Welcome to Monet Café. I'm artist Susan Jenkins. This month we're focusing on the theme figures in a landscape and I'm calling this painting better together. So get ready to have some artistic fun and learning as we focus on placing figures in a landscape. If you would go ahead and like this video go ahead and subscribe if you haven't already and if you hit the little bell next to the subscribe button you'll be notified of any future videos I post. This free video tutorial is brought to you because of the faithful support from my patrons on my Patreon page. For $5 a month you can support this channel and you get extra content. The lovely reference image is from unsplash.com. It's really a great site to get copyright free reference images and I have to thank Wojciech Solinski. Did I say that right? He loves mountains, their majesty, ominousness and he's from Poland. I have quite a few patrons from Poland. The pastel surface we'll be using today is La Carte Pastel Card. I love the surface. It is very textured though and for this painting I will be using a dark blue. I like to buy it in pads that have different color selections and I'll also have a clickable link in the description of this video for this product. I first begin with a general sketch like I often do. I keep it very simple and I'm using a white charcoal pencil. Now I had to use something light because the surface is dark obviously. Now I am just very subtly and simply getting in little gestural shapes for the figures and my lessons for figures in a landscape this month will be more with figures that are either in the distance they're small and so what we're trying to do is really just capture their gesture their movement and their basic shape especially when something's really far away. You don't need a whole lot of detail. As a matter of fact it's going to detract from your painting when you over detail images that are in the distance. They're going to be a focal point because they're typically a little bit darker and of course they're going to have a little focal interest but you don't want to overdo it so I'm just keeping some very simple shapes at this stage and I'll teach more on the figures when I get to the painting process. Now these are the basic pastels that I grabbed to start the painting. I do add other colors but it was a good selection to get started. I'm using a dark pastel. I believe this is the Terry Ludwig eggplant color and it's a really nice dark.  Now the surface is dark already or darker and I know that I still need some values that are even a little darker than that. Now I have my reference image very small right here. Now I'm adding a darker blue just to add some interesting darks but if you want to see this reference image larger I'll have a clickable link to that in the video as well. There was a tree back here in the distance and a few little shrubs and branches so I'm kind of just zoning out and squinting my eyes and seeing where the darkest darks are and I'm just getting in basically values at this point. I'm keeping some big strokes because a lot of the foliage in the front was very tall and I want to accentuate that. I added a little bit of that lavender color to the upper right there. It was a little light so I moved on. I'm adding a little green and now I'm using a piece of pipe foam insulation that you can buy at any hardware store for blending in this initial layer. Now this pastel paper, LaCarte Pastel Card, sometimes takes a little while to blend because it is pretty gritty. It takes a while for your pastels to get down into those layers. It does take a lot of layers though. Now I'm adding another green and these initial stages of pastel paintings are really mostly a value study with some underlying color for excitement and to kind of get your your groundwork down to get your basic palette in and cover the main surface. It also helps to keep things very loose and painterly before you go to getting very specific. There were like some distant hills in the background and some grassy areas and a little bit of a... I don't think in the reference image there was much of a sky but I ended up putting a little bit of sky back there. You'll see by the end of the painting. I got a little indication of that tree. There was another little area that I thought was a nice compositional element. The one on the left, the little dark in the midway to the left, it kind of made a feeling of those right foliage kind of coming in and then a little bit to the left. Almost like a little bit of a road there. Here are my figures. I've tried to zoom in a lot where I'm painting and also crop the reference image so you could kind of see what I'm looking at. Believe it or not I'm actually trying to zone out and forget that I'm painting people. Sometimes our brains think something looks a certain way when it really doesn't in actuality. I'm just looking at the shape of his pants, kind of his head and I'm using a dark... I think it's a prismacolor new pastel which is a little bit easier to draw small things because it's a rectangular and it has some corners to it. It's a little harder too. I'm also just getting the shape of her legs and perhaps a little bit of the feeling that she's walking but once again just look at the shapes. Break them down to their most simple form and I'm going to be having a few other tutorials where I really zoom in or I'm going to do some actually a little bit bigger so that you can get the idea of how to shape people in the distance and they won't remain this dark. It does appear that the sunlight is kind of coming from the distance far away, shining towards them. You see a little backlighting on her hair. He's a little bit more in the shadow but a little bit of light on top of his head but I need to get the dark in first for contrast and then I can layer other colors on top suggesting the color of their shirt. I decided to make them a bit older than they are. I kept imagining my parents, some of you know my mom passed away a year ago and I kept thinking of my mom and dad walking together like this. Also too I decided, you'll see as this evolves, I decided to make them holding hands so I do give that little twist on what was already there and so now I'm just basically working in some of the colors and the values around them and keeping it very loose. I have to apologize in advance. You can see my hair flopping down at the bottom of the screen there. I'm working based on a lot of your comments. You really like this overhead footage. I think you can see better. I have my lighting more consistent over the whole image. I do find though when something is really little or detailed I just have this habit of leaning my head over so that I can see. I don't wear glasses but I wear reader glasses and so I have to see a little bit closer and thus I put my head down and get it in the camera. What the camera does is it starts focusing on my head instead of what I'm painting so a little bit of the footage at the end. I wasn't able to get quite as clearly as I do at these beginning stages so apologies in advance. So yeah I'm just working around. I decided to I think in the reference image there was a little bit of a path. It was very subtle so I decided to make it like they're walking through a beautiful field going towards this little path to get on a road home or wherever and I love when I'm painting how my mind meanders making a story almost with the painting. I do it even if people aren't in the painting. So now I'm adding a little bit of a blue to a shirt. His shirt was kind of gray but I thought I'd make it a little bit blue and so I'm just layering a little bit on top and I'm keeping in mind as I'm painting not to go too light too soon. They really are a little bit darker because of where the light is coming from. Now I'm adding a little bit of a this. Now this is a big chunky pastel. It's kind of a lavender like a neutral gray lavender that I'm adding a teeny little spot to the top of his head there. It gives the feeling of light. Some of you guys asked to how do you make such little marks with the big pastels and there's really just a little trick to it. I basically make these little tester marks. I'll put my pastel down and kind of feel where it is. I'll make a teeny little mark then I'll look at where it landed and you learn over time to just adjust your pastel to where you want it to be and that's just like anything. You just get better with practice and I think I made a few marks that were not quite right so I kind of tweaked them as I work again. It's really small so you got to keep it super simple and I'll just make a few more marks for the woman figure and then I'm going to move on because I don't want to overdo it. This is still the initial stages of a painting and it's best to keep things loose and painterly and work the whole. I find that when I work the painting as a whole the end result comes out being more consistent and painterly so you don't and it's more enjoyable. You don't get overly frustrated at one area that's driving you crazy. Just move on and sometimes these things work themselves out.  I do end up also adding some other trees. I felt like the tree was just too much in the center of them. You know it looked almost like a triangle so I thought I would give a few more trees. You'll see me add those later. So now I'm getting in just some of these deeper grass colors. I know that there are some purpley bluish colored flowers that are on the top and buried down in the grasses but the majority of the grasses are especially in the foreground. They're pretty pretty dark right in the foreground and then they gradually get a little lighter as it's going towards the people and you can see from the reference image. I'm not going to keep the reference image popped up for most of this painting because it would be too little for you to see anyway but if you pull it up and look at it or look at it at the beginning of this video you can see there was an area to the lower lower right kind of that was really dark like it was some deep deep grasses. I felt like that balanced out compositionally. It was weighted nicely with having the heavy dark color on the right side on the bottom having the people more up towards the left in the top and some of the darker trees. It felt balanced to me. Now I'm adding some of this pretty green color. I can't remember what this pastel was but it layered so beautifully on this Sennelier LeCart. It's a little bit of a cooler green I would say. Notice the greens that I had already put down in the foreground. They were a little darker in value and they were warmer closer to yellow so I'm just gently putting in some of these lighter greens back in the distant field. I'm keeping a super super light touch here because I don't want them to be too light. There was some shadowy areas back there and I also want to keep my focal point my center of interest as the people so you can see right now they're the obvious focal point because they're one of the darkest things and I have contrast going on. There are dark elements with light values around them and also brighter values that's another focal point strategy to have colors that are bolder and brighter and higher in saturation, stronger in saturation. So as you can see I had the part where I painted the people as real time and I've just sped some of this up slightly just to be able to move along in this and not have it to be so long. By the way thanks for all your commentary on the video I posted almost just before this one where I really had a lot of raw footage and I ask if you guys mind it there was a lot of pausing a lot of times in videos like this one I go in and I edit out dead time sometimes I literally walk away from my painting and I don't turn my camera off so I try to for your convenience cut out all of that and in the last video I I didn't do a lot of that tweaking and you guys were so nice you're like we don't care you know it definitely makes it easier on me but again I'm trying to make these videos short enough to watch I know people's lives are busy and to make it a lesson where you can just really concentrate on what I'm doing rather than all this dead time so anyway that that was my long-winded version of a thank you for your comments and I do have to again oh I'm adding a little bit of dark to some of those grasses that were there was like a big tall area on the right side that looked almost like wheat grasses I wasn't sure if I wanted to keep them looking like wheat I kind of played around with it and I kind of decided against it I felt like it was a little bit much so I kept all the flowers kind of consistent in color and type of flower but anyway another thank you to my patrons for helping me to continue to do this because if it wasn't for the support of my patrons I know I would not be able to make this many videos and give all the instruction that I do I would probably just do it like I don't know maybe once every few months but because of the support from my patrons I can keep the free lessons coming here on the Monet cafe YouTube channel and trust me I get comments from people all over the world that are so grateful I mean literally people in countries who have not only they don't have the financial means they don't have people teaching in their area and they can't find art instructions so god bless my patrons for that and it's helping my husband to build our home some of you have been through my saga where our home flooded in 2017 we're still living in a temporary home situation and we bought some property six acres and we're trying to build a home and the future home of the new Monet cafe so all of that is coming down the road and I'm very grateful for my patron support because my husband is literally building our house he has no job other than that so it's my art business alone god bless you all okay enough of that so these were some of the wheat grasses those crazy black things I'm putting in there it's the dark Terry Ludwig eggplant and I was I put down the contrast I'm gonna lighten them up you basically a lot of times with flowers and things that you want to have focal interest you need the contrast so you put down dark and then you gradually lighten it up with your layers you'll see me do that pretty soon so now I'm just kind of weaving in some of these grassy keeping the the gesture of the grasses and also trying to vary the direction I find that as my artwork has evolved as I've painted for many years I found that that has been one thing that has really really helped me or really really been a noticeable difference in my my art is that I have the spontaneous motion to things now you can see I added that blue to the sky I thought that was had a more interest to it if it had some distance with a blue sky I'm getting in a little bit more of some of these grasses in the distance just lightening it up a bit in some areas it felt dark for a while so I was trying to brighten it up a little bit there's the head that I was talking about my gray my gray crazy hairs anybody else have that going on why don't they just behave they just won't lay down but anyway my figures are still a little bit dark but you'll see me tweak this and I really liked the gesture or the feel of the figures at this point I felt like they looked more painterly here's where I am lightening up some of these to give them the feeling of maybe some just sort of grassy wheat like things growing up and so I'm kind of just putting a highlight almost like I put a highlight on their head their gray hair which I'll do more of soon so again I liked their form here probably better than at the end but I I needed to lighten them up a bit which I do with the color of their shirt and things like that now these little square or rectangular pastels that I have here are prism a color new pastels spelled in you pastels and they're harder they're good for grasses they're more affordable actually and they're really great for sketching now here's some of these gorgeous it's like a blue-purple it's this is a Terry Ludwig pastel you can see that one laying there now these are some of the blues it's a little bit of a warmer blue that I'm just getting in shapes I'm looking at where some of the flowers are in the reference image not that you have to follow it like a total roadmap you use it as a guide and then you put flowers where you think it will compositionally enhance the image so I know some of these I'm going to bury to I don't want my flowers to look like they're all just pasted on the top of the grass that's not what happens if you're if you're in nature this photograph is more like somebody who got down low in the scene and so you're going to see flowers that are behind grasses and flowers that are deeper in the grasses so I will layer additional grasses on top of some of them towards the end of the painting I also felt like the blue in the sky kind of connected the blue flowers when I didn't have the the sky as that blue color I don't know it just didn't feel right so you do have the artistic license to look at things and think what would make this just more beautiful and more connected with color and and with motion so I've got the energy going on of the flowers pulling the viewer's eye kind of up and around a little bit of a curve this is kind of does have an s-shaped curve you come in to the the lower left with the flowers curve around that barrier where those wheat grasses are towards the people and then back around that road to the mountains so a really kind of typical s-shaped curve composition and here is more of my crazy head getting in the way I decided to add a little bit this kind of magenta color I know her shirt was that color but I wanted to add a little bit of that in the surrounding area kind of on the road and in some other areas so that when I added the magenta to her shirt she didn't just look like she was standing out like a sore thumb I'm adding a few more grasses that are kind of in the middle ground they're gonna have a little bit of height to them not nearly as tall and broad as the foreground grasses so I wanted to zoom in a little bit more to here so you could maybe see a little better better how I'm kind of just sketching in this road a little bit very suggestive and I decided to add a little bit of that pretty teal blue at the base of some of the trees and here's where I'm giving a little bit more of a suggestion of more trees I felt like that was neat that there were trees kind of receding into the distance adding a little bit of that Terry Ludwig I did just then to the trees to darken them up now I'm adding some lighter greens this is the whole concept again of working dark to light you put your darker values down first and then you gradually layer your lighter values on top I wanted to lighten the sky up a little bit more and I'm peeking in some of these blues and I haven't quite yet defined the area of those tall grasses on the right so I didn't want to give too much detail with some negative painting behind them and now I do this a lot I get a pastel that's kind of a neutral it's almost a gray when things are in the distance sometimes a little bit of bright color in the distance is good but I didn't want it to take away from my focal point there's my little dark area to the left there that I also felt compositionally pulled your eye in you're going to have to pardon my big old head again for a minute as I'm leaning over and working a little bit on the distant hills in the back and you know really at this stage it could have been considered pretty done I liked the really almost unfinished look of some of the grasses and the flowers but you know me if you watch my videos I just get so into it I keep working and keep working one day I'll learn to stop sooner hopefully and you can probably see how the little bits of light areas that I'm adding is really brightening up this painting when you're working on a dark surface like this or a darker surface like this sometimes your painting can feel a little dark and I wanted to make sure I brightened it up a bit so I'm just adding there were some of these little pretty blue flowers peeking up over the tops some of them are reaching really high I moved my painting to my easel it helps me to not get my head in the way and I was also collecting a little bit of pastel dust that's the disadvantage of painting flat with pastels that you sometimes have to pick your painting up take it outside dust it off and come back into work because it's not going to fall like it does when it's on an easel like this by the way I made a new invention based on my filming my new filming technique that I can't wait to show you I always like my work surface to look nice and put some foam core board down to work on well foam core board it gets expensive I have to replace it a lot because I get pastel all over it it doesn't look good for the next video so I thought hmm I got creative and came up with a neat board that oh my gosh I think so many of you are gonna love it I came up with it out of my brain and it is gonna work so great and I'll share it with you hopefully within the next tutorial or so I think a lot of you will love it alright so just little wispy suggestions of grasses once again moving in different directions just use your reference image as a guide I saw some grasses were just diagonally reaching way across you know and that gives a little energy and excitement to the painting thus far I'm almost done with this video you as you can see but thus far I've had only speeding it up minimally and real time when I painted the figures but this last part I'm gonna just speed it up a little bit because these are kind of the finishing marks and then you can see the final that big chunky green pastel I'm using there is a Diane Townsend it's part of the Diane Townsend greens it's a really nice set I think it's 12 pastels so just getting in more of the flowers adding a little bit more purple and keeping them hopefully free and not too patterned that's one thing you want to try to do when you're adding a lot of wild flowers is to keep some it does have a harmony to it but it's not a specific pattern that's gonna make it look very artificial so here is almost the final on the easel I think I tweaked it a little bit more and it came out brighter when I put it up on the easel like this you can see the color so I hope you learned a lot I am gonna be having plenty more lessons on figures and landscapes this month if you would like to support this channel it would really bless my husband and myself for only $5 a month and a lot of other people who want some free art instruction all right my friends God bless and happy painting


You now have a woke mind virus has infected all these other institutions. I mean, just look at corporate America. Most corporations, some of these big corporations, are now exercising quasi-public power. Is it time to fight fire with fire, to wield government power, to stop a dangerous ideology from destroying America's vital institutions? Florida's governor and maybe 2024 presidential candidate Ron DeSantis thinks so. We're not just going to sit idly by if you're trying to circumscribe people's freedoms. And that's true of its government, it's also true of its big business. He's quickly becoming a favorite of a conservative movement, seeking to jettison the libertarian idea that government shouldn't meddle in the affairs of private business. But I think the lesson for people on the right is I think there was a generation of people that kind of the muscle memory was just if it's private, just defer to it. Here, DeSantis and Republicans in the state legislature retaliated against Disney for opposing a Florida law prohibiting the discussion of sexuality and gender identity in K through third grade classrooms. Disney should not run its own government. Now DeSantis, who declined our interview request, has signed the Individual Rights Act, formerly known as the Stop Woke Act. I think what you see now with the rise of this woke ideology is an attempt to really delegitimize our history. A U.S. district court judge struck down the first part of the law on First Amendment grounds. It prohibited private companies from holding any mandatory training that espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels employees to believe eight concepts. Those are that members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are morally superior to members of another race, color, or sex.  That these characteristics determine one's moral status as privileged or oppressed. Or mean that you bear personal responsibility for past injustices. The concepts like merit, excellence, hard work, fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist. Or that trying to be colorblind and treat people without regard to race is wrong. Here's one example of a diversity, equity, and inclusion presentation from one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Oftentimes, it's very hard for us to distinguish white supremacy from things like these are just U.S. cultural norms, you know, a focus on individualism over groups, or emphasizing written word as a form of professional communication. White supremacy culture is why the posture of white humility from my perspective is so difficult for white people to embody. Banning workplace trainings that tell people that their race or sex makes them morally culpable might sound pretty reasonable. But opponents say such laws set a dangerous precedent. As you go through the concepts, the state worded in a way that makes it seem terrible. Jerry Edwards is a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida who is challenging a separate part of the law that applies to universities. He calls the bill a wolf in sheep's clothing because anytime a government bans broad categories of speech, it gives politicians the ability to define terms of acceptable discourse. It's problematic and we can't allow the state, can't give the state this power to regulate speech in a sort of way. The left also craves state power to impose its cultural preferences. Human writer here tweeted recently that we should use state power for good, like civil rights and defending the LGBTQ community. The only objection to DeSantis is that he wants to use state power to push big business to do bad things. Of course, from the perspective of DeSantis and his allies, the Individual Rights Act is a civil rights law to force businesses to do what they think is good for Americans by taking identity politics out of the workplace. The more power politicians have to determine which type of speech is good and therefore legal and which is bad and therefore illegal, the more the sphere of acceptable discourse is likely to shrink as both sides of the political spectrum hem in those boundaries to promote their subjective notions of the common good. The state should not be banning ideas, particularly on college campuses. When you have such a blatant attempt to control thought, and not only control thought but have the state control thought, that's reminiscent of societies and governments that we are supposedly fought wars against. The part of DeSantis' law that hasn't been struck down pertains to universities that receive state funding. It bans college professors from promoting any of the eight forbidden concepts. Leroy Pernell, a law professor at Florida A&M University, or FAMU, and historically Black College, is a plaintiff in the ACLU's case challenging that part of the law. He's afraid that the law will outlaw discussions of systemic racism, which he says is part of FAMU's institutional history. The state created the law school in 1949 to accommodate two Black law students who applied to the racially segregated University of Florida. In 1966, the state forced it to seize admitting new students, until then Florida Governor Jeb Bush signed a law to reopen it in 2000. Pernell worries that if instructors were to characterize that history as systemically racist, they'd run afoul of the law's restrictions around teaching the concept. I have no way of knowing that my passion for teaching students about history, about change, about the ability to bring about change, I have no way of knowing that that isn't offensive to these subjective judges of what is endorsing, what is not endorsing, what is promoting, what is not promoting. So I do now live with the idea that at any moment the state can come and take negative action against me because of my thought. Pernell also worries that the law would prohibit him from teaching material from his own book about the racist roots of the concept of colorblindness. It is impossible to understand the criminal procedure and understand the issues that arise in criminal procedure without understanding that the history has not been colorblind. But the state has argued that it does have a say over what's taught at taxpayer subsidized schools.  What do you think about that specifically, the fact that the state has a say in this because it involves public money and they deem the teaching of this to be harmful to the state's interest? The state's done this before. I mean, this is not something new. Back in the Red Scare era, they tried to crack down on professors who they thought were communist or communist adjacent. And the state has no business doing that, of regulating the marketplace of ideas in that way. There isn't a compelling interest in the state saying which ideas are acceptable and which ideas aren't. That is viewpoint discrimination. Diversity is good for business in many ways. Companies with diverse leaders are shown to be more profitable. Sarah Margulis and her husband co-founded Honey Fund, a Clearwater Florida-based company that administers online cash wedding registries. Their plaintiffs, in the case against Florida, are arguing that the law restricts their freedom to provide diversity training seminars to their employees. What was in the trainings that you believe might have run a foul of those kinds of restrictions? So one thing that comes to mind is the idea of privilege that white people or males have privilege that non-white people or females don't enjoy. And I think that the concept of that, the idea of that, is not something for us to shy away from understanding and actively trying to mitigate in our business. DeSantis' office declined our interview requests, but his press reps responded by email, that because the concepts are forced on employees as a condition of employment, that they are designed to force individuals to believe something and adopt a certain prescribed ideology, and therefore that the law is designed to prohibit forced indoctrination in these concepts because doing so is discriminatory under Florida's civil rights law. But Honey Fund's attorney, Shalini Argawal, of the Nonprofit Protect Democracy says the existence of civil rights law implies the opposite, that anyone who feels targeted by a diversity training workshop is already protected. Our current employment discrimination law that preceded the Stop Woke Act already covers hostile work environments, and that's basically when in the workplace an employee faces objectively offensive, and it can be just largely speech, not even other things, but it has to be so severe and pervasive that it creates a situation where the employment, then continuing that employment is intolerable, it affects a term or condition of their employment. So that is out there. If anyone is engaging in diversity, equity, and inclusion trainings that actually create hostile work environment, employees preexisting this law were free to bring claims. The Stop Woke Act creates a whole set of pretty flimsy and vague standards that make it kind of impossible for an employer to figure out how to proceed. How much concern do you have about retaliation for putting yourself out there and being part of a lawsuit like this? As a business leader, I strive to do what's right for my business. I strive to take good care of my customers and my employees, and so for me, standing up as a plaintiff in this case was an easy decision. It's one that my team was behind, and I moved my business to Florida in 2017 from California because Florida was known to be a business-friendly state because it was a place where a lot of investment dollars were coming in, people were moving, going to colleges, getting tech degrees, and big names, people like Bill Gates and Jeff Innick have invested billions of dollars in the Tampa Bay Area specifically to make it a tech-friendly place for innovative businesses. And so I don't imagine that the state of Florida is wanting to do anything to undermine the billions of dollars that have flown into the state to promote business. We believe in education, not indoctrination. If people are thinking of themselves in terms of their racial identity, that didn't begin with critical race theory, all right? That began in the womb, and that began with their families, and it began in society. So this is nothing that's, this is not indoctrination of ideas that have roots and things that didn't exist before. So that's just silly. But the idea that somehow it is a negative to understand that there are racial differences that as a society, different races, different communities bring different things to the table. You might disagree with Parnell. I'm also not convinced that teaching law students to celebrate racial identity and differences is the best use of classroom time, but it doesn't really matter what I think a lot of professors should teach, and it shouldn't much matter what a governor thinks about that either. The relevant question really is not what goes on in the classroom, the board room, or the break room, but who gets to decide? Let's say that there was a blue state that did kind of the opposite of this, and they said, we're gonna ban a professor who has a different viewpoint and thinks critical race theory is wrong and that we should be talking about color blindness as a legitimate concept and things like this. Anytime you put state and ban together, danger, all right? Why does the state ban any thought? If we are in a free society that exists and develops based on free exchange of ideas. The state can't really banish ideas. It can make people more hesitant to speak openly and honestly through threat of punishment. Hampering real communication that way makes solving hard problems even harder, and there are a lot of hard problems left to solve. Some so-called woke ideas are pernicious because reducing every injustice to an identity-based formula flattens nuance, cultivates grievances, and can create tension where none existed before, as borne out by studies that find diversity training quite often makes people more prejudiced. This simplistic and counterproductive approach only further clouds our view of real solutions and real progress. But is this situation really so dire as portrayed by political operatives like Chris Rufo, who stood beside DeSantis as he introduced the law and who calls critical race theory and similar teachings, neo-Marxism? It's not a benign philosophy about teaching racism. It's a radical philosophy that's rooted in Marxism. Even some libertarians have come to look at the issue as a fight against communism. The Libertarian Party's official account tweeted that, soon, parents will be required to help enforce the state's Marxist, queer theorist critical race agenda at home. Parents who fail to adequately indoctrinate their kids will have them taken away. And when you believe you're fighting an existential domestic threat, it can justify all sorts of very unlibertarian, authoritarian behavior. The party account defended Joseph McCarthy while approvingly quoting an anti-woke academic saying, it's time to deal with American communists for real. Joseph McCarthy in the Senate and the Committee for Un-American Activities in the House went way overboard in their hunt for communist infiltrators in the government, eventually targeting actors, writers, poets, musicians, teachers. And we're not even talking about Soviet spies within the government here, which is what kicked off McCarthy's crusade. We're talking about professors teaching what they believe college students need to hear and employers training their workers in ways they think will help create a more harmonious workplace and virtue signal to their customers and ultimately help their bottom line. We're talking about a state government regulating the free exchange of ideas.  This isn't the way to stop woke. Does that mean you just have to roll over and take it? After all, as conservatives will point out the progressive left has no problem using civil rights law to push its ideas into the workplace and onto the college campus. Why shouldn't the right pick up that tool and use it for its own ends? Well, because you're sharpening a tool for your opponents to eventually turn against you. Instead, you could be blunting or even dismantling it. If existing laws are part of the problem, limit or repeal the laws. Also build, improve and support alternative institutions, ones that reflect your values. Don't work for or buy from companies that you think disrespect you or attend colleges that spend a lot of time on a little of value. They'll get the message some already have. If you really think woke ideas should be stopped, fine, but be wary of shortcuts. That's often how you miss important details and badly hurt yourself. The long hard path is the one more likely to bring enduring change. Criticize, resist, and when need be, opt out.


Give All to Love by Ralph Waldo Emerson. Read for LibriVox.org by Andrea Fiori. Give All to Love. Obey Thy Heart. Friends kindred, days, estate, good fame, plans credit and the muse. Nothing refuse. Tis a brave master. Let it have scope. Follow it utterly. Hope beyond hope. High and more high it dives into noon, with wing unspent, untold intent. But it is a God, knows its own path, and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean it required with courage stout, souls above doubt, valor unbending. It will reward, they shall return. More than they were, and ever ascending. Leave all for love, yet hear me yet. One word more thy heart behoved. One pulse more of firm endeavor. Keep thee to-day, to-morrow forever. Free as an Arab of thy beloved. Pling with life to the maid. But when the surprise, first vague shadow of surmise, flits across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee. Free be she, fancy free, nor thou detain her vestures hem, nor the palest rose she flung, from her summer diadem. Though thou loved her as thyself, as a self of pure clay, though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive, heartily know when half gods go, the gods survive. End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Give all to love by Ralph Waldo Emerson, read for LibriVox.org by David Lawrence. Give all to love. Obey thy heart. Friends. Kindred. Days. Estate. Good fame. Plans. Credit. And the muse. Nothing refuse. Tis a brave master. Let it have scope. Follow it utterly. Hope beyond hope. High and more high it dives into noon, with wing unspent, untold intent. But it is a God, knows its own path, and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean. It requireeth courage stout. Souls above doubt. Valor unbending. It will reward. They shall return more than they were, and ever ascending. Leave all for love. Yet, hear me, yet. One word more thy heart behoved. One paltz more a firm endeavour. Keep thee to-day, to-morrow, for ever, free as an Arab of thy beloved. Cling with life to the maid. But, when the surprise, first vague shadow of surmise, foots across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee. Free be she, fancy free, nor thou detain her vesture's hem, nor the palest rose she flung from her summer deoden. Though thou lov'dt her as thyself, as a self of purer clay, though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive, heartily know, when half gods go, the gods survive. Give all to love. Obey thy heart. Friends, kindred, days, estate, good fame, plans, credit, and amuse. Nothing refuse. To the brave master, let it have scope. Follow it utterly. Hope beyond hope. High and more high. It dives into noon. With wing unspent. Untold intent. But it is a god. Knows its own path. And the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean. It requireeth courage stout. Souls above doubt. Valor unbending. It will reward. They shall return more than they were. And ever ascending. Leave all for love. Yet hear me yet. One word more thy heart behoove'd. One pulse more of firm endeavour. Keep thee to-day. Tomorrow for ever. Free as an Arab of thy beloved. Cling with life to the maid. But when the surprise, first vague shadow of surmise, flits across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee. Free be she, fancy free. Nor thou detain her vesture's hem. Nor the palest rose she flung, from her summer diadem. Though thou loved her as thyself, as a self of pure clay. Though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive. Harderly know, when half gods go, the gods survive. End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Give All to Love by Ralph Waldo Emerson, read for LibreVox.org by Kevin Bank. Give All to Love. Obey thy heart. Friends kindred days, estate, good fame, plans, credit, and amuse. Nothing refuse. It is a brave master. Let it have scope. Follow it utterly. Hope beyond hope. High and more high it jives into noon. With wings unspent, untold intent. But it is a god. Knows its own path and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean. It will acquire th' courage stout. Souls above doubt, valor unbending it will reward. They shall return more than they were, and ever ascending. Leave All for Love. Yet hear me. Yet one word more thy heart behoove'd. One pulse more a firm endeavor. Keep thee to-day, tomorrow, forever. Free is an Arab of thy beloved. Clean with life to the maid. Who, when the surprise, first-fake shadow of surmise, flits across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee. Free be she, fancy free, nor thou letain her vesture's hymn, nor the palest rose she frung from her summer diadem. Though thou lov'dt forrest thyself as a self of pure clay, though her parting dims the day, sealing grace from all alive, heartily know, when half gods go, the gods survive. End of Poem. This recording is in the public domain. Give All to Love by Ralph Waldo Emerson. Read for LibriVox.org by Leanne Howlett. Give All to Love. Obey thy heart. Friends, kindred, days, estate, good fame, plans, credit, and the muse, nothing refuse. Tis a brave master. Let it have scope. Follow it utterly, hope beyond hope. High and more high it dives into noon, with wing unspent, untold intent. But it is a god, knows its own path, and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean, it requireeth it requireeth courage stout, souls above doubt, valor unbending, it will reward. They shall return more than they were, and ever ascending. Leave All for Love. Yet hear me yet, one word more thy heart behold, one pulse more of firm endeavor. Keep thee today, tomorrow, forever, free as an Arab of thy beloved. Cling with life to the maid. But when the surprise, first vague shadow of surmise, flits across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee, free be she, fancy free. Nor thou detain her vesture's hymn, nor the palest rose she flung from her summer diadem. Though thou loved her as thyself, as a self of pure clay, though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive, heartily know, when half gods go, the gods survive. End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Give all to love, obey thy heart, friends, kindred, days, estate, good fame, plans, credit and the muse, nothing refuse. Tis a brave master, let it have scope, follow it utterly, hope beyond hope, high and more high it dives into noon, with wing unspent, untold intent. But it is a god, knows its own path and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean, it requireth courage stout, souls above doubt, valour unbending it will reward. They shall return, more than they were, and ever ascending. Leave all for love, yet hear me yet. One word more thy heart behoved, one pulse more of firm endeavour. Keep thee to-day, tomorrow, forever, free as an Arab of thy beloved. Kling with life to the maid, but when the surprise, first vague shadow of some eyes, flits across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee, free be she, fancy free, nor thou detain her vesture's hem, nor the palest rose she flung, from her summer dear dem. Though thou lov'dt her as thyself, as a self of purer clay, though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive, heartily know, when half gods go, the gods survive. End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Tis a brave master, let it have scope, follow it utterly, hope beyond hope. High and more high it dives into noon, with wing unspent, untold intent, but it is a god knows its own path and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean, it requireeth courage stout, souls above doubt, valour unbending it will reward, they shall return more than they were, and ever ascending. Leave all for love, yet hear me yet, one word more thy heart behoved, one pulse more of firm endeavor. Keep thee today, tomorrow, forever, free as an Arab of thy beloved. Cling with life to the maid, but when the surprise first vague shadow of surmise flits across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee, free be she, fancy free, nor thou detain her vestures hem, nor the palest rose she flung from her summer diadem. Though thou loved her as thyself, as a self of pure clay, though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive, heartily know when half gods go, the gods survive. End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Follow it utterly. Hope beyond hope, high and more high, it dives into the moon with wings unspent untold intent, but it is a god knows its own path and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean, it requireeth courage stout, souls above doubt, valour unbending, it will reward, they shall return more than they were, and ever ascending. Leave all for love, yet hear me yet. One word more thy heart behoove'd, one pulse more of firm endeavour. Keep thee today, tomorrow, forever free as an Arab of thy beloved. Cling with life to the maid, but when the surprise first vague shadow of surmise flits across her bosom young, I will joy apart from thee, free be she fancy free, nor thou detain her vestures him, nor the palest rose she flung from her summer diadem. Though thou loved her as thyself, as a self of pure clay, though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive, heartily know when half gods go, to God survive. End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Give all to love by Rolf Waldo Emerson, read for LibriVox.org by secrets. Give all to love, obey thy heart, friends kindred days, estate good fame, plans credit and the muse nothing refuse, tis a brave master. Let it have scope, follow it utterly, hope beyond hope, high and more high it dives into noon, with wing unspent, untold intent, but it is a God, knows its own path and the outlets of the sky. It was never for the mean it requireeth courage stout, souls above doubt, valour unbending, it will reward, they shall return more than they were, and ever ascending. Leave all for love, yet hear me yet, one word more thy heart behoved, one pulse more of firm endeavour. Keep thee today, tomorrow forever, free as an Arab of thy beloved, cling with life to the maid. But when the surprise, first vague, shadow of some eyes, flits across her bosom young, of a joy apart from thee, free be she, fancy free, nor thou detain her vestures hem, nor the palest rose she flung from her summer didem. Though thou loved her as thyself, as a self of pure clay, though her parting dims the day, stealing grace from all alive, heartily know when half gods go, the gods survive. End of poem. This recording is in the public domain.


The ubiquitous USB Type A. Released in 1995, Type A is for host computer connections. You likely still have a compatible port on your desktop machine today. In 96, the chunky Type B connector came along for connecting to peripherals, known to many simply as printer cable. It also connected to Arduino. Type B is a bit large for a cell phone, so in 2000, mini-B was introduced, followed seven years later by the flatter, more reliable, micro-B connector. With the release of USB 3 came extra chunky Type B connectors, with backward compatible sockets, odd but cool. Eventually, we take a big step forward with USB C. It's faster, reversible, and uses the same connector for host and peripheral. It's the one connector to rule them all, until the next one comes out.


Yeah, that's amazing. I think we can reconvene. If you would take your seat, we'll begin our next discussion. And as you do take your seat, I want to mention, and I'll try to remember to mention it when we break, there are going to be several emergency announcements, several emergency tests, well, several, I guess two. St. Peter regularly at the beginning of each month holds an emergency test of its sirens. And that will happen today, I believe, at 1. I think that happens. Yes. 1? Yes. It's 1 PM today. And then also there is a national test of the emergency system, and everyone will receive a notification on your cell phone no matter what you do to prevent it. So just do not be alarmed. We have emergency protocols in place. If an actual emergency should emerge, please pay attention to Miguel, the manager, the stage manager here. And he will tell you what to do, but we're not going to have any of those. We're just going to practice having them. So please do note whether your equipment works or not. I also have been asked to announce that session, at the noon time, there's a session listed. Go to the ant, thou sluggard. It's the session about the Hebrew Bible and references to insects in it. It had been going to be held in the Soka, which has been constructed on the south campus. There has been what is described as a catastrophic event there. I didn't ask for details. But at any rate, it has been moved to the Banyur Interfaith Center, Multi-faith Center in Anderson Hall. So please go there during the noon hour if you would like to go to that session. So thanks for that. With that, I turn it over to Margaret, who will launch our questioning. Great. Well, the first question I'll ask is, do our fellow speakers have any questions for Julie and Saganet? Jonathan? Yes. Thanks very much to both Julie and Saganet for a fascinating pair of talks. I think there was a lot of overlap in the content of the talks and some of the recommendations coming out of them. And it seems as though one big point of agreement between the two of you is about recommending people to eat more insects. And so for some of the reasons I was discussing yesterday, I'm a little bit hesitant about this because it does, in a way, involve recommending to people to consume far more individual animals than they have been consuming in the past. For example, someone might eat 100 crickets in a single sitting. And so it seems very important to be confident that we have the welfare standards right and that we're giving these animals good lives when we recommend that people eat them in such large numbers. And then I'm really unsure because it seems like very little research has been done into the welfare of these animals and how to give them good lives in farming environments. So just like you two, to reflect on that really, how does welfare feature in your own thinking about these issues? And what do you see as the most useful things we can do to try and make sure these animals are having good lives? I have lots of thoughts. So to start, I always find it fun when somebody's like, oh, I can't eat insects. I'm a vegetarian. And so I say, OK, that's fine. But it's like, why are you a vegetarian?  Because a lot of vegetarians are health-based or environmentally-based. And then some are literally vegans who believe that harm can be quantified by numbers of lives lost in your consumption. So then eating thousands of insects is more harmful in their eyes than eating a single cow or chicken. And so it really comes down to definition. And those are very philosophical debates and thoughts. And everybody has very personal views on it. But so from the environmental side, if you are an environmental vegan or vegetarian, the insects can provide this really interesting way that makes it easier to get all of your nutrients. Being a vegan is hard. It's not easy to get all of the essential amino acids by pairing. You have to be intelligent in how you pair your foods. And also, it requires a lot of highly processed foods a lot of time. And so in trying to eat better for ourselves and the environment, less processing is good. So there is this little entovegan group that I find really has kind of connected a lot of the dots. So yeah, insects isn't going to, if you are a vegan, then insects might not be for you. The second thing is about the welfare and the killing of the food insects. And this is something that I find interesting and important is that right now, we mostly freeze the insects. So the insects go into just a natural state of torpor or hibernation. They just kind of fall asleep. And then they stay in the freezer long enough and they eventually die. So that is mostly how people process it. However, refrigeration is a really expensive cost energetically and dollar wise. And so I have fears that when this scales up that what when I came into these ideas 10 years ago and I had sort of the rose-colored glasses and the idyllic perceptions to start realizing that when we scale, that we're going to likely start losing that insect welfare piece that is critical to how this movement is starting. But I think that can so easily be lost. And so I do think it's really important in sort of regulations of insect foods going forward to even if it's a labeling issue so that you can make your decision on how the insects were harvested, I think that's going to be important. Good. I mean, I've got to be honest and say I'm a bit concerned even about freezing insects to death in ordinary household freezers because that's quite a slow process. Something that is more recommendable, I think, is liquid nitrogen, which does kill them essentially instantly. But as you say, that's even harder to scale up on a large commercial scale. Yeah, so I'd like to hear a second at thoughts on this as well. Well, I think life is always a balance, a choice. So what do we do? Do we care most about eating the insects or letting people die or letting people malnourished when there are more than a billion people who are malnourished when they could solve this? I don't want to sound cruel. But I think my scientists tell me that we think about these issues. So the least painful way to kill the insects is freedom slowly. But this is also not practical when we are telling people you can raise a chicken in a very low-tech in your garden, in your backyard. But the vast majority of African households don't have electricity. So are we going to say, yeah, just freedom and eat them? So I think people are not going to care how the insects feel. They are going to eat them, whatever. The way the chicken running around, the backyard are digging and swallowing the worms what they find. So it's a balancing act, really. But I think from the environmental point of view or so when you look at the figures, the efficiency of insects through some of the figures which is commonly cited is to produce one kilo of beef, you need 25 kilos of feed, and 22,000 liters of water to hydrate the animals. You need 95 times more space. So it just makes sense to have these things. But having said that, I'm not saying that eating insects is a silver bullet to solve food security or nutritional security. No, we are not saying that there is alternative to do things better. So I think what Julie said also in the thing is also, you know, we have tried many things. It's organic. Organic, as she said, is not solving our problem. So we have really to think out of the box. And it's not this one. Eating insects is not even out of the box. It is we are just doing the traditional one, what people have been eating for three centuries. Animals have been eating for centuries. How we bring the science and do it better and mainstream it. And I think the only country that I know that have really mastered mainstreaming is Thailand. Thailand is amazing. So I think, yeah, so yeah, we have to think about those. But we have also to balance what is really most important. So yeah. I think that's a really good point. I think pragmatism is what maybe is needed here. I mean, we're in a position of privilege. We all, our bellies are full. We don't face food security. We were able to eat a variety of animal and products this morning that may not have been killed in a humane fashion. So we can sit here nourished and have this kind of academic conversation. But I think the real world scenarios that you're describing, where people, I have friends and colleagues who are faced with food security issues in other parts of the world. If they're choosing between humane euthanasia for the soldier flies that they might be eating or feeding their children, they will, of course, choose feeding their children. And so I think we should be thinking about these issues because if they're vital, animal welfare includes insects. Insects are animals. But I think we also have to really understand that we come from a perspective where we are maybe making suggestions but not necessarily following them. I mean, in the types of food that we eat and the way that other animal products are being killed. I think human suffering is something that we forget about or it's easy to forget about because we can turn on the television and be distracted. But it is a real problem, food security globally. I saw Michael Young and then Anna. Yeah, well, I was going ahead in a little bit different direction but I was impressed that you were able to show the efficacy of trap plants, for example, and particularly microsperidia and control of malaria, which is an enormous scourge. But it brought to mind a question that is connected to a great deal of resistance with regard to genetically modified organisms. Because, you know, one of the principle worries is that you're creating an organism, it can be free-living, it can escape, et cetera, et cetera. But, you know, if you're putting microsperidia together with mosquito, there's going to be somebody that comes along and saying, well, what's the host range for the microsperidia, are we going to, how many different types of mosquitoes are going to affect? But, you know, the resistance, you can't go into a grocery store without picking up a box that says non-GMO. And there were 150 plus Nobel laureates in 2021 that wrote a note to the UN, among others, you know, begging for some balance in the attitude toward genetically modified organisms. You've got a long history, I mean corn, maize is something that we created. And there's, it's genetically manipulated and in those cases, you're manipulating things that you have no control over in order to get an outcome, which in most cases with a genetically modified crop, you're doing something very specific. Another example that might be even comparable to malaria is golden rice. You know, you've got this huge problem of young people dying from vitamin A deficiencies in parts of the world, where they don't have access to sufficient vitamin A and a simple production of a crop that varies by a single gene, that allowing production of vitamin A can eliminate the deficiency. So, I just like to get a sense from this group about how you look at, this is another part of this feature of trying to come up with justifiable ways to respond to health disparities and disease disparities, et cetera. So, it's a good point. So, the history is a story of genetically modified crops. I think that debate was lost due to bad communication, bad PR and non-scientific based communication. The environmental group activists won that battle. So, first it was sold as a silver bullet that is going to solve Africa's problem, which is false. I have worked on genetically modified crops. I have advocated on that. So, a lot of what the advocates really sold was false advocates. So, and then the green piece and all the environmental activists came hammering it. A lot of misinformation went into Africa, into others. Yeah, the GM crops are coming. It's going to make you sterile.  So, all those things. So, it was lost in that debate. And then to make matters worse also, Monsanto was linked to that. So, they are going to control your materials, planting materials and so on. So, there is a significant role for GM crops to play in sustainable production system. But that's not the silver bullet. So, in Africa, in many countries, you know, apart from South Africa and a few countries, and now Kenya also allowed GM crops. That was lost cause. In terms of micro-sporidias, it's not genetically modified. This is naturally existing association that has evolved with mosquitoes for many years. We just happened to stumble on it by luck. And to avoid that type of thing, we are working with communities and with regulators so that they work with us through the process. The process together so that there is no magic to this, there is no modification. This is, we are just amplifying the naturally existing thing. So, we have zero doubts that this will be allowed to be released in a couple of years in, at least in Kenya. And Rwanda also, I had a talk with the president of Rwanda. He's excited by that. He's very happy to be the first to get it released and so on. So, I think how we communicate with the public, how we also work with the policy makers, it makes a difference in the uptake of the technologies that we develop here. Yes, first of all, thanks for two amazing talks. I guess there were several things I wanted to say. First of all, I think it's important that we, although this is a conference about insects, that we sort of lift our gaze and, like you were saying beautifully, think about sort of the environment and the stewardship is for the entire environment. So, we need to find this balance between feeding the people. I mean, we have a right to be here, of course. We need food and that should be a fair, I mean, that goes for everyone, of course. While finding a way to coexist with the entire environment, not just the insects, but everything, and what I thought was so nice in your talk was that you both talked about these examples that were sort of very simple with the push and pull technology and those more fancy tech solutions. And I think regarding the tech solutions and the GMOs and things, like you say, the PR has been a problem, but I think that is partly because there's a risk when big corporations have control of this technology and use it for profit, not necessarily for the good of everyone, like you were both talking about. So, I think this is part of it too. And so, trying to work from sort of taking three steps back and trying to widen our perspective more often, I mean, a circularity, like with the soldier flies, that is such a beautiful principle and we need to try to find more of those solutions that are good in the broad perspective and not sort of be tempted to dive into these small, techno-fancy stuff that is super interesting for some business that deals with it, but might not really be good for the greater picture. And I ask my question. Did either of you want to say anything in response to that? Yeah, I was just going to point out that some of these large corporations have been controlling seed availability far longer than GMOs have been around. Maybe a solution is governmental, that is someone like the UN or the World Health Organization has to be a repository and that those deposits are made available to anyone. Yes. As well as, on the other side, the protection of having a seed bank where the original naturally occurring seeds are... I think there's a place in Norway or something like that. Yes, it's all that. Yeah, yeah. And, you know, I think those are essential to have stashed away a guaranteed way back if something does go wrong, but... So, which has already gone wrong at Svalbard, of course, climate change has meant that many of its faults have been destroyed by melting. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just because it really leads really nicely into the question that I wanted to ask, both of you, actually, because you broadly have been talking about food systems. Julie, you mentioned it explicitly and you talked about stewardship. And right before this I mentioned that's something that I use with my network. We talk a lot about stewardship. And what you just said, too, Michael, food systems... I just have to enter this question a little bit so I have context. If you try to look at even a specific commodity, a food system, right, let's take for India, like we'll take rice, and you start to map the stakeholders involved in this food system. You start really generally with the producers. You can do then the processing and the marketing and then the distribution and then the consumers at the end. Within each of those levels, there's so many different stakeholders. There's, like you mentioned, there's the seed companies, the fertilizer companies, the pesticide companies, the farmers, then the transportation services, then the processing stations, then the packaging stations, then the distribution. And you go all the way up to grocery stores and restaurants and then consumers. So when you're thinking about changing that system, you quickly find yourself, as our network has done, in a quagmire of diverse interests, which even government, if I can say, can't even penetrate because it goes far beyond even the regulatory capacity of a government because it's dealing with so many different aspects. So my question to you, and also my hope that you can solve it, so I can go back to India and then we're set, is I really admired what you said. I agree with you on that. I really like this more broader approach of thinking about this. And one of the things that we keep railing against is when you start talking about how to fix these systems, the onus often gets put back on the least empowered stakeholder in that process. So it's the, we have women farmers in India too, right? 87% of the farms in India are smallholder, 70% of those are women, just like in Kenya, where I know as if I work well. Those women are often asked to adopt these technologies or these techniques while the other stakeholders that are much more powerful interests are not able to, and for whatever reason, do that. And so my question for you is, because stewardship also is a little bit of a loaded term. I'm with you on sustainability.  Stewardship also suggests, at least classically, this very much tied to the land sort of concept, and that's usually the least empowered person in this process. How do we, I'll get to my question, how do we foster a stewardship concept that works at this food systems level that puts the onus on these much larger, much more financially salient stakeholders and not on the people that I also care most about who are the people that aren't here at the table and have no voices, and I struggle with this. So I'm hoping that you have some insights also for the people out there to recognize that we have a lot of work to do and that we often put the blame on the people that have no power in this equation. Yeah, I think in going forward, it's all in steps. We need to make sort of dismantling steps in our current systems and start building blocks for a new system. Currently, yeah, everybody's livelihoods is based on our system. Everybody's like those are the jobs that people have to feed their families. And so if we're like, oh, we get rid of these food systems and we don't have jobs. So whatever the new, the bricks we need to lay, it's a value shift. And so when I was talking about stewardship, I was talking about that we who are not traditionally the stewards need to become the stewards and our government needs to figure out how to be stewards. And so with that, whatever that looks like, there should be new jobs, right? There should be new job creation that is literally going out and taking care of the land, renewing habitats or whatever that might be or taking care of these animals or whatever's in the food system. We can't, we don't know what it looks like yet. We, it's an imagined future. But I think we, I don't like to think of it as like a naive blind that, oh, it could be so perfect in the future. But if we don't start making the steps now, then it never can be. And so we just need to start thinking about what that could look like so that we can start finding ways to create new jobs that are more of stewardship on our shoulders instead of the people who have traditionally had to do it. Yeah, so I think that's a good question, but a hard question also. So a food system is a very complex system. It's different from one to the other. So when people talk about food system transformation, they always talk, oh yeah, the global south, those guys, they don't produce enough, they are hungry, so that is a system which needs to be fixed. But in reality, it is a system in the north that needs to be fixed more. As during COVID, I don't know how many people remember, there was a shortage of meat, beef, pork in the United States. So shortage, your shelves were empty, we were watching on TV. So what happened? It's not because there was no production. There was a lot of production actually.  The reason there was shortages there is, I didn't know that the whole meat distribution, pork distribution system in the US was controlled by four companies, three of them were foreign companies. So when the COVID came, the workers got sick and the plants were closed, there was no movement distribution. So I always say food system, food distribution, food security is everybody's issue, not just a developing country, developing things. So I think there has to be a political will and also to really transform. And all these players, as you mentioned, along the way.  During COVID, there was once the vaccines were developed, there was priority list. Priority list of elderly people, the staff, the house workers, the staff, farmers were not in the list. So I like, are you kidding me? Why don't you put them in the list of the priority because we need the food. So in developing countries also, the system has deliberately, the smallholder farmers must put them at poverty level. Poor. So how do we transform actually? The food system, when we don't value the producers who feed us. It is, yeah. Yeah, it's difficult, yeah. Thank you, everyone. We have a question coming from the audience. While food is necessary for nutrition, and we've talked about challenges with malnourishment, for many of us here at least, what we eat has many other benefits. Eating can fulfill kind of sensory satisfaction. There also is cultural connections to the foods we eat. And so we were wondering what your ideas were for how the United States, the dominant culture in the United States, might go about embracing entomophagy. I tried to go where to start, I had like one thought and then the question kept going and I went somewhere else. Sorry. No, no. So one of the things I love when I'm giving examples of insect eating around the world and focusing always on termites mostly because that's what I've studied, is I have these examples of just like women that go out foraging together.  And so it is, it's a social thing. Food is so much more than nutrition. We don't make our food choices based on nutrition, we make them based on so many more things. And so I think in some ways it's, I love the insect eating parties, right? Like we had the bug bites yesterday and I know a lot of students have baked cookies and brought people together. And so it's difficult because it's a little bit of a, it's novel, right? It's a funny thing together, together in ooh, we're gonna eat bugs. But I think the more we do it just, but the act of doing it is making it more known, more accepted and it's making it social. And so I do think that social component to it is really key to going forward. I really think another major part of sort of entomophagy in our culture and things need to happen is that we need to find ways to make them delicious. We get these freeze dried crickets and they're dry and stuck in your throat and it's not always the best sensory experience. And so challenging ourselves to play with the flavor to treat the insects as an ingredient that contributes to addition. What can you put with it to compliment it, not just hide it? I think that's how a lot of times we treat food and sex here. And so the more brilliant chefs like John Sherman that are doing this, the more we'll start seeing it in more places in delicious ways that we're gonna want to eat. And in Germany, in Berlin, every year the government sponsors a big function. One of them, the major popular function was inviting the public, people from Berlin, all week long to test various insects. So they bring in these big television chefs and because I have participated many years there with it's at least three years. And it is fascinating that all these elderly people coming with a stick and with their grandchildren and telling the grandchildren to taste it is delicious. So I said to one of the elderly couple, this is great, wonderful, that you are encouraging. They said during the war they ate literally dirt, tulips, everything because there was no food. So this one is a delicacy, it's no problem. So I think it is changing mentalities, changing perceptions. So in Kenya, based on our work now and a large 3,000 or so school feeding program, now Kenya has approved fortifying porridges, the maize meal, porridge, ugali, bread, flour, 25% cricket powder to fortify, it's labeled, whatever, baby, winning porridge with termite, 10% termite, labeled. People bite, no problem because they are not seeing the tentacles and everything of that. You don't see the difference actually, you don't taste it but these are packaged nutrients which are really important. I think more of this is going to happen as we know more and as people benefit from the nutrition from the health aspect of it. I mean cereals for breakfast that most people eat in North America and then even in my own home, cereals, cornflakes cereals, imagine if instead of sugar you add the cornflakes made also fortified with insect things. This will be great breakfast for the kids and adults as well. So I think this coming, so it's no problem, I think you will see, it will come, yeah. Yeah, I also wonder if you had some striking statements that have been made about eating insects in the Americas, but I wonder if part of the problem or part of the reaction has to do with the fact that for 10,000 years we've had cultivation, almost everything you eat, I mean sure there are people that will go out and hunt elk or deer but almost everything you eat is something that's supplied as something that's cultivated and so there's a sort of a distrust that builds up generation after generation about something that doesn't come to you now packaged in a grocery store. And perhaps this is part of how you get around that. If you've got things that are showing up in a grocery store and they say, yeah, I'll try it, then these attitudes could change as well. But again, 10,000 years of agriculture and animal husbandry, it seems to me could have a big influence on just what you think you should be eating. Well I would argue it's not 10,000 years of agriculture, it's however many hundreds of years since industrial agriculture because the number one food system around the world is small scale agriculture. And in many of those places pest control is harvesting the insects out of your field and those also being a food resource. So out of your plot of land you have the crops that are gonna provide you nutrition but now you have the insects that were drawn to it that if you can harvest them you've just doubled the output of your plot of land. And so that is a traditional land stewardship of cultivation. It's when we industrialize it and it becomes the industrialization of the chemical pesticides and it really starts demonizing the insects in this relationship but small scale agriculture has kind of had to learn that insects are part of it. You're gonna lose some crops to insects and you can benefit from eating the insects. Right, but we were talking about why is North America? Yeah, so here in North America it's industrial, right? It's the industrial but I think it's, a lot of that is based I think the, we have the industrialization and then from that things start looking more uniform and then we expect things to be uniform. And so part of the success of fast food chains is that you get the exact same hamburger no matter which McDonald's you go to. And so we start expecting that. And so the, yeah, so we just, we don't, we have that package foods and everything. So I think it's all, it's all bundled together where, insects were not a food that got put into our packaged food system. I think Jonathan had a comment and then Shannon had another question. The exact same terrible hamburger wherever you go. But I mean, I'm thinking about, inevitably I think people will end up eating more insects. I suppose what I fear is that they will be eating them indirectly through other animals because the insects will be used to drink animal feed for chickens and pigs being raised in exactly the conditions you presented on your slide. And that's a really serious fear. And I don't know what the solution is, but I suppose part of it is just trying to inform people how inefficient it is to get your protein in that indirect way to be eating these animals that have themselves been fed on other sources of protein. And you have to understand the pathway through which you're getting your protein and think about how you might do it more efficiently. And when you think about it in that way, you see there are different options. One is to eat insects and one is to just eat more plants in the first place. And I tend to by self recommend the eating more plants option. But the main thing is to, the main thing is that all of us are thinking about the pathway through which our protein reaches us and how we can make it more efficient. I think it's also, we also have to take into consideration the differences, right, because it's funny you say that, you know, I guess livestock we're talking about or animals. In India, that's insurance. That's not this protein. It's actually an insurance way for farmers to have money by selling the livestock or eating the livestock in cases where they lose their crop from floods or droughts or the effects of climate change and all the things that are happening. So at the same time as I agree with you to have a plant-based diet, I think this isn't something that we can, I think let's go back to my previous comment. We can't just shift, we can't just say, even though India is a very predominantly vegetarian culture, they do have cows and they do have a lot of pigs and other things as well, goats and things because that is an insurance policy that allows them to sustain their livelihoods. So I think that it's important also to be respectful that what we do here in Minnesota and what we should be doing here in Minnesota, and I really appreciate a Julia talk referencing really, I think us in here in North America, it can't be equal. And I think this is something that I often worry about when we talk about like the sustainable development goals, which is like kind of this thing that we should all do across the world and how it works where segment is, you know, in different African countries has to be very different because you know, the way we live and we make money and we survive is different in different parts of the world. So I do agree with you, but at the same time, we have to be cognizant that we don't all live the same way. I'd like to ask, oh, did you agree, of course. I think we have also to accept that no matter what a certain proportion of the population globally will never eat insects under any circumstance. So we have to accept that as well. So, you know, as you know, I'm from Ethiopia in the 1980s, there was a huge publicized farming in parts of Ethiopia. And so the Western countries send, I remember, a lot of food donation on one of them was like a shipload of hum. So hum in Ethiopia, we are 60% Coptic Christians, or 40% Muslims, neither eat pork.  So people said, are you kidding me?  So all that pork just got rotten. So there are portions that under any circumstance are going to eat insects. That's fine also, that's all. Yeah, that's all, okay. Boy, there are so many really great questions here. It is killing us up here. Unfortunately, we want to stay on time, so I'm gonna cut it short. If I had been some of the proof, well, let's just say we should stay on track. So at this point, note there will be a test of the National Emergency System at 1.20, there will be a test of the St. Peter's System, we're pretty sure at 1.00 p.m. Information about food choices, I'm page 23. Some of my colleagues have graciously agreed to convene discussions in the forum today, where the buffet is, and also you can bring your bag lunch there. If you'd like to just sit at a table with some other people and talk, my colleagues said, don't expect me to be an expert on what just happened. I said, no, no, no, you're just a convener. People will talk. Please do join one of my colleagues. The Learning Lab is fantastic. Also, please make your way down to the South End of Campus to see diminutive measures, diminutive messengers in the Schaefer Gallery. And again, we're in the middle of Sukkot, the pilgrimage festival, which marks the end of the agricultural season in Judaism. Please head down to go to the aunt, thou sluggard, but remember that it's now in the Banyur Multi-Faith Center, not in the Sukkot. And Gustavus students, don't forget, 12.30, you have exclusive access to our speakers. So please do head to Beck Hall for those. Other activities you can find in the program, don't forget to recycle compost and store waste in the right place. Please do not smoke anywhere, except maybe mentally. And we will reconvene at 1.45 when we will hear the Gustavus Wind Orchestra. Thank you for this wonderful session. Thanks again to our amazing speakers.


This is the last thing the narcissist wants to see. Narcissists are typically very observant. They're always scanning their environment for threats. So they're quick to notice things. They're always paying careful attention to what you do and how you feel. And by this point it should be pretty obvious. But the last thing the narcissist wants to see is your happiness. They don't want to witness your well-being and contentment. They don't want to see you experiencing joy, satisfaction or fulfillment. Unless it's something that they can bring back into the realm. Or if it's something that they can take credit for. But other than that it brings them irritation and annoyance. It causes them mental suffering and distress. And they know when you are happy and contented. They know when you're done. Because they're emotional predators. They manipulate and exploit people's emotions for their own benefit. And they've been doing it for a very long time. So now it's almost like they have a sixth sense. They're intuitive of your mood and of your shifts in energy.  Because narcissists are low in energy. They're like empty buckets. They have a void that can never be filled. So they're insatiable. They have an appetite and a desire that is impossible to satisfy. So they're always unhappy and dissatisfied. And they're always wanting what you have, which they don't have. So when you experience they shift in energy, they immediately sense it.   They're satisfied from seeing you unhappy or from where you're longing and yearning for them. It strokes their ego. It makes them feel good about themselves and momentarily increases their sense of self-worth. So they instinctively already know how you're feeling without even needing to be in your presence. Or they can hear it in your voice. Because they're able to perceive other things that are not discerning to a normal human's perceptions. So they know when you're going through it. They know when you're still dissatisfied. And that actually makes them happy. To where they may show a smug condescended or self-satisfied attitude. Just from seeing if you're still miserable just like them. And they find pleasure in knowing that they were the cause of it.  From your lack of belief and assurance. Which is why the moment that you start to regain your confidence. And things start to make more sense to you about what they're about and who they are. And you begin to realize these surprising facts about them. It begins to detach the connections and associations that you've made with them. And then you begin to heal those emotional wounds. As you begin to understand and learn more about them. And when this happens. They can feel it. And they can sense it. Even when you're not around them. Because they have a very strong perception. They're very attuned to you. Because they view you as an extension of themselves. So however you feel affects the emotional state. Which is why when they know that you're happy without them. They experience sadness and distress. It hurts them because you no longer get attached to them.  Because you no longer get connected or in sync with them. You're pulling away from their negativity and pain. So now you're starting to feel better. Your anxiety is going away. And you no longer desire to be with them. And they know it. They can sense when you're longer thinking about them.  They can read your emotions very easily. Even if you say that you're fine. If you're not they will know. Because it's essential for their emotional survival. Narcissists are very miserable people. So they're heavily dependent on other people's reactions.  So to aid their survival they've learned to read people like a book. Tests have shown that narcissists can even read a person's feelings by looking in their eyes. So they're able to figure out your emotional state without being negatively affected by it. And in fact it brings them pleasure. It makes them feel good about themselves.  They can sense it in your energy. Which again is essential to their survival. Because they don't want to be vulnerable. They don't want to expose any parts of themselves to you. So they're able to sense your energy without even being around you. They're able to know if you're happy and contented without them. And it immediately brings them pain and sadness. Because they don't like the quality of being suited to serve a purpose well. They don't like practicality or usefulness. Because that makes them look bad. It makes them feel insignificant in comparison. So they prefer to be around things that are dysfunctional. Things that deviate from the norms of social behavior. Things that are not operating normally or properly. They like being around people who are unfortunate and unhappy. People who are not satisfied or pleased with their situation. Because they contaminate everything they come into contact with. They make it impure. So they know when you have healed. That's why they come back. To rob you of your qualities and virtues.  Everything that gives you your light and energy. Because nothing hurts them more than seeing you happy and contented with yourself. They don't like being around anyone who is unshakable or unmoved. They can't survive around someone like that. Which is why they always end up destroying them. Because that's the only reason why they come around you to begin with. That objective is to break you of your happiness and contentment. Your peace and well-being. Your love and joy. So they never give you love. You never see love from them. They give you an illusion of love. By robbing you of your qualities and virtues. Because they have no love to give. It's just a void.  And it will never come back because it never meant anything. So any energy that you give to them doesn't result in anything. It disappears and you don't get anything back. You just feel drained in the process. You feel overlooked and exhausted by the time you're done with them. Because they rob you of your energy. Which is why even when you try to let them go. They always end up blaming you in the end. Because they want you to blame yourself. So that they can continue to deplete you of your energy. Even as you try to recharge. Which is why you need to validate yourself. You need to remind yourself that you are the prize. And when you do that. They will feel it and it will lead to weigh at them. It will drive them insane. It will make them envious and hateful. Because you were meant to have been destroyed when they were done with you. They expected you to fall apart without them. But you didn't. You became stronger. You gained more knowledge. Which is what hurts them. Because you are still able to obtain happiness without them. Which is something that they can't do. They can't sustain a feeling of happiness and well being. Which is why they want to bring everyone down to their level. If you would like to support the channel. You can donate a paper to Amis or Snark Survivor. You can book a one-on-one with me on my website. It's Snark Survivor the Kudu UK. Thank you for watching and I'll talk to you soon.


We don't control the vast majority of stuff that goes on in this world, but we control how we respond to it. You know, Victor Frankel is a marvelous man. He wrote a great book, Man's Search for Meaning, and in that he said, you know, in every situation, between the situation and the way we respond to it, there is a space. In that space, you have time to determine where they're going to react or respond. The only real power we have in the world is choosing our response. We can't choose what happens to us. We can get stuck into situations where we are abused, where we are not treated fairly, where any number of bad things can happen. And so the only choice we can make is how to respond. And if you want to be a high performer, if you want to be a high achiever, if you want to raise your game, then you have to choose to take every single thing that's thrown at you and use it in a way that serves you and moves you forward.