep you notified as soon as the next conversations go live.

Meantime, thanks again for your time.