Everything a Marine touches got its start in some way at Marine Corps Systems Command. The Marine is our mission. As the acquisition command of the Marine Corps, equipping our Marines is job one. Our diverse, dedicated workforce of 2,500 Marines, sailors and civilians work hard every day to give Marines the unfair advantage they deserve. We ensure Marines have the gear, equipment and training systems they need to accomplish the mission. The Marine Corps modernizes a future force and Marine Corps Systems Command continues to challenge industry and other partners to deliver the tools and capabilities needed to ensure our Marines remain the world's premier fighting force. No other element of the Marine Corps can do what we do. Semper Fidelis. The Marine Corps is modernizing and building the naval expeditionary force needed to execute warfare in actively contested spaces, fully aligning the service with the direction of the National Defense Strategy. The force design effort will create and maintain our competitive edge against tireless and continuously evolving adversaries. The Fleet Marine Force requires a transformation from a legacy force to a modernized force. Marine Corps Systems Command plays a critical lead role in equipping Marines with the next generation capabilities needed to meet and defeat the evolving threat. Communication is critical to the Warfighter's situational awareness on the battlefield and we're here to ensure Marines achieve maximum overmatch. Marines communicate and share intel with the tools and systems provided by command element systems. CES provides and sustains command and control, communications, intelligence and wargaming capabilities to the Fleet Marine Force, helping them maintain a competitive advantage over our adversaries. Logistics Combat Element Systems delivers critical sustainment capabilities to ensure Marines have the power, water, ammo, shelter and vehicles they need on the field. We use advanced technology for supply and maintenance into equip, field and sustain engineering, medical resources and capabilities, ammunition and motor vehicles. LCES delivers a high standard of care to the Marine in operational environments. Ground Combat Element Systems helps Marines deliver lethality on the battlefield. GCES equips Marines with fully integrated infantry, reconnaissance, armor and fire support weapon systems to increase the survivability and lethality of the Warfighter, providing overmatch to ensure an unfair fight. We supply direct and indirect fire weapon systems as well as targeting systems, artillery survey equipment, fire control, radars and acoustic sensors that give Marines a critical advantage in the detection of enemy forces. We also provide Marines with the clothing, air and amphibious reconnaissance equipment and body armor needed to effectively do their job anywhere, anytime. Marine Corps Tactical Systems Support Activities is the Marine Corps' 24-hour helpline for the Fleet Marine Force. Mictissa conducts testing, evaluation and engineering for command, control, communications, computers and intelligence systems and expeditionary combat vehicle systems. We're also home to Amphibious Vehicle Test Branch, a center of excellence specializing in the test, evaluation and development of the Marine Corps' present and future amphibious combat platforms. We have the strongest Warfighters in the world because we train the hardest in the world. Nobody trains like the Marine Corps. The program manager training system strives to develop and sharpen the Warfighter's skills through various training activities, environments and support services. PM Tracist delivers cutting-edge 21st century training products such as virtual simulators, mock weapons, range targets and other inventive training systems to increase the lethality and readiness of our Marines. PM Marine Corps Cyber Operations delivers cyber capabilities at the speed of relevance. We are the only program manager office in the Marine Corps in direct support of an operational command. We collaborate daily with subject matter experts at Marine Corps Cyber Command to expedite the delivery of cyber capabilities such as artificial intelligence and machine learning. PM MCCO conducts full spectrum cyberspace operations to defeat current and future threats. Marine Corps Systems Command supports various program executive officers across the DoD, including PEO land systems, PEO manpower logistics and business solutions, PEO digital and the joint PEO for chemical and biological defense. These PEOs collectively provide Marines everything from Warfighter focused computer applications and IT enterprise software to chemical and biological protective gear and combat vehicles and systems. We are Marine Corps Systems Command and equipping Marines is our mission.


Welcome everybody who's joining us online to the third of our New Voices seminars. The New Voices seminars is intended really to showcase the research of some of our exciting new and early career scholars in the school and really intended just as a platform I think to showcase the diversity of who we are across the school and the diversity and the breadth of the research that we're doing. And I'm delighted today that we're joined by Dr Summera Fink who is going to be talking about state-private hybrid regimes of migration control. So I'm just going to introduce Summera, if that's okay. We're also joined by Leonie Ansem's degrees as the discussant, so welcome Leonie. So Summera's a lecturer in international relations in the Department of War Studies. She previously got her PhD in international politics from the Royal University in India in April 2023. She's also been a Fox international fellow at the Macmillan Centre for International and Area Studies at Yale for the academic year 2019-20. Summera's work really is focused around bordering and mobility control practices, their evolution across time and space, and to their securitisation by the introduction of algorithmic technologies and risk management. In disciplinary terms Summer's research is located very much within the critical security studies space, international political sociology and post-colonial scholarship in IR. So she's previously worked on migration policy in India as a researcher at the Indian Ministry of External Affairs and also at the India Centre for Migrations Think Tank as well. So I think Summera has a really distinguished and rich background and I think I know that you're really looking forward to sharing your research and getting some thoughts and getting some feedback, which is really what today is all about. So hopefully everybody can hear us okay in here and Summera over to you. Thank you. Thank you so much Ellen. Good afternoon everyone. Thank you for having me at the seminar today. It's nice to be at the Defence Academy as well. So today I will talk about state private hybrid regimes of migration control. I will go over what I need by state private hybrid regimes but right quickly to begin. These are regimes of migration management migration control where the state and private entities private companies come together to work together towards the goal of migration control in different ways in different contexts in different settings. I'm going to go into that in my presentation. Can you move to the next slide now please Ellen. Thank you. So why am I studying this and why is it important? These regimes are novel. They are novel phenomenon of outsourcing in bordering and migration control specifically, especially my area of focus, which is private visa application companies, which are very very new. So the first of these companies was set up in 2001 in India and their first client was the US government. Since then now I think they have close to 70 client governments and run, I think the latest was 3300 application centres across the globe and they are the primary partner for the UK government when it comes to visa applications or any passport related census. They're called VFS global. So novel phenomenon in the overall practice of bordering and migration control. And because they're new, they are most understudied and under theorized. There exists limited research on the topic from academia. We have works by Maria Luisa Sanchez Barueco and by Frederica in Patino, who have studied VFS global visa application private centres in Istanbul and in Morocco. Morocco, especially outsourced by the governments of Italy. They have done what they call ethnographic fieldwork in these application centres, but that's about the range of works available from within academia and English language on the subject. And you will find some journalistic investigations on private visa application companies. The latest being in 2019 by the independent that assessed VFS global to be valued at more than two billion US dollars at the time. And that sort of laid out that we don't know much about its financing and we don't know much about how it conducts its day to day operations. Because what we have are the company's own annual reports. And the company's own annual reports, of course, tell us that the company is a success. And in terms of how many applications they process, they probably are. But that leads up the questions, important questions of, okay, if they are working in tandem in cooperation with the state in governing migration, how much of the functions have they actually taken over. So state outsourced certain aspects of migration management management to private actors in the case of. So this is a range of outsourcing functions. So states have on the record outsourced management of detention centres to private companies like G for us, et cetera visa application companies that I focus on in my research. They perform the functions of collecting biographical information of the visa applicant collecting their biometric data. The photograph storing that information and that relaying that information to the relevant consulate and then communicating the final decision to the applicant. Now what happens is that many times the applicant only ever interacts with the employees of this private company at the visa application centre. So earlier when they would go to the actual consulate and interact with an actual visa officer who knows state policy. Now they interact with an employee of the private company that is at the end of the day running a business. So as I think I've covered this, my focus, my research focus is going to be visa application companies, which I think is a new subfield for migration studies. So a bit of context now in terms of my research. I'm happy to say that I won an early career small research grant by visa yesterday to study this. So I do have some long term research questions that I want to study over the years when it comes to studying state private hybrid regimes. So they pertain to three areas, one, concepts and practice. So the big question here is what does this state private hybrid regime mean for our understanding and practice of security, sovereignty, borders, migration and citizenship. Second question is it pertains to the day to day operations of the VACs by VAC I mean visa application companies. So how is responsibility distributed between the state and the VAC and what happens in the event of a crisis because we have had reports of expertise shifting to these VACs so much so that there was trouble in the UK in terms of efficiently running for the emergency visa schemes for Ukrainian refugees because the logistical capability now rests with the private company. And the third long term research question pertains to visa applicants and the individual migrants. So I want to look at what the effects of state private hybrid regimes are on individual migrants, given that these VACs are often their first and only point of contact now when they apply for this. And the research, as Ellen has outlined in my profile, the research will connect these questions to scholarship in critical security studies, international political sociology, postcolonial studies and science and tech studies within IR because I'm very much based in the discipline of international relations. Next slide please. So now we come to today's paper, which comes out of my PhD work, but it also incorporates some points from the work that I have been doing following the PhD on the topic. So the paper is organized in a number of sections. The key points I make is that the privatization in bordering and vulnerability control is tied to neoliberal logics of privatization of sectors. But nonetheless, it remains an odd case because it's not quite like privatizing transportation sector, it's tied to an area that states say is a matter of security of the states. So when you outsource a part of it to private actors, whose goals are to run a successful business, which is a very different from the goal of the state, which is to protect national security. How does that work in practice? We don't know enough about it. We don't normally think about it. The second point I'm making in the paper is that that is if you try and study the operations of private actors right now, you will come across a lot of ambiguity and opacity in key features of how this operation is run. And I am saying that this appears to be by design to make it hard to be in responsibility, while private actors can exercise discretion to interpret policy, and I will try and touch upon how they exercise some instances of how they exercise this discretion and their day-to-day operations. And based on my engagement with the topic so far, it appears that ambiguity and obesity combine to make the individual migrant more disadvantaged. And in the paper specifically, I look at two discourses, I call them, that legitimise these hybrid regimes now in practice in bordering and mobility control. One of these discourses invokes expertise, and the other invokes the logic of efficiency. But nonetheless, they both result in rising dependency of states on private actors like the VACs. Now the structure of the paper, I think Ellen, you can just bring up all the points and I'll just go back. Thank you. So how the paper is structured is that first I talk about neoliberal foundations of privatisation in BMC, BMC meaning bordering and mobility control. So I talk about how the call for the entry of private actors in this domain is also founded on similar logics where private actors argue that we will come in and will make the process more efficient. We will decrease the strain on national budgets of the states and we will decrease wait times at application centres. We will process more applications. We will bring more discipline to the process. Therefore, these regimes of migration control should be made hybrid. There should be more privatisation in the sector. But nonetheless, in my research so far, I don't find even this logic convincing because for the state, it's about maintaining control over legitimate means of movement across their borders, which is, like I said, a very different goal from that of VFS, let's say, that they want to process more and more applications. The state may have some humanitarian laws also around visa applications, some visa waivers, et cetera, et cetera, but the private actor is not by design concerned with it. They are happy as long as they are processing more in your applications. So the two aims of the state and the private actor in these hybrid regimes don't reconcile very well for me to even say that they fit within the neoliberal framework also properly. This is the first part of the paper. Then I move on to sections 2 and 3 in the paper where I talk about how the discourses of either expertise or efficiency are used to justify state-private hybrid regimes to legitimise them. So talking about the discourse of expertise first, we've seen, especially after 2001, that consulting companies like Accenture find the tech companies like IBM, et cetera, were involved in sort of restructuring how mobility control is done, making it more digitised. By saying that they are coming from the private sector and they already have expertise to sort of do risk assessments and they can bring that over into migration control so that they can now equip the state with enough and adequate tools to do risk assessment of individual migrants also. So here we are asked to believe that the expertise already rests with the private sector, which they will bring to migration control, hence we should have a hybrid regime of migration control. In the second discourse, when efficiency is invoked to justify hybridisation in the regime, it is said that the private sector, because it's based on market logics, is just by design more efficient. And you will see reports by private actors like VSCs where they say they have, like I said, reduced vague times, they've made the process more disciplined, they are shorter queues, they try and process the application, file the application, they can process it, file the application sooner, which means that they are by design more efficient and therefore they should be allowed into the infrastructure of bordering and mobility control. But these are two logics we are given by the two runs of this infrastructure, let's say the state and the private actors working together. Then I move to the section where I talk about states' rising dependency on hybrid regimes. What I mean by this is that across the range of functions that private actors perform, now sort of stepping back from visa application companies as well, state, GPORUS, et cetera, running magnificent pension centres, visa application centres, processing visa applications, et cetera. The more these private actors carry out these functions across time, the greater capability and logistical capacity they gain to keep doing it. And so what happens in the event of a crisis where you need greater than usual capacity, let's say you need to suddenly change the rules to allow more migrants in. As we saw in the UK with the Ukrainian refugee scheme that was put in place very quickly in early 2022, and there have been reports of the state having issues because the ability to do it rested with different private actors and not with the state. So then finally I move to a discussion of the AC specifically because that is what I want to study more in my research, visa application centres. And I look at the FS. Can we move to the next slide now? The full slide this time. There's one more. Thank you. Thank you. So this is a slide I had prepared in an older presentation. Here I'm giving you an overview of different actors that can be involved in these hybrid regimes, airline carriers, they check documentation of passengers because they want to avoid what are called carrier sanctions. Security companies, consulting companies, tech companies and VACs. Then again to map the two discourses and here's a screenshot of home offices contracts to private border security companies which were valued at 385 million in. I think it was 2022, I think. Then we moved to VFS global specifically, which is the largest visa application processing company in the world. The first of its kind also, it started operations in 2001 with the US government as its first client and it had three application centres in three Indian cities. It started as an Indian company. Then moved to the UAE, it may have moved headquarters again since. I'm not aware of that. And you can see on their website they have a section where they sort of recount milestones to you. So in the 20 plus years since their inception, you can see that now they have 70 client governments. They run close to 4,000 application centres, operate in close to 150 countries, have processed millions of applications and have close to 11,000 employees as of 30 November 2023. The interesting point is that they have been appointed to deliver UK government visas and passport services across 142 countries. This is interesting because then I have used these services because I come from India. So when you go to the application centre, they sell you tiered services. So it's not just your visa fee, which is now, I think, visit visa is about 115 pounds. On top of that, you may have to pay the service fee for using the visa application centre. But once you go there before you go, when you're fixing an appointment, the company will sell you premium services, they call it. So which will come to about 35 to 40 pounds, which is a lot of money if you go by Indian income levels. So give us 35 to 40 pounds for your visit and we'll take you to a nice room with nice couches and you will get one-on-one service. We will look at your documents and we will take it very smoothly for you. But there you see that they've sort of tiered their business model. It should just be the visa application you look at my documents and out. But there are these options and they give you different memberships. You can have bronze membership, silver membership, gold membership and get different services for different visa applications for different countries, depending on that. Now in 2018, they were charged, possibly running a monopoly by the European Parliament. And they had to make a statement to defend themselves. I'm just going to read a part of the statement to you. This is July 2018. So the rep said, it is our CEO, Mr Zubin Khakaria, who invented the concept of visa outsourcing in 2001. VFS Global has taken a large share of the market. However, there is no monopoly. I shall present the improvements that outsourcing has brought to the whole visa application process for both governments which decide to outsource and most importantly for the visa applicants themselves. But I couldn't help but notice then in the whole statement what comes across as their idea of improvement is that our application centers are need to clean. We do the things quickly and we make it more disciplined. But the issue I see as a researcher in that is that it is the company speaking for itself, sort of legitimizing its own operation. They barely have any research besides the work by Infantino and the Sanchez Bodoico that actually tries to study it from an academic, from a researcher point of view. So you can go to these application centers as I have done once and they will tell you you need to pay X amount of money extra so that you can get some status updates on where your application is and when you can come back to collect your passport. And I'm like, why do I have to pay for it? This has happened to me. Well, I not just get an SMS, but my passport is ready and I should collect it. And they're like, no, actually you have to pay for it. And at that moment, I'm like, okay, I'll pay for it. I want to be able to know that I can collect my passport. But these are things that I think should be investigated from a researcher from an academic point of view. I think this may be the last slide. So this is what I am right now in this paper. I'm saying that this runs on neoliberal logic, but it's not convincing even so that it invokes either expertise or efficiency to legitimize itself. These hybrid regimes and that visa application centers, visa application companies are going to be my focus in terms of my research. So the small graph that I just want will enable this research. I will look at migration control practices between India and the UK. And there are methodological challenges with studying this because I put in theory say I'll go and talk to company officials, but they can just say no. And that's it. So how I have designed it for now is that I'll look at some archival records to get a sense of how things were before. This hybrid regime came into existence. And I will interview some government officials in the UK and India who I've sort of arranged to interviews with already. Because the people who have studied this before me saw that it's better to start with state officials because their clients are in the states. So if the state official asks the company officials to talk to you as a researcher, they will. So I'm going to do that. And I'm going to study through FOIA requests their contracts with India and the UK that can be made up with the available. So there's going to be some contract and document analysis. That's what I am at the moment, but I am very open to suggestions on which areas I should focus on and how I should proceed in my research going forward. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. It sounds like it sounds like a much needed area of research to be honest. And I'm sure there will hopefully be some questions about that. And so Bione is going to act as discussants. So I'll just hand over straight away to you, Leone. And then we can open up for questions. Yeah, thanks so much for inviting me to join a seminar as discussed. Sorry, I cannot be the room person, but it's great to be connected online. Thanks also very much for the presentation seminar. That's been really useful because I know you've been talking about this project for a while, but it's been really useful to sort of see that in PowerPoint as well as to read the paper. So thank you for that. And congratulations on the grant on BZ. That's fantastic. Very good first start. So that's really great. So yes, what I would like to do is provide some feedback on the paper that you sent me as well as ask a few questions. About that and the way I've read the papers because I know is that if some of it comes from your PhD, but it's also at the same time, you know, the start of this kind of new bigger project. So I've seen it as a kind of as an overview of the project as you have presented today as well. But I'm also thinking about if this were to be a research article that you want to submit somewhere, you know what will be the best way of developing it. And I think actually there's more than one article in there. So that's that's kind of how I'm looking at it. So I'm going to be, I've got two screens. So if you see me looking away, it just means I'm looking at my notes. I'm not doing something else. Yes. Right. So, yeah, I mean, I think Ellen said it as well. I think it's just a really important area of research. I think in what I find really interesting as well, especially when you speak about it, it's very clear in terms of sort of really practically what's going on, what the implications are. And this is just an important area to study, especially because a lot of this is quite opaque. Right. And also, I think very often just kind of accept it that, oh, you know, we need to go right VFS VFS if we want to kind of apply for visas. All right. So for most people to just sort of go through the motions and but to kind of unpack that something that's really quite opaque and to really understand what is going on there. And also, I mean sort of practically in terms of how it impacts people, but also then those bigger conceptual questions. What does it actually mean for sovereignty of security in the state and citizenship that these kind of things are happening? And that the kind of things are kind of evolving over time without often as very sort of very much thinking about it. So I think that is, yeah, sort of really important, but also very interesting to think about. And I think the kind of the paper opens with that question of what prompt states to resort to involvement of for private private for profit private actors in this field. That really should be driven by security concerns of the state. Right. And also kind of what are the logics of those kind of regimes, especially in relation to visa applications. I think you mentioned a few times is I think that, yeah, this is slightly different from some other types of privatisation because this concerns the security concerns of the state, right, which quite often at least on paper seem to be very much state owned. I think I have some questions about whether that's actually there are other presidents for that and that maybe already something has a much longer trajectory. And then there's also a question around, I think what you call this, how these are, what are the logics of it and how they are legitimised, right. So when you say on a very neoliberal kind of logic in relation to efficiency, as well as expertise. And then there's a kind of final question there as well, which you haven't discussed so much, but I think it's actually really interesting. And that is about what's the impact on people on visa applicants, you know, of these hybrid regimes in a way in which that that involves evolves. So, and I think your overall answer is there is it disadvantages people, right, is presented as something that's more efficient. It's presented as something that will reduce the cues and, you know, in terms of how long it takes to get your visa and so on. So it's presented as better, but actually in practice, people are worse off, I think. In fact, I know it's much more complicated that, but that's kind of initial term, kind of where you go with that. Right, so in terms of, I think I've got a few ideas on, yeah, kind of on the structure and the focus and so on, that I want to discuss in and ask a few questions. So, yeah, I think, as an overall, I think this is such important work. And I think the paper really sort of makes the case of that as well. But what I thought is that there are, because you're kind of a given an overview of quite a large project, right, that you will be developing. I think there's several papers in here that could be developed. And one of them is is around that. The kind of, yeah, the kind of the what you call the oddity of states linking up with private actors and kind of, you know, so called outsourcing. Some of the security functions of the state to private actors. And I think as you kind of describe that really well already. But now I think what's really interesting to why you can develop that further as a paper on its own is then what does that now mean for understanding of sovereignty, state citizenship for security. What does it mean for security as well in terms of how we understand security, but also how it is practised. So that in itself, I think you could go a lot further than I'm really thinking that through. And I guess some of that internal understanding that will require the research you're going to do. Right. And I think that you'd be able to give all the answers right now. Although there is more research around this, right, how, you know, kind of more generally about, you know, changing ideas with security and so on. But I think that that question in relation to this particular example, I think could be a really interesting paper. Yeah. And then another paper would be what is, what are the impact? What's the impact of these kind of, you know, of these developments on individuals and then and on groups of people. And because I think, again, you say a few really interesting things and then different parts of the paper. But I feel that could go into that much more. I think in a paper at a moment doesn't quite a lot of focus on the kind of financial side of it. Right. So it costs more. But of course, there could be so much more. And also really thinking about, because as we see it is presented as something that makes things better. And it probably does make things better for some people. Right. So it's thinking about what are all the different types of impacts and for who. Right. So for some people, this actually will facilitate mobility. Right. For others, it makes it much more difficult and that is partly due to financing it and the ways in which the people get categorised. Right. On the basis of their financial status and socioeconomic status. But of course, there's also other things that play into it as well in terms of who's regarded as a security threat. And that may be different between the state and a private actor. Right. And I think you say a little bit about that in a paper as well. Right. How are people then racialised in that? What's the gender aspect of that? All these things I think will play into what it means for people to be undergoing this kind of new regime. But also I think what will be interesting are there also ways in which I'm always interested in this. People are actually able perhaps, I don't know, to undermine the state regime by working with, to some extent, private companies, other ways in which people can resist or struggle against or whatever. Right. Or undermine or even in sometimes very small ways. But does it just go one way and is it just an imposition of a particular kind of regime on individuals and groups? Or is there more going on there as well? And I guess all this kind of stuff will probably emerge much more once you're doing that research. And especially once you're able to do the more kind of empirical research also with visa applicants. But I think that would be really interesting to understand. Really the complexities of what happens in these processes in terms of, you know, for individuals. And again, which groups of individuals. And I think, especially in relation, because I know the focus is on the UK and India. Again, I mean, I guess it's different as well for UK residents as it is for, you know, Indian residents as well as sort of, and then nationality may be slightly different again. So again, thinking about those aspects, I think it could be really, really interesting now because I already see two really interesting papers there. And again, I mean, that could be sort of something a bit more empirical. But at the same time, you can think more about then again, what are then the implications for the ways in which we understand questions of citizenship, questions of mobility, right? So again, you can bring that back. And I think the moment of paper is kind of more the kind of relation to sort of some of the literature and sort of the aspect of how regime works first. And then there's an example at the end. And again, I'm wondering whether you can bring in examples much earlier and then through those examples, think about the more conceptual stuff as well so that you bring it together a bit more. Yeah, and then I think another aspect. I know that for the research you will focus on the UK and India. So that's clear. I felt in this paper really interesting to bring in examples from different places because you can see that this kind of regime operates in different places. But of course then there's also the question, is it the same everywhere? Because of course it will be very different between the EU and the US, for instance, or very different places. So again, it's good of thinking about if there's going to be one paper, perhaps maybe some geographical focus or say a little bit more about how it may be different in different places. Because also the neoliberal regimes that you kind of attach it to may be very different in these different places as well. Right. So again, if you speak about those kind of logics, they may not be the same in these different places. So I think it's something to think about. Right. Yeah. And I think so. I mean, my suggestion would be to write two papers on this. But I think if you want to keep it in one paper, which is a possibility as well, I think there is some scope of. Moving structure around a little bit. And I say, yeah, start maybe with some of the empirical stuff and then and then link that to some of the more conceptual stuff. I would do that a bit more. Right. A few questions then. So, yeah, I think I really mentioned this earlier. The kind of when you speak about the state and private sort of hybrid regimes in relation to state security. It really made me think about sort of some of the basically state private companies or maybe more private and state companies during colonialism. And I always think about the Dutch example of these in the company, which was very much involved in security functions. Right. In relation to in relation to the colonies, but also in relation to the mobility of people. Right. So this is just one again. I mean, this is different, of course, from now, but I think it's interesting to think about is like, is this just a new liberal? Is this just a new liberal logic? Or are we assigning too much here to new liberalism and is it worth thinking about whether the security function of the state has always been just or whether securities has just been the prerogative of the state? Mostly or actually there have been other kind of hybrid regimes already in the past. And if so, what would that mean in trying to understand what is happening today? And also would be really interesting then to think that through in relation to the kind of inequalities and unevenness of mobility and who can move, who cannot move. Right. And the racialisation of, you know, the kind of who's who's allowed to move and who's not in what way. I feel that may be worth thinking about a bit as well. Or it's more like a, yeah, more like a question I have for you. Do you think this is a really regime that's related to new liberalism? Or actually, is it worth thinking a bit more about historically as well in broader terms? And then the second question, I've hinted at this already, but yeah, be interesting to get your view on, do you think it always makes people more disadvantaged? I don't know from the research you've already done. Other things happening, because I think in the kind of, when you set out your argument and say it is a bunch of people, but then actually in the text, it seems already a little bit more complex. So just be great to hear a bit more from you and from the research you've already done. Yeah, what happens there in terms of in terms of impact on people. And yeah, and then finally, I think this was just a smaller example, but that you used in a text, but I thought was really interesting in relation to the tension centre. So you speak mostly about visa application processes, but there's also an example in there of detention centres often, especially in the UK also by private companies. And again, kind of what that does to people. And what you say as well, that's from the perspective of a private company. It may not be so much about kind of migration control, border control, or keeping people contained, but it is about filling the centres. Right, because that is what helps them to reduce profit and helps them keep going because if the centres are full, then that means they're needed. So I would just be interested to hear a little bit more about if you know about how do these companies go about this. And also what does it mean with respect to migration control? Because I think so often when we speak about migration scholars, we speak about it, we just speak about the state and the state does this and the state does that. And that means hostile environment and so on, which is all the case. But actually, if it is the case that there's this other actor involved in that as well, when it comes to something like detention centres, which is a key aspect of especially in the UK of this kind of creating this hostile environment, then what does that mean in terms of thinking about border and migration control? Actually, there's a private actor having doing the same thing in a way as maybe the state wants to do, but for very different reasons. So, yeah, I'll leave that. So that's a lot of ideas and questions. I hope that's helpful. Thank you very much. That is very good. Should I respond for you? Yeah, if you happen to. Thank you so much, Yunni, for reading the paper, taking the paper at what is a busy week to the start of term for everyone, I'm sure. And for these very thoughtful comments. And then I'm also happy to share some within publishable material with you because we've been otherwise discussing this in like he's called like this. So to speak to the points you made before your questions. The quantity of states, the privatising and what does that mean for our understanding of security would be one paper and impact of these developments on different groups of people. Do they make things? I find it interesting because, as you mentioned, the private actors do say that they make things better. But I am saying that they need to make them generally more disadvantaged. So how do the two come together? So it's a question of who you are. I study visas and even I find it confusing sometimes. What am I supposed to do now to get X visa, which VFS centre is it? But I come with the background knowledge of what this whole thing is. And I've seen students, dependents of people in different western countries, parents of people in different western countries, trying to apply to these visas for various reasons for a leisurely trip, for attending a wedding, for moving with their kids and being actually confused by it. So in the winter, we had a wedding here in the UK, a family wedding, and someone wanted to come from India and they called us. They were like, just give us the number of the British High Commission. We will just go there and apply for a visa. And I was like, this is where you're wrong. You don't have to go. You will have no contact with the British High Commission. And they were so confused and I don't know how they messed up their application. They didn't get the visa. They couldn't send the wedding. So it depends on who you are in different ways in terms of do you understand mobility regimes or do you understand how people travel internationally generally, how they access visas, how they can plan for it. You may be beloved in your own society, in your own city. You have a nice decent job, a nice decent income. But if you don't have the know-how of how this operates, it will make you more disadvantaged. That depends on who you are. And then there is a question of just generally, you're paying service fee additionally, besides the cost of the visa. You are one step removed from the consulate. So if you have a question like, yes, you asked for X document, but I feel like this other document I'm submitting should suffice for both these requirements. You can't ask that question to someone at the VAC desk, because they're just the VAC employee. And literally you ask them anything, they'll read the policy online that you've already read, that the confusion actually stems from. And they'll read it back to you and say, this is how it is, bring X paper to us, only then can we find your application. So in the little research that exists, especially on visa application centres in Istanbul, the researcher recorded that the company employees would ask applicants to open new bank accounts entirely and then show proof of funds in those accounts, and they would go to those lengths because they were worried that their Schengen views that otherwise will not come through. And then the tiered services, premium services, like even more quicker processing of your documents if you take the premium service, et cetera, et cetera. This layer within the business visa application, I think based on all of that, it does make the applicant more disadvantaged, but I am excited to delve into it a little deeper now that I have funding. And we will see in our future conversations when my answer stays the same or if it changes slightly. And then I also wanted to sort of flag here that the larger question of the hybrid regime is more important than the empirical actors involved in it at the moment. Yes, the best global is the largest visa application company at the moment, but that may change because now in the past month I've seen the rise of another company at least, which is former VFS employees that have ties to consulates of different countries that do digital visa application processing. So if you have, if you qualify for an E visa, if you don't have to go for an in-person biometric training, et cetera, et cetera, you download the Atlas app, you take a picture of yourself using the app, you upload your passport, and then they have these like they have ties with the governments of XYZ countries, guaranteed visas in three days for Egypt, five days for this country, and it actually comes through, I've used it. So it, I will not deny, sometimes it does make it efficient because if you go through the consulate websites of these countries, it's very confusing. And then you go to Atlas and they're like, you need these three things, give them to us and we'll give it to you in three days. So there you see that the, the kind of function being performed is also changing as the tech around it changes. But I think the core question of having these hybrid regimes and then being understudied and then being opaque persists. And you're right in asking where does it leave us in terms of unequal access to international spaces for different groups of people. That's an open question, really, that remains to be seen. I like the first question you raised about companies being involved in mobility control during colonial times. So I think there is some record of being an East India company also being involved with the transport of indentured labour from South India to the Caribbean. And then then being involved in the evolution of migration policies, some of which we still retain. Why I stuck with neoliberalism in the paper is that colonialism is a different context. It's a different way of organizing the world compared to the way we organize it today. And we have hierarchies today also colonialism is explicitly hierarchical, which we don't have at the moment. With the kind of interlink to my more set logics we have across the world today, neoliberal logic seemed like a good framework to try and explain this development through. But I really like this question and I'm going to sort of think about it and research this further. On your second question, how are people more disadvantaged? I think I've covered it. Or are there other things happening? So sometimes you really want the efficiency and go for it. But then you also know that if my mom has to apply for the same, she won't be able to. She taught at a college or in her life, she taught math, she's educated and everything. She'll need help because it'll be like, what is this new tag? I used to go to a consulate. What am I doing? Why am I applying with my form? What is happening here? Please help me. So it sort of speaks to all that. And then finally, detention centers, private companies, the incentive for them to fill the detention centers and likewise the intention for a visa application company, meaning that more people apply, at least that's the incentive for VFS. And they advertise it continuously on their website with these milestones tracker that we've done 200 something applications. And at the end of the next year, we've done 200 something more applications. But it's interesting that after this now, their milestones also include that we will get you the visa. Because they deal in e visas, right? They don't deal with like biometrics collection, etc. We will get you the visa in three days or five days or your money back.  So remains to be seen, but what does it mean with respect to migration control? I think it ties to the larger research on how that is more digitization migration control. Generally, because now you do fingerprinting. Now you do iris camps. Now you do like tracking migrances data and you do these databases. It creates room for a lot of private actors to come in and say, we can do this better for you. And we can sort of offer the costs to us, etc. And we will offer it to our customers. But what does it mean for migration control? Then we'll have to be sort of assessed in terms of what it means for sovereignty with the individual migrant and what it means for the state. Those are the last questions that I will hopefully continue to look at. Thank you for your comments. I hope that answers some of your queries today. Should we open it up here? I just want to see. Nianni, did you want to come back on anything at all? No. No, great. No. And I just look forward to see the research develop and hear more about it. Thank you. Great. Thank you very much for your comments, Lianni. And are there any questions from anybody online or in the room? So I think we've got one. Yeah. Or please, if you're online, also you feel free to put a question in the chat. So, yeah. Do you want to just sort of introduce yourself first? Am I actual? I'm a new member of staff at the new plans department. So I haven't met you yet. Nice to meet you. So I was just wondering, I mean, it's fascinating work. Congratulations on the field work that you have done. I know that it's very difficult sometimes. I was just wondering what's so particular about this because everything is hybrid now. Everything is privatised. And even the terms of security, even the private companies are now providing technology, you know, arms to the armies. Everything in terms of health, in terms of education. So I was just wondering what's so particular about this application? Because this seems like what I was just reading. I mean, if you had money, you have access to better service in essence.  But even in the UK, I mean, if you have money, you can go to private health. And you will see a specialist doctor much easier than waiting for months.  But if not, you just, you know, you pay the money. I don't know what people do it for you, right? I mean, for visa applications, I mean, I know well also from Turkey, you know, when I'm here. So I was just wondering, since you are living in this world, is the neoliberal logics that have been encompassing now the whole everything that we live in now in the world. What did you find so particular about this? That's so kind of, let's say, so puzzling about security borders or other way of life. I mean, I think that right now everything is hybrid. I'm working on green energy transition. So hybrid. We haven't left something, but we are doing something else. We have military, everything. And even the military, I mean, they're employing robots now. The military is employing robots now, maybe to do some operations or something. So I was just wondering. Thank you. Thank you for that question. And it's not the first time that I'm getting this question. That's what is still distinct about hybrid regimes in border control. Now, you may be right in saying that hybrid regimes exist beyond these applications, beyond controlling borders and ability. And in my PhD defence, I'm trying to get the military industrial complex, I'm just saying that I've encountered this question before. But nonetheless, that doesn't mean that hybrid regimes function similarly across all these domains and that they have similar implications for different groups of people across all these domains. So I think simply because we know so little about the operations of these hybrid regimes that it is worth studying so that we know what impact hybrid regimes in bordering and mobility control have on the functioning and say sovereign capacities and mistake what impact they have on migrants, especially those who are already disadvantaged in the system. For example, think of someone coming from a disadvantaged, let's say Afghanistan, who's already suffering in a famine and who would do well if they could migrate. But the way the rules are at the moment means that they absolutely need visas for most countries of the world and they have to jump through these documentation loopholes, etc. So what does this hybridisation where someone like me can see the advantage of it? Like I used the premium service when I was moving to the UK. At the end of it, I thought I didn't need to because they literally sat me on a couch. I'd already uploaded my documents, they gave me some water to drink and that was it. But I can see that it may bring some efficiency in for some people, but it can also potentially disadvantage a large group of people. And you see parents of people who are settled in Canada, settled here in the UK, waiting outside the Delhi application centre, who don't really speak English as much, being utterly intimidated by the home infrastructure. And when they try and seek help from the application centre staff, who know the local language so they can speak to these people. They don't exactly get help because the application centre staff will only turn to repeat official policy. So if they need help with understanding something, accessing something, they're not going to be very helpful. So I think even if we have hybrid regimes across different areas, the fact that this is so understudied and we know so little and this is so big. And the only ones producing some knowledge about it are the people involved in it. If we are telling us we are efficient, believe us, should prompt us to study it further. So I just have a question on that. And you kind of mentioned a couple of times this notion that it is untheorised. As you were saying, perhaps actually we know quite a bit about these hybrid regimes in other areas. You think about private military companies where there's quite well established research now. We've got people in school actively doing research. So I'm just curious as to why you think this sort of subfield is so untheorised and so little, relatively little, there's no. I mean you sort of hinted at a couple of things but I was just curious because it's emerged as quite a theme of what you said. Yeah, no, private military security companies and I think private prisons also in the US are some of the research areas that I've sought to look at to understand the genesis of privatisation across these domains generally. So you're right in that, that PMSCs at least are very well studied and theorised. What I meant by under theorised was not the overall bordering in migration control, because you will see some research on detention centres also. What I mean here is visa and accessing international spaces particularly that is understood even under theory because it's new simply and because it comes with some methodological challenges. You will not easily be able to talk to the new official to elaborate on what they do. You will probably not gain that access. So it is understood as a result of that. That's what I meant to get you right. And you alluded earlier to the methodological challenges you're going to face now as you sort of go forwards to expand on this research with the grants and so on. So I just kind of wondered if you have any kind of sense of how are you, particularly to test this kind of hypothesis about the mismatch between the efficiency, the narrative efficiency that's being given out by these companies and then the sort of the seeming reality of the idea that the only thing I was talking about is the experience and the impact, the human impact, this idea that they are disadvantaged. So how, sort of methodologically, do you see yourself overcoming some of the obstacles to kind of generate some empirical evidence that can reinforce that? That's really a question of that and it keeps me up at night. Sorry. But briefly to touch upon it, I've spoken to Maria and Fenderica who have studied VACs particularly before. I've spoken to journalists who've covered VACs in their investigations. And the common theme that emerges is that how they operate is that they enter into contract with a state government. So they enter into a contract with the UK government, with the Indian government and so on and so forth. The government is the client, but they charge the applicant mostly through the service fee, etc. And so these researchers having taken a stab on this issue before me have advised, and I'm going to take it, is that I talk to government officials first. And if the government official asks this contracted company to talk to me as a researcher, they will because their client is the government. And because it's been done in research before, I'm hoping this is how I will circumvent one challenge. And because I've worked in the MBA in India and I know a few people here, it is doable for me. I'm going to look at contracts of these companies with the UK and the government and then try and expand it further because contracts, it is opaque, but the contract is out of date. So it's just that it's a lot of pages and pages of documentation, but it's still worth looking into. And if something is not available, you can always find NFOIA in the UK as well as in India too. And pointing to what Yuni said about private companies operating in the mobility regime during colonial times as well, that is some very interesting research, archival research, that looks at how say Indian indentured labour moved from South India to the Caribbean and how they had to develop new migration laws for that as that new form of migration also developed, developed the paperwork around it, et cetera. And then comparing it to how regimes operate today. So drawing a cue from that, I have shortlisted some records available in the British Library here in the National Archives of India and the National Archives here that I think are going to be helpful. Not so much to tell me how regimes operate today, of course not their own best. But to give me a sense of how they operated post saying in independence because I'm looking at UK and India first to begin with how they operated before we had private entities coming in and to then maybe try and see what has transformed with the involvement of these private companies. Another idea I have, but there are still methodological challenges and implementing it is to talk to visa applicants. But I can either do that outside a BSE centre in India, say, which I have done in the past also, or I can sort of, it's just an idea, but like in my local council where I live, I have been in touch with the Borough local council members. Well, it's like, can we get new migrants into the Borough to come to the local centre once a week, once a month, so that I can ask them about their experience of migrating to the UK. And there I can get a sense of people coming to the UK from different parts of my understanding of them, how they're using these private companies, did they find them confusing? So these are some of my four of my ideas. And I was wondering whether there is any existing empirical research data around their actual, are there other studies that have been done where they've gone into it? Those who have experienced the centres and have been receiving out of this, I suppose, efficiency? Yes, but not enough, yeah. So in a sample like I was saying, the researcher interviewed people who were going to the visa application centre applying for Shendon visas, and how, so they were saying that the company employee has discretion in interpreting policy that we would like, because they're asking them to open bank accounts and many of them are opening bank accounts. And there has been some field work-based research, like I said, in how the centres are operating in Casablanca in Morocco. But that's more field work where the researchers situated themselves in the application centres, where they spoke to consult the traps, as well as to company officials that didn't speak so much to the advocates. But nonetheless, I did receive good advice from her that if I speak to the consulate reps, government reps first, they can convince the company reps to sort of talk to me, talk to the researcher who wants to study this, and it is possible since it's not entirely inaccessible then. Is there any other questions? Thank you very much for your presentation. My name is Amjadam, mostly to the department. Excellent presentation, and I think there is a niche there. I myself also have been accustomed to such business. So I've got a question that I'm very sure, two of them related to theory, the other one is really probably to theory and methodologies. The first one is, I came from somewhere where I found some monopoly on the use of the establishment of these companies. So how much liberalism of unicorns can explain this, since there is this monopoly element there and there is a lack of competition. The second one is probably related to travel agencies. How different they are, those visa centres from travel agencies. A couple of months ago, I applied for the Vietnamese visa. Back then, I had only the Iraqi passport from a Kurdish agent in Iraq. So Iraq doesn't have the representation in Vietnam. So when the travel agency did, they literally arrived. I showed up at the airport and everything was set up. So how much this is different from travel agencies? Not structural, because I know those centres have giant structures there, good number of staff and so on, but theoretically speaking. The third one is, have you ever considered speaking to the beneficiary, the public themselves? Me being one of them, at least at some point in the past, that I found the values. So they have been used. Oh, the travel agencies? No, the visa centres. Have you ever been methodologically speaking? Have you considered speaking to him? I have, but I find this very interesting. Can I ask why or how you find them useful? Say it again, sorry. How or why you find them useful? You just said you find them. The visa, in terms of probably efficiency, and probably me being a full-time job, no time to shop and stay in the queue.  There is obviously that element of it, the tiers and so on, that's of course. But I remember also, because I applied for one of those tiers, sorry, I had a missing application and they said, oh, you could use a copy machine. It's part of what you paid for. It hadn't been for that premium service. I might have rescheduled an appointment. And obviously, you know, those sometimes are not everywhere. So, for example, say, for example, if you're outside of Manchester, you have to travel to Manchester and go back to where you were. So, in that sense, I found them useful. You know what I mean? No, definitely. Well, I'm sure you do. I mean, given that you have also used it yourself. I have. Hopefully, not anymore. Yeah, thank you so much for these questions. So, a monopoly element and how much neoliberalism then explains it. That's a good, and that's an open question, I would say, that requires more work. Why I say neoliberal framework explains private visa application companies is because the logics are similar. So, when VFS sort of reached out to the US government as their first client then the justification was that. So, don't do this for you. Just enter into a contract with us and we're going to take care of the logistics of it. That's why I say neoliberal frameworks sort of explain it. And then the reports these companies publish on why they're doing a good job. New liberal visa thinking or just making things faster and applicants like it. And they have some nice testimonials on their website when they say from applicants. So that's why I said neoliberalism, but monopoly element is something that I want to study further. But because at least as things stand right now. It does look to me that one company has no visa applications are done. Because they have 75 companies they have 160 almost countries of operation. And about 3000 application centres, which looks way more than any other company. Is something worth looking at? I'm not challenging with anything, but since these practices are done in disadvantaged countries. There is no doubt that there is some form of chronic capital. Only the political leader. So how much of this is new liberal that's it. Where there is this element of competition. Which is I think at the heart of what neoliberalism is at the heart of the tenant. So just just in just a minute. Yeah, I know you. You made me think of some research that someone is doing in terms of healthy centres operating the God in Senegal. And how many other surrounding countries in Africa don't even have application centres. If you travel to three first, you may be right. And some 20 captains are not going to be there needs further work. Thank you. Thank you for your comments moving to travel agencies and how they are different from. VJC's. Travel agencies, I just see them as more informal, but that may just be neat, but they can do different things for your travel. They can read your tickets, they can read your college packages, etc. But they. They may not sit on as much data of their customers. Certainly not by metro paper like the VACs do. Just far more sensitive. And there have been documented leaks of applicant personal data through VACs in 2007 and 15. Which, which now they do more to address because I know GDPR, etc. And it's possible, but you didn't back then. But so the security data privacy concerns remain more acute with VACs. But it's interesting because some travel agencies then take on the role of visa application agents also. Especially for many countries. Because they may not have a formal relationship with a large VAC. They contract it out to some travel agencies if you're going to use one of such travel agencies for some manner travel.  And your passport will then come back with a sticker, a visa sticker in two, three days. So there is some intersection there, but I just don't see them as formalised. Is how I see them to be different, but again, good thinking point for me, especially theoretically. And speaking to the public is also the more challenging part of it. Because outside of speaking to them at the VAC, outside the VAC, where else can you speak to them? Now my idea is, when I have some agreement by my local borough council that this can possibly be done. Is that I talk to people who come to the borough to seek different settlement services. And we can sort of sit them down, give them a cup of coffee, a cup of tea and then try and ask them questions about how they interacted with VACs. Did they find them helpful? Did they not find them helpful? Because some people find it efficient, but a lot of people also do find it confusing, right? So it will be good for me to try and talk to them to see where this goes. This also goes to the union saying that some people might deliberately use it to challenge. Like I said, to challenge this on the team that is largely in those disadvantage countries is impossible. All the borders. Yeah. I know that they, and I don't know how this relates to new questions. Specifically, but I know VACs then end up prompting another layer of private actors more informal again. Who help people apply for the visa. Because the visa application as this is lengthy and complex. And then they have to go to a private application centre, which I have seen many people, including people who want to move to. US Canada, et cetera, on student visas, be confused by. So they're then willing to spend more cash on having a travel agency do the application of that. But again, I'm not sure that's a meaningful thing. That you, because you, because this is a hybrid regime now that you have to mandatory go through a private actor, especially in the case of VACs, that you sort of end up, that's an end up creating more and more layers of private actor involved. Like the migrant fund is further and further from the actual decision making centre, the consulate, the embassy. And now if you even try to go to the consulate at the embassy, you write to them, you want to talk to them about your application. They're very rarely required. Outdoors. This becomes interesting. Yes. Do you know how much or how much the embassies or the state, the whole state, or the state are from this? How much should we, because there must be a commission, I guess, right? As companies into the embassies. That's a huge, actually, they are running a lot. They are a lot of money. That's interesting to me. There are, there are media departments publicly available. The UK office earning hundreds of millions of pounds. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. Through this outsourcing. So you are right that it's worth. Visa money plus the commission. Yeah, visa money plus the commission. You are right that the outsource and then it takes care of. So actually it will never stop in the world. No, that's true. It's absolutely available for every country that they enter into contract with, but there has been some reporting on it in the case of the UK. The UK now has very close ties to private agencies, especially. Was there anything else that you asked? Well, I think, conscious of time. Unless anybody has any burning comments from online, but I think we'll draw it to a close. Thank you so much, someone for that, for your presentation and Leonie as well for your reflections. It feels like you are really shining a light on, I don't know, quite sort of murky. Murky world of these means of companies in the way that they operate.  It raises some really interesting wider questions actually around sovereignty, security, state, the nature of the relationship between these, you know, the hybrid relationship. So really fascinating. And I hope you've had some useful kind of comments and questions. And yeah, thank you so much for presenting yourself. Thank you. Thank you, Ellen. Thank you, everyone at the DSD for having me and coming to the presentation. Really appreciate people actually being physically in the room, especially now that we have the option to do it on. Yeah, thank you so much. And thank you, Leonie, of course, last but not the least. Thank you so much for reading the paper for these very thoughtful comments and everyone who joined online. Thank you.


is the human digestive system closer to a carnivore or a herbivore. I've heard some people, vegans, say that the reason we see the color red is to find ripe fruit, yet meat is the color red, that we have molars to chew plant matter, but canines as well. Once you look at the digestive system and adaptations in an animal, it becomes very clear what they are supposed to be eating. Humans have thrived in a variety of climates and regions throughout the world. This means there were periods of time where we could only subsist off of animal foods. And once you actually look at the animal to plant food ratio in hunter-gatherer diets at approximately 55% animal foods and 45% plant foods, there is a lot of evidence that we need to have animal foods in our diet in order to be in optimal health. Some people bring up stomach acidity, but if you look at the stomach acidity of other animals, things become a bit unclear. That's why we have to look further into the digestive system. The lower the pH is, the more acidic the stomach. Buzzards, a scavenger animal, have a pH of 1.1. Humans are at 1.5, so fairly low. We essentially have the stomach acidity of a scavenger animal. But rabbits have a stomach acidity of 1.9. The thing is, rabbits regularly eat their own feces and a lot of it. Penguins, a carnivorous animal that eats fish, have a 2.9 pH, elephants as well as rhinoceros, have a 3.3, and cats have a 3.6, and they are obligate carnivores. Monkeys, however, have an almost neutral pH. Neutral is 7.0, monkeys are at 6. One of the easiest ways to answer whether humans are carnivorous or not is to compare an animal that's very similar from a gene perspective. We share a lot of our DNA with monkeys, and monkeys eat a lot more plant food than us, and they have different gut adaptations. Once we look at the digestive system of a human versus a gorilla, things become even more clear. This isn't just in the digestive system. Humans have a smaller liver. Their kidneys are smaller, indicating there is less digestive function. And our hearts are bigger as well, about 20%. So, you know, we're pumping more blood. We have more endurance capabilities. The brain size is a huge difference too. And all of this is in relation to body size. Of course, if you had a human and a gorilla side by side, all of the gorilla's organs would be much larger. But this is scaled in relation to body weight. Starting in the stomach, gorillas have a 20% larger stomach capacity. This is fairly significant, but the small intestine is where we see the first major difference. Small intestines in humans are 5 times longer than that of a gorilla. This is where we absorb nutrition from animal foods. Correspondingly, our large intestines are much smaller, and gorillas are 4 times larger. We also do not have a cecum. A cecum is a pouch where the small intestine enters the large intestine. It's where salts, various minerals are absorbed. That is present in gorillas. And the main thing to keep in mind here is animal foods absorbed in small intestine, plant foods ferment in large intestine. And gorillas have specific genes and enzymes and capabilities in their stomachs that humans do not have. Genes regulate all of these things, and gorillas have different genes than humans. One of them is the ELOVL gene, the elongation of very long-chain fatty acids. What this does is it actually turns fatty acids that are produced by the gorilla's gut bacteria into long-chain fatty acids. It's really interesting that a gorilla eating plants is the equivalent to a human eating animal foods, because the macronutrient breakdown of a gorilla's diet is 24% protein, 16% carbs, 3% fats, and 57% short-chain fatty acids. This is because their gut bacteria literally ferments plant matter into fat. They also have cellulase, which is an enzyme that breaks down cellulose, the indigestible plant cell wall, and they also have phytic acid neutralizing capabilities through fermentation and microorganisms. I spelled it wrong here. It's P-H-Y-T-I-C. Phytic acid binds phosphorus, and once that phosphorus is released via their microorganisms, they can utilize it for energy. Very specific digestive capabilities. A drastically different digestive system correlates to the larger human brain size, and there's a couple of other things that tie into that as well. What you should really check out is the mouth of a cow or a goat. It's literally like sandpaper, and there's also some animals that have very unique digestive systems. The reason I chose human and gorilla is because they're very similar. The difference is the size of the organs and some little things that are present and not present. If you look at the digestive system of a cow or a horse or like a deer, you're like, what is going on in their stomach? That is nothing like a human. So there's definitely some interesting digestive systems that occur in nature that tie into all of these things in a similar way. Animals need to extract nutrition from plant foods, and they have specific adaptations to do so. So we see these specific adaptations in herbivores. We also see certain behavioral changes, and this can mean eating their own poop, but eating frequency, food volume, and digestive waste are huge here. Cows, gorillas are eating plant matter for 10-12 hours a day. Therefore, their eating frequency is very high compared to a carnivore or an omnivore. We can eat once a day, once every two days, and be fine. The food volume is much lower. Vegans are known for eating incredibly large amounts of food, probably between four and six pounds of plant matter per day, whereas carnivore dieters eat between one and a half and two pounds of meat per day. And not only that, the digestive waste difference is huge. Let's say about 70-80% in most cases of meat gets utilized in the digestive system, whereas plant matter, I'd be surprised if people even digested half of it. Now, what separates humans from other carnivores? The first thing is tool usage. Normally, to hunt an animal, to overpower it, you need to be fast and strong, which requires a lot more muscle cells, and muscle cells require brain power. If we are able to replace those muscle cells with a spear, with a knife, with a trap, we are able to reduce our body mass, but since we're still procuring animal foods, maintain a higher brain size. The ability of humans to obtain animal foods in this almost unnatural way is what makes us so unique compared to other animals. Our adaptation for speech is also something we don't see. You know, the way the human neck has formed, the face has formed, allows us to make certain noises that other animals cannot make, and that communication is something else that makes us unique. The weaning period in humans is much shorter. We breastfeed an average of 2.5 to 4 years in our indigenous groups, and orangutans and monkeys breastfeed 6 to 7 years, much longer. Human breast milk has preformed EPA and DHA, and our ability to procure animal foods and feed them to our children has given us a large amount of easy to digest nutrition for brain development in early stages of life. If you look at cow's milk, goat milk, sheep milk, it's very nutritious, but the form of omega fatty acids in the milk of herbivorous animals is alpha linolenic acid. It's not preformed EPA and DHA. Human breast milk is much more nutritious than the herbivorous animal milk. And when we look at these vitamins and how the human body absorbs them, it becomes pretty clear we're supposed to be eating meat, but then when you look at how herbivores obtain these nutrients, it's even more evident that we better be munching on some steak. People love saying, oh, you can convert carotene to vitamin A, but there are genes, polymorphisms, that inhibit your ability to convert carotene to vitamin A, and there are also flavonoids in carotene-containing foods that inhibit the enzyme that allows us to assimilate vitamin A from beta carotene. Basically, if you eat a carrot, some people don't get any vitamin A. Herbivores have unique adaptations. They don't have these gene polymorphisms. They have gut microorganisms that can deal with the flavonoids, the negative substances, so they can extract nutrition. Also, these herbivores are eating much more plant matter. The volume of food that these herbivores are eating far eclipses what a human is physically capable of doing. B vitamins are only obtained from animal sources for humans. These animals, again, the gut bacteria can ferment certain plant matter and they get their B vitamins from the organisms in their stomach. Humans do not have that capability. Vitamin D3 is obtained from the sun in both carnivores and herbivores. Herbivores have, again, enzymes, digestive functions, larger organs that allow them to metabolize vitamin D3 in a certain way. Humans need cholesterol from animal foods and we can also get vitamin D3 from animal foods in order to absorb vitamin D3 properly. Vitamin K2 is only obtained from fermented animal foods. Every single indigenous group, our hunter-gatherer ancestors, consumed literally rotten meat for this specific reason. Humans don't have the digestive capability to assimilate the plant form vitamin K1 into vitamin K2 in large enough amounts in order to develop properly. And of course you have the omega fatty acids that can only be found in animal source foods in nature. From a logical and evolutionary standpoint, it's so obvious and clear that we need to be consuming high quality animal foods. If a hunter-gatherer group had unlimited access to animal foods, because keep in mind, these people were surviving. They didn't necessarily choose what percentage of calories they got from animals versus what they got from plants. But when they were able to, if they were excellent hunters such as the plains Indians, they tended to consume 75 to 85% of their calories from animal foods. So there are definitely optimal amounts and when we see higher amounts of animal foods in the person's diet, we tend to see a taller stature in that group of people, more physical impressiveness, and it makes sense. A person is going to be larger, taller, and stronger when there are more animal foods in their environment because there's more caloric accessibility. If there's a bad period of time, if we start eating more plant foods, if humans wanted to adapt to a vegan diet, we could essentially get back to that point, but it would take tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years.  But if you make the change too drastically, which is the vegan diet now, that's where you start having health issues, people going infertile.  At the end of the day, it's very clear that humans are meant to obtain their nutrition from animal foods, and any sort of calories obtained from plant foods would be specifically used for energy as we cannot assimilate those nutrients. This is probably the strongest argument against a vegan diet, but people don't really understand the digestive capabilities of herbivores of these animals. Once you explain these things, this actually opens a lot of people up to the idea that we need to consume animal foods, and then vegans will always just jump back to the anecdotal argument of, oh, I've been vegan for like 10 years, and I'm completely fine. It's just all of my organs are gray, and I can barely get out of bed in the morning. It's completely ridiculous, but that being said, thank you guys for joining me today. If you could please like the video, subscribe, hit that bell icon, and share it if you can. If you guys would like to support me further, just check out some of the other videos on my channel. Recently I've launched Frankies Free Range Meat, my goal being to provide you guys with high quality, nutrient dense animal foods at an affordable price. So go to frankiesfreerangemeat.com if you would like Frankies meat in your mouth. Thanks again guys, and enjoy the rest of your week.


When you think of a highly intelligent person, what kind of habits come to mind? You might think of a braniac wearing glasses, reading books, and studying, but did you know that there are other, lesser-known habits they engage in? Here are five odd habits highly intelligent people have. Number one, they are night owls. What times are you most active? Research shows that night owls are more intelligent than those with regular sleep cycles. A 2009 study published in the Journal of Personality and Individual Differences found that high childhood IQ was associated with nocturnal behavior in adulthood. The authors theorized that humans didn't evolve for nocturnal activity, but highly intelligent people often choose to live life their own way rather than sticking to societal conventions. So instead of being active when everyone else is awake, they stay up late when they have no obligations or distractions so they can pursue their goals more productively. Number two, they are disorganized. How much structure do you like in your life? You might think that plans, schedules, and systems are a sign of intelligence, but research suggests it's the other way around. Studies have found that the personality trait that has the strongest link with high intelligence is low consciousness. This means they have a preference for disorder and flexibility rather than organization and routine. Researchers believe that highly intelligent people don't need rules, plans, and reminders, as they're smart enough to figure it out and manage themselves. Sometimes order even restricts their freedom and originality. Number three, they are loners. How much time do you spend alone? A study published in the British Journal of Psychology showed that highly intelligent people spent a great deal of time alone. They have many goals to pursue to make the most of their abilities and ambitions, which reduces the time they spend socializing. On the plus side, they tend to be quite satisfied with this, as working on long-term objectives gives them a form of happiness that nothing else can. Highly intelligent people are not only loners, they're happy being loners. Number four, they daydream. How much do you focus on the task at hand? You might think that highly intelligent people always have a strong focus. So that they can accomplish their objectives. But a 2013 study published in Frontiers in Psychology suggests that mind wandering is another form of intelligent thinking. And that daydreaming should be seen as a positive and constructive mental technique, not a distraction. Highly intelligent people use daydreaming to plan for the future, explore creative solutions, and enhance the learning of new information. Some researchers even suggest that the attention demanded by modern schools and workplaces is hurting our intelligence, because it reduces our capacity for mental reflection and daydreaming. And number five, they talk to themselves. What do you think when you see someone talking to themselves? It might look a bit odd from the outside, but researchers believe that this habit is actually a useful technique used by highly intelligent people. In a study published in the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, it was found to improve visual perception and understanding. Talking out loud allows the brain to retrieve information more efficiently, which helps to interpret the environment around you, find objects, and explore ideas. So when you see someone talking to themselves, they might be a highly intelligent person using this technique to think of solutions and ideas much faster than everyone else. So there you have it. Five odd habits highly intelligent people have. Do you relate to any of the habits mentioned in this article? Let us know in the comments below, and don't forget to like and share this video if you think someone else will find it interesting. As always, the studies and references used are listed in the description below. Until next time, and thanks for watching.


All right everybody, wowee, what a day of reactions. It's been great. We are at the last video of the day though. Christian McCaffrey week number eight, 155 total yards versus the 49ers who are quite possibly Super Bowl favourites at the moment but we'll see. Today's date is the 27th of December. The Super Bowl is in like five or six weeks so very excited for that but with all that being said, here we are. This was literally two months ago, October the 27th 2019. Christian McCaffrey powers through with 155 total yards. I've really enjoyed watching McCaffrey. I think his I think his mindset which we looked at in the first video, channeling you know the likes of Bruce Lee, probably you know channeling his dad as well. Also his ability, his knack for a first down, his speed, his exhalation but also his motion. When he's in top speed, he puts his foot down and doesn't look back and I absolutely love that about him. So with all that being said, let's get into the final video of the day and let's watch. Solid. Counter. Blocks there. Get through. Big collision. Big collision. Too big maybe. He tries to stutter step. It doesn't work. Oh boy. Third and 30. Third and 30. Okay so they just want as many yards up the field as possible I guess. How did the defense set up with a third for 30? Okay they're not, well they've got one, they've got one deep safety. Two cornerbacks, four linemen, three linebackers. One safety over here. What would you guys think is going to happen? Tough runner right? That is speed and exhalation. Straight up. That's all that is. He just had more speed than his opposite man. That ball, I did not think he was even going to throw it. I thought if I was watching that I'd think nah he's not going to throw it to McCaffrey. He's got no space. The defenders definitely got him but because of McCaffrey's speed and a perfect pass it was a first down. Yeah good first down. Good first down. Whenever there's yards after contact and they make a first down it's a bloody good first down isn't it? But this is a second and one. We need one yard boys. One yard. Why are these defenders so far back? I love that. I absolutely love that. Great block. Great block. Nice. Did you see that burst of exhalation man? Just then? Because I did. He saw that man. I swear that's putting your body on the line man and he's not the biggest player so I give him respect. I really do. He's going to hit that hole at pace and take whatever comes after it. The defenders pick up a first down. Newton goes last eight games. All of them play it in. McCaffrey just like that baby. Yeah go McCaffrey. Sorry guys got a bit up for that but. Love it. Love it. Absolutely love it guys and I hope you guys did too. That is the final Christian McCaffrey NFL video for the day. There is one other video that I did find before which is Christian McCaffrey's Stanford College Highlights. Shiftiest player in college football. It was actually only produced about three months ago in September. 250,000 views already. Accidentally read the title as shittiest player and it got real heated for a sec. You alright mate?  Where all you haters at now? Yeah they're not here mate. I'll always be pissed you didn't win the Heisman. You break a record set by Barry Sanders who had arguably the greatest single season by any college player ever. You deserve some respect but Bama Hype won out in the end. Still can't believe he was robbed for that Heisman. 2016 whatever. Just wait till he plays against some real competition. 2019. Never mind. He was the best player in college, now he's the best player in the NFL. Simran Bassra. Glad to see CMC blowing up now. One of my favourite prospects really felt he'd be a star. Hi you. Yes you. Don't worry you're not the only one who read shittiest player. I'ma be on this one day. Y'all gonna be reviewing my highlights. That's not my mama bro. This dude will be a bust for sure unless he converts to a slot receiver. Let's see what replies we've got here.  Huh? After putting up so much numbers last year and calling him a bust? It was a joke. Okay so he's trolling. Okay you never know. Alright guys that is enough for that video. Christian McCaffrey NFL. We only saw it up to week number 9. We're at week 17 at the moment so that means we've got like a whole another 8 games to watch. But the NFL didn't put up any highlights for him so he mustn't have bawled out. So I'm just gonna keep it there. Are the Panthers in the playoffs? Let me see. Al the Carolina Panthers can... Oh. The Panthers have been eliminated from playoff contention. The table below represents the Panthers winning games versus the Saints. Okay. They're out. They are out with a record of 5 and 10. With a record in their division of 1 and 4. But it is what it is. There's 32 teams. Not every team can expect to have a great season. So guys if you have enjoyed these videos and you know if you do have any other suggestions for me please hit me up in the comment section below. I can't guarantee that I'll get back to every single comment but I can guarantee that if you do message me on Instagram I'll get it. So if you do want to get in touch with me definitely hit me up on Instagram. By all means put your comments down below but I may not see them. You know my skin is getting thicker by the day but it's not thick enough just yet. But we will get there. Too bad about the Panthers being out. I would have loved to see some more Christian McCaffrey in the playoffs but it is what it is. He'll have a solid off season and come back stronger next year. And with that being said I'll see you in the next one. Peace out.