Hello everyone. I'm Martin. I'm a solution architect at Cloudera, which makes that I help customers with Flink. Cloudera is one of the vendors that you can get out there to support you on Spark. I'm a PMC member of Apache Flink, so I have quite some experience with both of these systems. I'm going to walk you through a couple of use cases in this talk, mostly focusing on the API, not necessarily the performance, a little bit on the architecture. Of course, I'm ready to take questions on those as well, but basically what I would like to give you is a takeaway message, is these systems are evolving a lot in terms of the APIs, and you can go much further with such a system than you would imagine in terms of use cases. So the setup that we are going to use for this is this big pet store example. She's nothing really fancy. We will have a couple of pet stores. So the model that we will see is we have a map with a couple of stores and we have customers shopping around in these stores generating transactions and we will take it from there. So we have already batched work on today a couple of times. I will continue with that. I guess that's something that everyone has to do to a certain level. Then I will elaborate a little bit on the model, and then we'll see how to do a little bit of data generation with Spark and Flink. Also how to use their SQL APIs or the APIs that are very close to our data frames, if you are familiar with that. Then we'll do a little bit of machine learning, and then prediction in streaming or near real time. So it's going to be a little too much code because I also had to cut a little bit of the slides from the theoretical part of course. So what I suggest to try to do together is, I would like to tell you the story and the code is going to be there and having the story and not necessarily understanding the code 100 percent, that's completely what we are shooting for today. So infamous word count example, who have already seen a word count in their life? Okay, good enough. But that's why I put it up there because it's just half of the people in the room. So basically word count is the hello word of big data, and that's exactly what it is. It gives you the first impression. It has certain merits and we should give those to it. Basically, as unfortunately, it may be a little low if you are sitting in the background, but it gives you the idea that the meta-produced paradigm does the following for you. Even though you have a huge chunk of data, and even though you will never have a global view of it on any single machine because it doesn't fit into one single machine, you can still produce a global count for a given key in it. So it has this power and word count exactly demonstrates that, but it doesn't give you much more. People sometimes use this also for, and that's what I'm trying to get into, benchmarking a big data application. Okay, I have installed Spark. Now let's learn a word count and see whether it's works okay or not. Well, it will benchmark a little bit on the shuffling phase, so at least you will have this network communication, maybe the disk giveaway in the beginning and in the end, but that's basically it. What happens if you wanna do data streaming or machine learning or graph processing? Is it going to be enough for you? Well, most likely not, and that's where we start bashing word count, of course. So then the other cool stuff that basically every one who is talking today has to do is give a shout out to BigTop because BigTop is cool, so I have to do that as well. This project in general is part of Apigee BigTop. You can have a look at the code there and references to the Big Pet Store model. Basically, BigTop not only gives you this ability to install your big data systems with the puppet scripts and the juju charms and all these cool stuff, but also when it's already installed, you might be able to benchmark it. I would definitely say that this is not the most major part of BigTop, but it's a new initiative where contributions are very welcome. Well, in terms of the model that we are using, I already mentioned that this is this BigPet Store model. There's a scientific paper out on it. Basically, the idea that you need to have here is that it can generate data in a big data setting that even if it's small-scale or big-scale, it's sort of still relevant on testing your big data applications. So for that reason, it might be nice for you. It's based on the distributions why it might be relevant. Okay, so the two systems that we are going to deal with today and mostly their API is Spark and Flink, two data processing systems. And I would like to just highlight one fundamental difference between the two in terms of the architecture and the other parts are just matching each other. When you look at the Spark runtime, the basic runtime of Apache Spark is a so-called RDD, Resilient Distributed Data Set API. That's the batch API. So it suggests that you already have your data sitting on your local file system or HDFS or S3 wherever, and it's there and it's a finite data set. So that's what Spark runs on natively and then they build streaming on top of it. The main difference in Flink is that in Flink, the data stream API, the streaming one and the data set API, the batch one, those are on the same level. So if you wanna have this finite data set or if you wanna have something that is near real time, maybe giving answers under a second, that's sort of both a native implementation. The streaming doesn't get translated on top of a batch job. And that has different implications. Because of this, it's much easier in Spark to integrate within a streaming and a batch job because a streaming job is just a sequence of batch jobs. But it might be limiting in a couple of cases. So it includes a trade-off. And we can define the mapping that we are going to go through today. So we have the batch API is matched up. We will have a look at the streaming ones, the machine learning ones, and also the SQL slash table ones. This talk is a little too short to also include the graph ones, but maybe next time for Vasya I have to do that as well. So then let's go to the coding part. Ronald, one of the authors of set paper, he also coded the whole generation process in Java classes. Of course, both of these systems do have Java and Scala APIs. I'm going to stick with the Scala one because it's just easier to read on a slide. Who considers themselves a Scala developer? Okay, a couple, Java developer? Good enough. Maybe Python, that also helps. Okay, I'm safe, thank you very much. So just a little bit of, basically we have a way to generate these classes on a single thread that Ronald has already provided for us. But I would like to use these distributed systems. I would like to generate a whole bunch of this data in a distributed fashion. That's basically my point. And of course, it's pretty easy to do that. The way that we are doing it here is for this data generation to work, we need to generate the so-called ground truth, which is our customer IDs and the name of the customer's basic customer information, also basic information on the stores and on our product categories. So in this case, product categories like a doggy leash or cat food or whatever you would buy in a pet store. And then in Spark, you have basically two main ways of passing data to your distributed operators. Remember, these will get distributed in the clusters. Maybe you will have 10 instances running and generating your data. One is of course to parallelize some collection that you already have or read from a file. So that's the standard data set that is going to flow through your pipeline. But that's also an alternative. If you have just a smaller data set that you would like to propagate to all of your nodes. And for example, the stores is going to be such a data set in our example, you can use Spark's broadcast variable to achieve such a thing. Then Spark has this so-called functional API. We already seen a lot of functional APIs today in the dev room. And one of the main features there is you can use these functions. For example, a map function or reduce function or a flat map function. And pass your user define functionally within that. You see one example here. I just adjusted the time when we started generating the process. That's basically the whole structure of how you would call the data generation in Spark. Let's switch to fling. I also generate the ground through. Once changes in Spark, we called the basis of building this Joggraph Spark context. Now we call it execution environment. Of course, relying on the Ronald is the same. And now it's slightly different the way how they use extra information on our functions. In fling, we use the rich function interface. In Spark, we use another solution for that. It's slightly different how we use broadcast variables. But as you see, the basics having a mapping is on the same level, it's mapped out the same. And this is just a summary of what I've already said. So we have already written our JSON output file. So this would be written in JSON just to sake of having able to look at it. And let's do a little bit of ETL on top of the data that we already have. So of course, this is usually where you would start with such a process because someone has already provided it for you. So how can we, let's have two goals for this. First of all, we would like to feed this data into a recommender system eventually. So we would need customer product pairs where a customer has purchased the given product. But the format that we have in the JSON says that this given customer generated a transaction that has these 10 products in it. So we would like to get into this couple format instead. First thing first, we don't really have an ID with our products first. Yet we only have that for the product categories. So we could select the distinct of those and zip them with a unique ID. These are all Spark functions already included. You can access it from the standard core Spark. And then you joined this information together with the customers who already have an ID. And then you have two IDs here. This is just some basic mapping and the join and this thing. And what's really interesting, these are, this is the batch API. If I switch to Flink, practically nothing changes. The only part that, this is exactly the same. The only part that changes here is the way Spark and Flink like to speak about their join. And basically the signature of the join, but basically it's the same. And the way they handle keys. So if you could almost recompile it with Flink instead of Spark and the other way around. That's, so this keys is a notion of the pair RDD. Okay, so one next step. We have already heard this today from many speakers that it's not necessarily enough to provide the Java and the Scala API because other people who have worked with previous systems, they are maybe used to SQL or R or Python. So why not provide an interface for them as well? And both systems give you SQL interfaces. Of course they, usually they have, they support a standard that's a little older. So I think Spark currently supports with Spark to the SQL 2000 sender. And Flink is on the SQL 92 standard currently. So ANSI in both cases. But they are catching up and making sure that you can also have complex queries on top of these. So for example, here in this query, I would like to have a look at the data and select the stores that have the most transactions. And you can achieve that with two SQL statement. One of the downsides of using SQL is you sort of lose the type information that you have in your data. Because when you look, you just type this declarative query as a string and you lose the information that actually this ID was a string or this was an int and this name was a string. So if you also wanna have that, then you can use the table or data frames APIs. We also heard today that it's very difficult to write a UDF in Hive for example. And there Spark and Flink, I think give you very nice solutions in terms of writing a UDF. For example, I would like to register this months function, which is a Scala function so that I can use it in my SQL statement. This is literally this much code. You write the Scala function, you call register and then here you can use it. So I think it's super convenient, it gets propagated to your worker nodes. The note I did report to the table API. So the SQL I showed you in Spark, now I'm going to show the table or data frames API in Flink. Both have actually both, which is don't have enough time to visit everything. So this is very pretty close to SQL. It's still Scala, it feels like SQL. So the statements that you write is table.groupby and select and join and where. But you are still in Scala and you still have the type information. And if you want to go back to standard Flink or standard Spark, it's way easier. And here I accomplish the same, let's select the most important stories. Okay, another topic is finally we realize and these customer and product pairs. We would like to feed it to a machine learning system. And if you are familiar with scikit-learn, then the API should look pretty similar for you. Basically they have this estimator predictor API that's very familiar from scikit-learn. So you have a model, you call fit on it and then you can predict with a testing data set. So that's what we would be able to call here. The recommender implementation that we are using here is called ALS, but there are also other solutions to solve this problem. Instead of predicting it right here, I'm just saving the model and we will use it later in a streaming topology. So right now with this much code and this is actually how much code you have to write in ML lib, it will be very similar in Flink ML. You can train a machine learning model and save it and then we can reuse it later. In Flink it would be this much code. This is really how much you would have to write there. Okay, in terms of comparing the ML APIs, the Sparkman is definitely more mature, but API level, they are almost as close as the batch APIs are. So I think given that the Flink one catches up with algorithms, it will be really easy to switch between those. And then let's play a little bit with streaming. So we have already have a machine learning model and the tricky part there is usually when you have a recommender system model, then the problem that you are trying to solve is, I have this user, he have watched five videos on my website and I would like to give recommendations for three more. Well, if you don't give those recommendations in approximately 200 milliseconds, the user is gone, so they are worthless. That's why we need streaming or near real-time processing. And as I mentioned in Spark, it's really easy to accomplish such a thing because we just load the model that we have already prepared in batch and then we have a query which is coming from a socket. I'm just typing in user IDs and when I would like to do the prediction, I go back to my batch pipeline and use the prediction there. This is something that is currently not available in Flink and it's super convenient to code in Spark. Of course, you have other trade-offs in Spark. And just to give you a sense of how to switch to Java API, this is actually coded in Java. Of course, you don't see much difference. The only difference is the semicolon here because it almost already looks like Scala, but in Flink I decided, and the code is available on GitHub, I decided to code the whole prediction instead of relying on the implementation in Flink ML. I coded it in streaming because it's very straightforward. It's just multiplying a matrix with the vector and then selecting the top key. Yeah, in terms of differences, I think this is the part where Spark and Flink are the most different because of the choice of architecture. Flink does definitely better when it comes to stateful processing and timeliness, but Spark is improving in that department with the new structured streaming API. So, as a summary, you should definitely go beyond the word count with BigBitStore. The batch concepts of Spark and Flink are very close, but they have the differences in streaming. You have seen a lot of use cases with under 500 lines of code and it's available on GitHub and you are very welcome to check it out. And of course, an Apache Pet project is always fun. Big thanks to the guys who have helped me to accomplish the project itself and thank you very much for listening. Do we have time for a few questions? Yes, please. It's very interesting to you compared to Spark and then both have been inspired by from Java API as historically, they look very similar and then another project Apache Beam, which is yet another inclination of this and I know there is a kind of process of converging toward that. What would be the merit to use Apache Beam as a kind of common API instead of have you experimented with this and what are the limits? Yes, so basically, yes. So the question was, how does Spark and Flink come together in Apache Beam and what's the future of Apache Beam in my understanding? I think Apache Beam is a very interesting project in the sense that the Google guys who published the data flow paper which was the driving factor behind Beam really got the timeliness of streaming application rights. So their model there is really goes into details in how to handle timeliness and late events and that's one of the main powers of data flow. And I think that if you look at the Spark and Flink's regular implementations currently, none of the systems can support all of the features of data flow but Flink is much closer currently. And the basic reason why Spark is currently not supporting all of these streaming features because in Spark, because of this architectural choice, Fulterance was very easy to accomplish because it was done, batch Fulterance is done already but when you have this mini batches so then it's really, you don't really have a way to communicate between two mini batch, that's the main issue. So that was one of the driving forces while Spark is coming out with a new streaming API, this structure streaming to make up for a couple of these semantic differences between the old Spark streaming and Flink or data flow. So it's definitely getting there but Spark has to improve in terms of semantics. Yes, please. I think Medlib is a little bit in a different domain but I would like to learn more about Medlib as well. Thank you very much.


In this study, it was found that laflunamide was effective in treating BK virus reactivation in kidney and kidney pancreas transplant recipients. However, the majority of patients required higher doses than the standard 40 mg daily dose to reach therapeutic levels and clear the virus. Additionally, delaying treatment with laflunamide could lead to progression of BK virus reactivation and BK nephropathy. This article was authored by Nicole Nestelhoff, Jacqueline Strutt and Bahar Bastani.


Okay, survivors! This is the third in a series of three videos. I recommend that you watch the first two. And all three videos deal with a combined, combined construct of a schizoid narcissist. Ostensibly, an internal contradiction, mutually exclusive. The narcissist needs other people. His pro-social depends on other people for the regulation of his internal environment, especially his sense of self-worth. The schizoid avoids other people at all costs. He doesn't have sex. He doesn't have friends. He barely communicates with a single member of his family. He finds people boring.  He's confined to his own solitary existence as a monk would. So, how do these two sit together? Perhaps before we come to this, to clarify something. In earlier videos, I said that trauma is not an objective event or set of circumstances. Trauma is a subjective experience. It is the way you react to external circumstances, to other people's behavior or misbehavior, to natural disasters, to man-made disasters. Trauma is the way you react. It's a reactive pattern. I can take ten people, subject them to exactly the same experience, replicated identically, and only two of them would be traumatized. The other eight would not be. But one thing I neglected to mention is that trauma could be endogenous or exogenous, internally generated or externally generated. Trauma could be a reaction to an experience that emanates from and is contained inside the mind, has no outside correlates. Consider, for example, chronic illness. Consider mental illness. Mental illness and chronic illness generate trauma, but they are not external events. They don't depend on anyone's misconduct. They are not derivatives of any external or outside disaster, catastrophe or calamity. Mental illness is essentially biological in most cases. It's a medical condition, so is chronic illness. People react with trauma to internal processes, to internal dynamics. This trauma generates loads of anxiety and depression. I would say that endogenous traumas, traumas which are reactions to internal processes, endogenous traumas are even more anxiety producing and more depression inducing than exogenous traumas.  Where would you escape to? You can escape an enemy. You can escape an adversary. You can escape adverse circumstances. You can escape the police. Where are you going to escape your mind to? Where are you going to go to? Your mind is with you at all times. Your body is with you at all times. Where are you going to flee your chronic condition? So endogenous traumas induce much more anxiety and depression than exogenous traumas. Gradually over time people try to develop strategies to cope with this permanent, all-permeating, ubiquitous anxiety and depression. Depression that is kind of a damocles sword hanging in the balance about looming, imminent, ambient depression and anxiety. People try to develop strategies, coping strategies and these coping strategies are what we call personality disorders. One coping strategy is to say I'm fearless, I'm resilient, I'm strong, nothing and no one can break me, not even myself. That is the psychopathic reaction. It's defined, it's consumatious, it's reckless, it lacks impulse control. Another solution is to say I'm God, nothing can touch me, I'm untouchable, I'm invulnerable. That is the narcissistic solution. As you see, personality disorders are forms, are reactive patterns and one of the main roles of personality disorders is to ameliorate, to reduce and to regulate anxiety, depression, moods and emotions in the wake of trauma and that's why I'm trying to recast personality disorders as post-traumatic conditions. To the issue, how do we connect? How do we connect schizoid personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder? You remember that my philosophy is that there is only one condition, personality disorder. That has been my position since 1995. I think the ICD, the International Classification of Diseases Edition 11, is going to reflect this thinking and it's going to have a single personality disorder with dominant traits or emphasized traits, which is what I suggest. So in my dictionary, the very question, the very question of how can we reconcile schizoid and narcissistic personality disorders is meaningless because there's only one personality disorder with different emphasis. But we live in DSM land, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, latest edition in 2013, still rules the hay, rules the barn and we have to comply, we have to adapt and we have to discuss psychology and psychiatry in terms dictated by the consensus on the orthodoxy if we want to be understood, comprehended and communicated. So schizoid personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, intuitively a connection between these two actually seems plausible. What are narcissists? Narcissists are people who self sufficiently withdraw from other people. Narcissists are self-contained. They are an ego system. They are self-sufficient. They are solipsistic. They are atomized. They do use and abuse other people.  Narcissists love themselves in lieu of loving others. They are auto-erotic and auto-libidinal. Now this love, don't confuse this self-love with real self-love. It's they don't love themselves. They love their false selves. So they invent a new self, piece of fiction, a movie script called false self. And that false self is everything the narcissist is not. The false self is omniscient. Omnipotent is perfect and brilliant, et cetera, et cetera. And the narcissist is emotionally invested in the false self. And he tries to uphold the grandiosity that underlies the false self. But still, this emotional investment is self-directed. That the self happens to be false. That's another issue. But it's self-directed. Narcissist has no object relations. He doesn't love other people. Same like the Schizoid. Lacking empathy. Narcissists regard others as mere instruments, objectified sources of narcissistic supply. Take, for example, the inverted narcissist, a subspecies of covert narcissists. It's a narcissist who projects her narcissism onto another narcissist. The mechanism of projective identification allows the inverted narcissist to experience her own narcissism vicariously through the agency of a classic narcissist. But the inverted narcissist is no less a narcissist than a classical narcissist. She is no less socially reclusive. So we must make, therefore, a distinction between social interactions and social relationships. The Schizoid, the narcissist, the even the inverted narcissist, even the covert narcissist, they all interact socially. But they fail to form human and social relationships, bonds, attachment. They have the equivalent of flat attachment, the psychopath, of course. So while they interact, they never get attached, they never bond. The Schizoid is uninterested in bonding. And the narcissist is both uninterested and incapable, owing to his lack of empathy and pervasive sense of grandiosity. The psychologist H. Deutsch first suggested the construct of as if personality in the context of Schizoid patients. It's an article published in 1942 titled Some Forms of Emotional Disturbance and Their Relationship to Schizophrenia. So the construct of a pretend personality, substitute personality, a fake personality. This construct was first proposed, not in the context of narcissism, but in the context of schizophrenia and Schizoid patients. A decade after Deutsch, Donald Winnicott named the very same idea, gave it the name of false self personality. That's how the false self was born. The false self has been established as a driving engine of both pathological narcissism and pathological Schizoid states. From the very beginning, from the 1940s and 1950s, top eminent scholars saw the immediate connection between narcissism and Schizoid states. And they used common psychological constructs to elucidate both. CR Cloninger and N. McWilliams. Cloninger, Cloninger and N. McWilliams. In 1994, they wrote the book Psychoanalytic Diagnoses. They observed the faintly contemptuous attitude and isolated superiority of, no, not of narcissists, of Schizoid. So when they describe Schizoid, they describe Schizoid in classic narcissistic terms, contempt, superiority. These were narcissistic traits which they had attributed actually not to narcissists, but to Schizoid. Theodore Millen and Roger Davis summed it up in their seminal tone, personality disorders in modern life. My favorite book on personality disorders. And they had written, they wrote, where withdrawal has an arrogant or oppositional quality, fantasy in the Schizoid-like person sometimes betrays the presence of a secret grandiose self that longs for respect and recognition, while offsetting fears that the person is really an iconoclastic freak. These individuals combine aspects of the compensating narcissists with the autistic isolation of the Schizoid while lacking the asocial and unhedonic qualities of the pure prototype. So even Millen and Davis saw the commonalities between narcissists and Schizoid. Before we proceed, many, including self-styled experts, real scholars, therapists, psychologists, many confuse the terms asocial and antisocial. Antisocial is a person who rejects society, or in terms, in half a lackluster, rejects life. He is defiant. He defies also authority. He's contumacious. He is reckless. He's impulsive. He's aggressive, sometimes violent. Antisocial personalities tend to break the law or bend it or test it. Many of them become criminals. Asocial personalities are people who don't like to be with other people. They don't socialize. They don't blend in. They don't mingle. They don't talk to people. They don't communicate. They don't have sex. They don't get married. They don't have children. They don't confide in anyone. They're solitary figures, quite happy in their own isolated universe. That's asocial, asocial, antisocial. Okay. Is this not all connected somehow to culture? I refer you to my previous video I've made about Christopher Lash and the other video about Althusser. And there will be a forthcoming video about Debord and the French thinkers. But is this not all part of cultural expectations? I mean, we're expected to be social. And if we are not, we are freaks. We are outliers. We are outcasts. Something's wrong with us. It's a dysfunction or a pathology. Is it not a culture bound thing? Is it not really? Is it really not? Is it a clinical entity? Is it a disorder? Or is it just the current way of thinking about how people should behave? The more is of society and culture in our day and age. After all, there have been periods in history where people were encouraged, encouraged to be schizoids. They were encouraged to go to the desert for 40 days. Expecting epiphany and enlightenment. They were encouraged to spend their youth and life in monasteries and nunaries. Isolation, social isolation has been condoned, not condemned in previous periods of history. So why are we condemning it now? The ethnosychologist, Georges Devereux, in Basic Problems of Ethnosychiatry, published by the University of Chicago Press in 1980, proposed to divide the unconscious into the id, the part that is instinctual and unconscious, and the ethnic unconscious, the repressed material that was once conscious. The ethnic unconscious includes all the defense mechanisms and most of the superego. Culture dictates what is to be repressed. That's why he calls it the ethnic unconscious. Mental illness, he said, is either idiosyncratic, cultural directives are not followed, and the individual is unique, eccentric or schizophrenic. Or mental illness is conformist, abides by the cultural dictates of what is allowed and disallowed. At any rate, cultural society seemed to dictate what constitutes mental illness and what constitutes permissible mental illness. Or mental illness to be repressed and suppressed and so on. I refer you to the work of others, like laying and the father of the resilience movement, and, and so on and so forth. Our culture, according to Christopher Lash, teaches us to withdraw inwards when we are confronted with stressful situations. It is a vicious cycle. One of the main stressors of modern society is loneliness, alienation and a pervasive sense of isolation. The solution our culture offers is to withdraw even further to isolate ourselves even further to become even more solitary. And that only exacerbates the problem. You could say therefore, why accurately, that Western culture and civilization, which is now regrettably the dominant, the dominant cultural mode, you could say that it is dysfunctional in this sense. A culture and civilization whose solutions to mental health issues only make the issues worse is a culture and civilization which is doomed functionally is dysfunctional. Richard Sennett expounded on this theme in the fall of public men on the social psychology of capitalism, Vintage Books, 1978, one of the chapters in Devereux aforementioned tone is entitled Schizophrenia and Ethnic Psychosis or Schizophrenia without tears. According to Devereux, the United States is afflicted by what came later to be called Schizoid disorder. C. Fred Olford. Olford, A. L. F. O. R. D. In the book Narcissism, Socrates, the Frankfurt School and Psychoanalytic Theory published by Yale University Press in 1988, Olford enumerates the symptoms. He says, the symptoms of Schizoid, the Schizoid syndrome. We draw emotional aloofness, hyporeactivity, emotional flatness, sex without emotional involvement, segmentation and partial involvement, lack of interest and commitment to things outside oneself, fixation on oral stage issues, regression, infantilism and depersonalization. These, of course, he says, are many of the same designations that lash employees to describe the culture of narcissism. Thus, it appears that it is not misleading to equate narcissism with Schizoid disorder. Okay, this is the cultural background, but our psychodynamics react to our context. We react to the culture, we react to society, definitely to social expectations, as they are mediated and communicated via social agents and agents of socialization, peers, parents, teachers. What are the common psychodynamic roots of narcissistic personality disorder and Schizoid personality disorder? The first to seriously consider the similarity, if not outright identity between the Schizoid and narcissistic disorders of the self was Melanie Klein. Melanie Klein broke ranks with Freud in that she believed that we are born with a fragile, brittle, weak and unintegrated ego. The most primordial human fear is the fear of disintegration of death, according to Klein. And so the infant is forced to employ primitive defense mechanisms, such as splitting projection and introjection to cope with this fear, actually with the result of aggression generated by the ego, the ego splits and projects this part, death, disintegration, aggression projects it, it disowns it, it becomes this part becomes ego alien. It does the same with the life related constructive, constructive, integrative part of itself. So actually it splits, it's separate breaks, breaks into the bed part, so to speak, and the good part. As a result of all these mechanics, the infant views the world as either good, satisfying, complying, responding, gratifying, or bad, frustrating. And Klein calls it the good and the bad dress. The child then proceeds to introject, internalize, simulate the good object while keeping out defending against the bad objects. The good object becomes the nucleus of the forming ego. The bad object is felt as fragmented, but it has not vanished. It is there, which is the cornerstone the foundation of my work in psychology. I actually inverse or reverse Klein. I claim that the child actually internalizes the bed part, because he's afraid to attribute it to mother, which is the only other person he knows. But put that aside. Continue with Klein. The fact that the bad object is out there says Klein, the fact that it's persecutory, threatening gives rise to the first schizoid defense mechanisms. For most among these mechanisms is the mechanism of projective identification, which narcissists use very often because they are infantile, they're still children. The infant projects parts of himself. His organs, body parts, his behaviors, his traits, he projects these onto the bed object. And this is the famous Kleinian paranoid schizoid position. The ego is split. Of course, this must be harrowing and terrifying. Must be very traumatic. And it is, it's as traumatic as it sounds. But it allows the baby to make a clear distinction between the good object inside him, and the bad object out there, split away from him. If this phase is not transcended, the individual develops schizophrenia and a fragmentation of the self says Klein. Around the third or fourth month of life, the infant realizes that the good and the bad objects are really facets, dimensions of one and the same object. He develops the depressive position. He's very depressed to discover that an object that he had thought to be totally good mother actually has bad aspects, bad parts.  It's depressing. So the baby equally becomes depressed. When he integrates the good and the bad, when he realizes that no object is perfect, no object is all good, no person is all good. Object in psychology is person. It depresses him, and he becomes depressive, depressive position. This depression, Klein believes that the two positions continue throughout life, by the way. This depression is a reaction of fear and anxiety. Remember how we started this lecture? Trauma leads to anxiety and depression. The infant feels guilty at his own rage. He's guilty. He's raging. He's frustrated. His impulse is out of control, but he also feels very guilty. And he feels anxious. He's afraid that his aggression will harm the object and eliminate the source of good things. At this stage, the only object he knows, the primary object is mother. The infant experiences the loss of his own omnipotence. Since now the object is outside his self. The infant wishes to erase the results of his own aggression by making the object whole again. Make America great again. By recognizing the wholeness of the other objects, the infant comes to realize and to experience his own wholeness. The ego reintegrates. Ironically, this trauma of integrating good and bad in the same object, which leads to depression, also leads to reintegration. We need to go through this phase. Traumatic as it may be, in order to become whole again. If the object out there is whole, good and bad, I am whole. Good and bad, I don't need to worry so much about the bad parts in me. If mommy is bad and good, I can be bad and good. No problem there. I can reintegrate. But the transition from the paranoid schizoid position to the depressive position is by no means smooth, nor is it assured. Excess anxiety and envy can delay this transition or prevent it altogether. Envy, what is envy? Envy seeks to destroy all the good objects so that other people don't have them.  It therefore, it hinders, envy hinders the split between the good and the bad breasts. Envy destroys the good object, but leaves intact, untouched, the persecutory, bad object. Moreover, envy does not allow reintegration, reparation. Climb calls it reparation. It's her job. Envy doesn't allow reintegration to the place. The more whole the object, the more complete the object, the greater the destructive envy. And so envy feeds on its own outcomes. The more envy, the less integrated the ego. The weaker and more inadequate the ego and the more reason for envy in the other object out there, envy other people. So the more you envy, the less accomplished you are. The more you envy, the more damaged you are. The more envy, the more dysfunctional you are. The more envy, the more envious you are, the less integrated you are, even as a child, even as a baby. And that's real reason to envy people because they are okay. They are whole, they are complete, they are accomplished, they are integrated, you are not. You've been destroyed and consumed by your own envy, which is good reason to envy other people who had not been destroyed and consumed by their own envy. Both the narcissist and schizoid are examples of development arrested, owing to envy and other transformations of aggression. Let's consider pathological narcissism. Envy is one of the diagnostic criteria of narcissistic personality disorder. It is the hallmark of narcissism. It's a prime source of what is known as narcissistic rage. The schizoid itself, fragmented, weak, primitive, is intimately connected with narcissism via envy. Narcissists prefer to destroy themselves and to deny themselves any pleasure rather than endure someone else's happiness, wholeness, and triumph. The narcissist fails his exams in order to frustrate the teacher that he both adores and envies. The narcissist aborts his therapy in order to not give the therapist a reason to feel gratified and superior. By self-defeating, self-trushing, and self-destructing, narcissists deny the worth of other people.  I hurt you by hurting myself. I took away your price position. If the narcissist fails in therapy, it means his analyst is inept and no reason to envy him. If the narcissist destroys himself by consuming drugs, it means his parents are less than perfect, blameworthy, should feel guilty and bad, and there's no reason to envy them. One cannot exaggerate the importance of envy as a motivating power in the narcissist's life. The psychodynamic connection is obvious. Envy is a rage reaction, an aggressive reaction, to not controlling, not owning, not possessing, not having, not engulfing, not enmeshing the good desired object. Narcissists defend themselves against this assiduous, corroding sensation by pretending that they do control, they do possess, they do engulf and own the good object. It's a pretension, it's a piece of fiction, it's fame, it's a confabulation, not to say a lie. These are the narcissist's grandiose fantasies of omnipotence and omniscience. It's part of his grandiosity. He tries to avoid envy. It tries to avoid envy by subsuming the good object, making the good object a part of himself so he doesn't need to envy the good object, because he cannot stand envy. Envy kills him, destroys him and drives him to self-destruction.   But in doing this, in going through this act of merging and fusing with the potential object of envy, wine, red wine, the narcissist must deny the existence of any good outside himself. If there's something good outside the narcissist, he needs to envy it. He will envy it, so he needs to deny it. Nothing good outside me. The narcissist defends himself against the rage, against his all-consuming envy by solipsistically and counterfactually claiming to be the only good object in the world. This is an object that cannot be heard by anyone except the narcissist, and therefore is immune to the narcissist threatening annihilating envy. Put simply, narcissist is not likely to envy himself if he is the only good object in the world. In order to refrain from being owned by anyone, being consumed and subsumed by anyone, in order to refrain from, to avoid self-destruction in the hands of his own envy, the narcissist reduces other people to non-entities, that's the narcissistic solution, or he completely avoids all meaningful contact with other people, and that is the schizoid solution. The suppression of envy is at the core of the narcissist being. If the narcissist fails to convince himself, his self, that he is the only good object in the universe, the narcissist is bound to be exposed to his own murderous envy. If there are others out there who are better than him, he envies them, he lashes out at them ferociously, uncontrollably, madly, hatefully, spitefully, he tries to eliminate them. If someone tries to get emotionally intimate with the narcissist, she threatens the grandiose belief that no one but the narcissist can possess the good object, and the good object is the narcissist. The inner dialogue of the narcissist is this, I'm the only good object in the world, and I'm the only owner of this good object. Am I not lucky? Ain't I the luckiest guy on earth? I own the only good object in the whole universe, and now she comes and she thinks presumptuously and impertinently that she can own this good object or that we can share ownership on this good object which is me. She deserves to be punished for this impertinence. She deserves, I need to show her her mistake in a way that is unequivocal. Only the narcissist can own himself. Only he can have access to himself. Only he can possess himself. This is the only way to avoid seething envy and certain self annihilation. Perhaps it is clear now why narcissists react as raving madmen to anything, however minute, however remote that seems to threaten their grandiose fantasies, because their grandiose fantasies are the only protective barrier between themselves and their own lethal seething envy.  It's like the famous, you know, race for Africa during colonial times. Everyone was trying to get a piece of Africa. She's trying to get a woman who gets close to the narcissist. She's trying to get a piece of the narcissist and this is going to provoke war. There is nothing new in trying to link narcissism to schizophrenia. Freud did it in his seminal essay on narcissism in 1914. Klein's contribution was the introduction of immediately postnatal internal objects. Schizophrenia, Klein proposed, was a narcissistic, an intense relationship with internal objects, such as fantasies or images, including fantasies of grandeur, of grandiosity. Klein proposed a new language in effect. Freud suggested a transition from primary, object-less narcissism, self-directed libido. There are no objects, just me. I love only myself. He suggested a transition from this phase to object relations, object-directed libido. Others do exist. I'm going to love them. Klein suggested a transition from internal objects to external objects and in this sense, of course, I'm a Kleinian. While Freud thought that the denominator common to narcissism and schizoid phenomena is a withdrawal of libido from the world, Klein suggested that it was a fixation on an early phase of relating only to internal objects. But is it a real difference? Or is it semantic? I'm going to read to you from Greenberg and Mitchell, Object Relations and Psychoanalytic Theory, Harvard University Press, 1983. The term narcissism tends to be employed diagnostically by those proclaiming loyalty to the drive model, Otto Kanberg, Edith Jacobson, for example, and by mixed model theories such as Kohut who are interested in preserving a tie to drive theory. So narcissism is a term used by drive theorists, theoreticians, psychologists who believe in drives. Schizoid tends to be employed diagnostically by adherents of relational models, fair bear, gun trip, who are interested in articulating their break with drive theory. These two differing diagnoses and accompanying formulations are applied to patients who are essentially similar by theories who start with very different conceptual premises and ideological affiliations. What these people are saying, and mind you they are top level scholars, what they were saying is that narcissism is just another name for schizoid and schizoid is another name for narcissism, depending which theory you start with. Klein in effect said that drives, example the libido, drives are relational, they're relational flows, drives flow from you to someone, or to something. A drive is the mode of relationship between an individual and his objects, internal objects or external objects, and so a retreat from the world according to Freud into internal objects as postulated by object relations theories, the British school, fair bear and gun trip, this retreat from the world into internal objects, that is the drive. That's a good description of drive, because the energy, the libido is redirected at internal objects, that's a way to reconcile as the British did, fair burn and gun trip and others, it's a way to reconcile drive and relational models by saying that a drive is simply the flow into objects, the flow from you to objects, internal or external, drives are orientations to external or internal objects, narcissism is an orientation, a preference even, that's why I keep saying that narcissism is in many ways a choice, it's a preference orientation towards internal objects, the very definition of schizoid phenomena as well, and to some extent psychosis, hyperreflection will come to it, this is why narcissists feel empty, fragmented, unreal, diffuse, it is because their ego is still split, it's never been integrated, they had withdrawn from the world of external objects, they live only inside themselves, with internal objects, when they come across an external object, you, they immediately convert you into an internal object via the snapshotting process. Canback identifies these internal objects with which the narcissist maintains a special relationship with the idealized grandiose images of the narcissist's parents, he believes that the narcissist's very ego, his self-representation, had fused with the parental images, which are idealized, can do no wrong, perfectly good, fair burn's work, even more than Kernberg by the way, and not to mention Kohut's work, all these integrate all these insights into a coherent framework, Guntrip elaborated on this framework and together they created one of the most impressive theoretical bodies in the history of psychology, fair burn internalized client's insights that drives object-orientated and their goal is a formation of relationships and not primarily the attainment of pleasure, pleasurable sensations of the means to achieve relationships, they encourage relationships, they provide you with an incentive of sorts to form relationships, but the core, the main goal is relationships, the ego does not seek to be stimulated or to be pleased and to find the right good supporting object, to find the right good supporting object is the main goal, so yes the ego can be stimulated, yes the ego can be pleased but it is in order to find the right good supporting object and to establish a relationship with it, the infant is fused with his primary object, the mother, life is not about using objects for pleasure under the supervision of the ego and superego as Freud had suggested before he himself had changed his mind, recanted in many ways, life is about separate, separate, it's about differentiate, individuate and achieving independence from the primary object, mother and the initial state of fusion with it, dependence on internal objects is narcissism, Freud's post narcissistic, anaclitic phase of life can be either dependent, immature or mature, the newborn's ego is looking for objects with which to form relationships, inevitably some of these objects, some of these relationships frustrate the infant, disappoint the infant, this is life early on, the infant compensates for these setbacks, for this disillusionment, disappointment and disenchantment by creating compensatory internal objects, the initially unitary ego fragments into a growing group of internal objects, think about it this way, every time there is a disappointment, every time there's a frustration, the infant generates an internal object which is not frustrating and not disappointing as a way to balance the emotions and so gradually there are many many many many internal objects where there used to be a single ego, it reminds me of the many worlds theory in the interpretation of quantum mechanics where every decision and every action you make creates a new separate universe with a copy of you, so it's the same with the infant according to Klein at least and some of the object relation theories, you could say that reality breaks our hearts and minds according to Febel, the ego and its objects are twinned, the ego is split in three or four according to Guntrip who introduced a fourth ego and so this leads to a schizoid state, the original Freudian libidinal ego is unitary, it's instinctual, it's needy, it's object seeking, it then fragments as a result of three typical interactions with the mother, gratification, disappointment, deprivation, the central ego idealizes the good parents, it is conformist, it's obedient, the anti-libidinal ego is a reaction to frustrations, it is rejecting, harsh and satisfying, dead set against one's natural needs, the libidinal ego is the seat of cravings, desires and needs, it is active in that it keeps seeking objects to form relationships with, Guntrip added another ego which he called the regressed ego which is the true self in cold storage, the lost heart of the personal self, Febren's definition of psychopathology is therefore quantitative, how much of the ego is dedicated to relationships with internal objects rather than external objects like real people, in other words how fragmented how schizoid is the ego, to achieve a successful transition from focusing on internal objects to seeking external objects, the child needs to have the right parents, in Winnicott's parlance the good enough mother, not perfect, good enough, the child internalizes the bad aspects of his parents in the form of internal bad objects and then proceeds to suppress them together, twinned with portions of the ego, if the parent is dead, dead mother like Andrei Green, the parent is withholding, harsh, abusive, narcissistic, selfish, immature, parentifies the child, etc, etc, breaches the child boundaries, does not allow the child to form his own boundaries, doesn't allow the child to separate to individuate, doesn't allow the child to explore the world, stunts the child's growth, personal autonomy, etc, etc, etc, if the parent is dysfunctional in any of these senses, the number of bad objects, bad internal objects will outweigh the number of good internal objects and we have a problem then, it's known as psychopathology and so the parents become part of the child, it's a repressed part but it's a critical part. The more bad objects, the bigger the number of bad objects repressed, the less ego is left for healthy relationships with external objects. According to Fairbent, the source of all psychological disturbances is in these schizoid phenomena, later developments, such as the edipus complex and whatever, the less crucial. Fairbent and Guntrip think that if a person is too attached to his compensatory internal objects, he finds it hard to mature psychologically. Matureing is about letting go, by the way, generally, letting go of mommy, letting go of internal objects as well. Some people just don't want to mature, they don't want to grow up, they're reluctant to do so, they're ambivalent about it, they want to remain children forever, the Peter Pan syndrome, puer a eternus. This reluctance, this withdrawal to an internal world of representations, internal objects, broken ego, this is narcissism, it's a good description of narcissism. Narcissists simply don't know how to beat themselves because they don't have a self. Their self is broken, fragmented, disunitary, and a big part of it is false and projected. They don't know how to be and act independent while managing their relationships with other people. Both Otto Kernberg and Franz Kohut contended that narcissism is somewhere between neurosis and psychosis. Kernberg thought that it was a borderline phenomenon on the verge of psychosis, where the ego is completely shattered. In this respect, Kernberg more than Kohut identifies narcissism with schizoid phenomena and with schizophrenia. This is not the only difference between them, but it's a crucial one. They also disagree on the developmental locus of narcissists. Kohut thinks that narcissism is an early phase of development, fossilized and doomed to be repeated, a repetition compulsion, while Kernberg maintains that the narcissistic self is pathological from its very inception, end of story. Take it or leave it. Kohut believes that the narcissists parents failed to provide him with assurances that he does possess self. In his words, they failed to endow him with a self-object. They did not explicitly recognize the child's nascent self, the child's separate existence and boundaries. The child learned to have a schizoid split fragmented self rather than a coherent and integrated one. To Kohut, narcissism is really all pervasive at the very core of being, whether in its mature form as self-love or in its regressive infantile form as a narcissistic disorder. Kernberg regards mature narcissism also espoused by Neofroidians like Grünberger and Schössglö Schmürdel. So Kernberg regards mature narcissism, which by the way Schössglö Schmürdel has very interesting work and I'm going to focus on it in one of the next videos. Don't hold the name against... So mature narcissism said Kernberg is a contradiction in terms and oxymoron and here he conflicts directly with Jung who considered narcissism as a crucial part of the process of introversion. Kernberg observes that narcissists are already grandiose, they are already schizoid, detached, called aloof asocial at a very early age when they are three years old according to it.  In an adult such an emergence is known as psychosis and this is why Kernberg classifies narcissism as borderline, almost psychotics. We are beginning to see how everything fits into everything and what we thought of as separate disorders, they are not, they are spectrum. Even Kohut who is definitely an opponent of Kernberg's classification uses Eugene O'Neill's famous sentence in The Great God Brown, man is born broken, he lives by mending, the grace of God is gloom. Kernberg himself sees a clear connection between schizoid phenomena such as alienation in modern society, the subsequent withdrawal from society, you know, atomization and alienation in atomic societies. Kernberg sees this phenomena as narcissistic. He said these schizoid phenomena, they are actually narcissistic phenomena because they denote, they prove clearly an inability to form relationships or to make commitments or to empathize. Fred Olford in the aforementioned book, Narcissism, Socrates, Frankfurt School and Psychoanalytic Theory, he wrote, I quote, fair burn and gun trip represent the purest expression of object relations theory, which is characterized by the insight that real relationships with real people build psychic structure. Although they rarely mention narcissism, they see a schizoid split in the self as characteristic of virtually all emotional disorder. It is Greenberg and Mitchell and object relations and psychoanalytic theory who established the relevance of fair burn and gun trip by pointing out that what American analysts label narcissism, British analysts tend to call schizoid personality disorder. This insight allows us to connect the symptomatology of narcissism, feelings of emptiness and reality, alienation, emotional withdrawal with a theory that sees such symptoms as an accurate reflection of the experience of being split off from a part of oneself. That narcissism is such a confusing category is in large part because its drive theoretic definition, the libidinal catechesis of the self, in a word self love, seems far removed from the experience of narcissism as characterized by a loss of or split in the self. How can you have self love if you have no self? Fair burns and gun trips view of narcissism as an excessive attachment of the ego to internal objects. If resulting in various splits in the ego necessary to maintain these attachments, this view allows us to penetrate this confusion. Although I must say that it's somewhat analogous to Freud's narcissistic as opposed to object love. The innovation, the new thinking here is not as new as it sounds. Okay, all of us know lone wolves, you know, recluses, hermits, asocial by inclination or asocial as an ideology. I'm rejecting society, I'm rejecting the world. But what about the lone wolf narcissist? The narcissist false self requires constant doubts of narcissistic supply, attention. The narcissist's sense of entitlement, innate superiority, they collide painfully with his unmitigated dependence on other people for the regulation of his labile sense of self worth and the maintenance of his grandiose fantasies. Narcissists who are also psychopaths, antisocial, narcissists who are also schizoids, they choose to avoid the constant hurt and injuries entailed by this conflict. And they do this by withdrawing from society, physically, as well as psychologically. They create a cocoon of self delusion, confabulated narratives, and vivid dreams of triumph and revenge. Watch my previous video. This kind of narcissists become lone wolf narcissists.  Inevitably, the lone wolf narcissist is in a constant state of deficient narcissistic supply, very much like a junkie deprived of access to his drug of choice. And this overwhelming, unquenched, vampiric hunger coupled with an almost psychotic state, they render the lone wolf narcissists very dangerous to others. His aggression often turns into outright violence. His frustration to vindictive rage, his addiction to narcissistic supply drives him to coerce people, often randomly selected, to serve as sources of adulation, filmation and support. His detachment evolves into a loss of touch with reality, cognitive deficits, and utter misjudgment of his environment and milieu. He seeks fame and celebrity by all means available to him, even by resorting to crime and terrorism. What is the schizoid existence like? Is solitude frowned upon in modern western civilization? Is it actually a logical choice, especially now given the recent developments rising anomy, disintegration of basic institutions like community and family, pandemics, crime, terrorism, isn't withdrawing and avoiding a very rational, logical, self-efficacious choice? Pure bread schizoids, you know, schizoids who are not comorbid with narcissism or any other disorder, they shrug off their disorder. They simply don't like being around people. End of story. People who are only schizoids, people who can be diagnosed only with schizoid personality disorder, resent the pathologizing of their lifestyle. They say it's a choice to remain aloof and alone and nothing wrong with it. They consider the diagnosis of schizoid personality disorder to be spurious, a mere reflection of current social coercive mores, a form of social control, culture-bound artifact. Narcissists, as usual, tend to rationalize and aggrandize their schizoid conduct. They propound the idea that being alone is the only logical choice in today's hostile, anomic and atomized world. They have an ideology. They weave an ideology around their lack of choice and lack of opportunity. So they become schizoid because they want to become schizoid. It's like pre-emptive abandonment. I'm abandoning the world before the world abandons me. The concept of individual exists only in the human species. Animals flock together or operating colonies or herds. Each member of these aggregates is an extension of the organic whole. In contra-distinction, people band and socialize only for purposes of goal-oriented cooperation or the seeking of emotional bodily rewards, solace, succor, love, sex, support. And yet in contemporary civilization, the accomplishment of most goals is outsourced to impersonal collectives such as a state or larger corporations. Everything, from food production and distribution to education, is now relegated to faceless, anonymous entities, which require little or no social interaction using modern-day technologies. Additionally, these modern-day technologies, they empower the individual, they render the individual self-sufficient, profoundly independent of others. Social distancing started long before the virus. As they have grown in complexity and expectations fed by the mass media, relationships have mutated to being emotionally unrewarding and narcissistically injurious to the point of becoming a perpetual fount of pain and unease. People enter relationships with dread. Relationships create anxiety and depression and heartbreak. Everyone knows this. No one wants it anymore. More formalized social interactions present a substantial financial and emotional risk as well. Close to half of all marriages, for instance, end in a divorce, inflicting enormous pecuniary and emotional damage, emotional deprivation on all the parties involved. The prevailing ethos of gender wars as reflected in the evolving legal milieu further serves to deter any residual predilection and propensity to team up and to bond. We have created an environment which not only is not conducive to relationships, it actively sabotages them, undermines relationships. This is an anti-relationship environment, perhaps because people make money from lonely people.  This is a vicious circle that is difficult to break. Traumatized by past encounters, past liaisons, past relationships, people tend to avoid future ones. Deeply wounded. Deeply wounded. We are all bleeding profusely. People are rendered less tolerant, more hyper vigilant, more defensive, more aggressive, even I would say paranoid. These are traits that bode ill for the capacity of people to initiate, sustain and maintain relationships. The breakdown and dysfunction of societal structures and institutions, communities and social units is masked by technologies which provide various similitudes and confabulations of social content. Social media is a social media. We all gravitate towards the delusional and fantastic universe of our own making, as we find the real one, too harsh and too hurtful to endure. Modern life is so taxing, so onerous, it's so depletes the individual scarce resources that little is left to accommodate the needs of social integrals. We don't have energy for other people. We hardly have enough energy for ourselves. Realities constructed, society and civilization have been constructed in a way that they consume the last drop of blood we have, leaving nothing to us, to ourselves and to our loved ones. People's energy, funds and where we will, has stretched to the breaking point by the often conflicting demands of mere survival in post-industrial, post-modern societies. Furthermore, the sublimation of instinctual urges to pair, libido, associate, urges to mingle and fraternize is both encouraged and rewarded, not the urges, their sublimation.  We are encouraged to substitute for them. Don't date, surf, don't talk to a real life person, talk to your Facebook friends. Substitutes exist for all social functions, including sex, pornography, including child rearing, single parenthood and all these substitutes render social institutions obsolete and superfluous. Social give and take became awkward and highly inefficient. The individual, me, has emerged as the organizing principle in human affairs, supplanting the collective us, the idolatry of the individual inexorably, ineluctably results in the malignant forms of narcissism that are so prevalent, indeed, all pervasive, wherever we look. Our world is becoming more and more narcissistic, ironically, as it becomes more and more schizoid, for a very simple reason. These are two sides, two facets, of the very, very same deleterious coin. It's a bad path we have chosen.


The best way to build a professional network here in Australia is to start in your classroom with your friends, with your lecturer, then attend conferences and workshops to connect with people who do the kind of work that you do as well. By being part of the Women's Leadership Initiative, it will help me with creating networks that will be beneficial in my roles in the future. Join clubs, meet people from your same professions to expand your skills and knowledge. Roads, guests, lecturers and also attend industry professional workshops.  From my networking engagements, I can share my knowledge with them and I can get their perspective on issues that they're facing. I can then take that and I've applied it to my own study in the area.


Hi, I'm Kelsey and I'm an organizer with CodePink's Divest from the War Machine campaign and a few years ago I also started a chapter of Food Not Bombs in San Luis Obispo, California and so Food Not Bombs is a global grassroots mutual aid movement that protests war and poverty by sharing food freely with anyone who's in need and So every Sunday we gather at a local park and share food with the community And many people have come to rely on Food Not Bombs every week But when our governor recently issued a statewide shelter-in-place order that banned social gatherings We became concerned that we might not be able to continue sharing food with people But in these times of uncertainty and vulnerability we knew that now more than ever we needed to support our community so we got creative and We are now bagging up the food in lunch bags for people to pick up and take with them rather than gather So we're packaging food such as sandwiches burritos Fruit bread anything we can get our hands on we're putting them in lunch bags So people can pick them up, but we're encouraging that people don't gather and keep a safe social distance we're all wearing gloves and masks for the food prep and the drop-off and We just know that now is not the time to stop providing for each other because this current crisis It's highlighting all of the misplaced national priorities that Code pink and Food Not Bombs have been protesting for years for decades The fact that Waller tax dollars are funneled into the US war machine year after year Public health infrastructure is neglected and people are going hungry So now is the time to start providing for each other to safely come together and Organize mutual aid efforts and to grow a local peace economy


With Danny Kaye still overseas entertaining the GIs in the Pacific, Jack Benny, Eddie Cantor, Ed Gardner in Duffy's Tavern, and tonight George Burns and Gracie Allen Yes, it's George and Gracie with Bill Goodwin and the music of Meredith Wilson and his orchestra George won't give you the money. Not a penny. I've used up my budget I even used up my mad money. Gosh, I didn't know married women had mad money Well, I call it mad money. My husband went mad and gave me five dollars And that's gone too, huh? Yes. Well, I sent it to my poor Uncle Tim so he could get himself some glasses Oh, that was nice. Yes. Uncle Tim got tired of drinking out of bottles I sure would like to lend you the money for the hat, Gracie, but I'm broke too Oh, Meredith, shame. You should have some money saved up It was two months ago that George auditioned you and you've been on our program ever since I know. I wonder how much longer I have to audition before he starts paying me Well, George is a little slow making up his mind I remember when he auditioned me about ten years ago I was awfully worried at first You were? Yes, but no more. I'm sure he's going to hire me I hope he hires me too Well, I guess we both got a problem, Meredith Yeah But I've just got to get that new fall hat Can't you think of some way I can get the money out of George? Well, Gracie, you're Irish. Why don't you try a little Blarney? You mean flattered a little rascal? Well, sure Well, maybe you're right. Flattery won't work on any red-blooded man Yeah, it might even work on George Here he comes Good morning, Meredith Good morning, George Good morning, Gracie George, don't move Huh?   Yes Oh, that's good Uh, George No, you can't have a new hat Flattery will get you no place I was telling the truth, wasn't I, Meredith?  No I like the other way better Well, I was getting someplace Hi, folks Mind if I sit down for a minute, I'm a little shaky What's the matter, Bill? Well, I was driving over here and I had a terrible accident Oh, my goodness Was it bad, Bill? Well, it was awful, George I was driving along, see? And there was a beautiful girl standing on the street corner So I swung over to the curb and said Hi, George, just hop in Well, what happened then? She didn't hop in, must have been an accident Well, I thought you were hurt Yeah, I'm disappointed, too Say, I didn't know you had a car, Bill Well, it isn't mine, George It belongs to Danny Kaye And he asked me to keep it while he's on his USO tour Oh, gee, that Danny Kaye has such a wonderful personality And so charming and so talented Daddy does all right with the girls, too Oh, you're not kidding, Gracie They mobbed the guy When I took him to the station, thousands of women crowded around him and grabbed him They shook him and said, ooh, Danny Danny, introduce us to Bill Goodwin Oh, brother But kids about this... Oh, brother Oh, brother But kids about this car at Danny's, I've got a little problem No garage to keep it in Could I keep it in yours? Well, could we... could we use it now and then ourselves? Well, sure, why not Oh, that would be wonderful Our car's in the shop being repaired Really? What's wrong with it? Well, the other day I had a letter to mail So I drove into the post office Yeah? We're in the post office That's all you just drove into the post office Well, that's the deadest thing I ever heard Gracie, I hope you'll be more careful with Danny's car Don't worry I'll do all the driving myself and I've never even dent an offender Well, that's fine, George When Danny left, I promised him I'd take care of two things His movie contract with Goldwin and his car I'm on my way over to talk to Goldwin now So let's at least leave him a car to come home to Oh, my, it'll be fun to have a nice car like Danny K's to ride in, won't it, dear? Yes Let's take a ride tonight Just you and me and the moonlight on a dark country road I'll snuggle up real close and put my new hat on your shoulder There won't be any new hat But I only wanted for your sake so that people will notice me I want them to say, there goes the wife of that clever, handsome, smart George Burns That witty George Burns Elegant George Burns No hat No hat, no Because you always get such ridiculous, outlandish hat I do not You do too What would you say if I came home with a derby that had a flagpole sticking through the crown and two toy jeeps racing around the brim? Oh, George, that sounds darling, where did you see it? At Newman Oh, I see something What did you do? Well, I deliberately flabbered you to try and get a new hat I feel cheap and ashamed of myself Oh, don't feel bad It was a low mean vulgar thing to do Oh, honey I hate myself for such sneaking, underhanded, vile trickery I didn't mind I'll tell you something, it almost worked One more compliment than I'd have given in You're incredibly handsome, George That's no way to get things You're right, George Flattery never works Now, let's say, for example, I wanted to ask you to let me use Danny Kay's car this morning Don't waste your breath No, I'm not asking for it, but if I were asking for it I'd forget flattery and just appeal to your intelligence Right Because you're too clever for flattery Certainly The way to appeal to a busy brainy man like you is to just ask for the car honestly And you'll say, well, sure, Gracie, take it Absolutely Oh, thank you, George Now, wait a minute You promised Look, honey, I wouldn't mind if you're a good driver, but you're not Harry Morton next door says you ruined his elm tree backing out of the driveway Oh, that's a man for you, exaggerating I ran over one teensy, tiny little branch clear at the top of the tree How could you run over a branch at the top of the tree? The tree was lying across our driveway Well, didn't you see it? How could I? It wasn't lying there until I hit it Oh, fine, and you want to borrow Danny Kay's car? But I only want to do a little shopping I won't drive more than ten blocks Shopping for what?  Now, never mind being flipped Just see that you have Danny Kay's car back here without a scratcher All right, dear We finished our shopping, Meredith I parked the car right over here Gosh, Gracie, how did you ever manage to work George for the car and the money, too? Well, I told George I wanted to buy some cherries and grapes and a pork roast But you didn't buy those things I bought everything but the pork roast Couldn't find a hat but the pork roast on it Gee, you sure are a shrewd girl, Gracie Yeah, I know There to George With my looks, he has every right to expect dumbness I have to see us get home without a scratch on Danny's car Yeah Hide into us Gracie, you backed into it And you bent our back fender till it looks like a pretzel Hello, Missy Burns, are you having trouble? Oh, hello, Mr. Postman You two seem to be on a bender I made a little joke But I guess you're not in the mood for levity Well, I'm afraid not, Mr. Postman You think there's much damage done? Well, your rear bumper is out of shape If you'll pardon the expression Well, did I hurt the other car? A little, but don't worry about it I know the old bitty who owns it She's a sourpuss But I should pay for any damage No, let her husband pay for it Anyone who'd marry an old battle ax like that deserves to be stuck Well, all right Who does the car belong to? My wife Goodbye, Missy Burns Well, Gracie, I backed Danny's car into the garage for you Oh, thank you, Bill Anything to keep George from seeing that back fender I'm terribly sorry about it Well, it can be fixed, Gracie But of course, when George finds out, he'll hit the road Yeah, well, this has taught me a lesson I hereby solemnly swear that I will never lie Or deceive my husband again as long as I live Unless I'm positive it'll work Hey, here comes George up the walk now Uh-oh, he's here for the car What'll I do? Well, calm down, Gracie Maybe I can square this whole thing for you I got a little idea Say, Gracie, who backed the car into the garage? Well, I did Didn't I, Bill? Oh, sure Really? I didn't know you were that good Oh, yes, I backed into lots of things that you don't know about Well, I'm glad you're improving I'm going to drive down to the office now Goodbye, dear Well, goodbye Oh, Bill, what if he sees the fender? Well, leave everything to me, Gracie Oh, wait a minute, George George, uh, do you mind dropping me at Hollywood and Vine? I got to pick up a cute little girl there at 3 o'clock Bill, I don't go to Hollywood and Vine I go to Wilsh and La Brea Well, okay, I'll pick one up there at 3 o'clock Get in, Bill Hold it, George Hold it What's the matter? You're running right into the side of the garage Back up Huh?   Is there maybe some way that you could make Gracie believe that she did this? What? You want me to stoop to deceit and trickery? Well, I just... You want me to make someone who didn't do this believe they did? Well, I...  You want to end up now? Meredith Wilson and his orchestra Tonight, he presents his chiffon arrangement of If I Love You It's your Gracie about it driving If she finds out I smashed this fender on my dead duck Well, now, calm down, George I'm the only one who knows I'm the only one who could tell her You wouldn't tell her, would you, Bill? Would you, Bill? Look at me Bill, old pal George, I've been thinking Maybe we should make a few changes in your radio program Well, just minor changes For example, you know the opening where I say George Burns and Gracie Allen Yes Well, from now on, that'll be It's Bill Goodwin time Starring Bill Goodwin Now, Bill Yes, sir, folks Presenting that handsome, talented young star Of stage, screen, radio, and television Dimples Goodwin 30 minutes of solid commercial Well, Bill, I'm not going to let you Or anybody else take over my program I've worked hard to get where I am I struggle, I stop, but I finally made it I achieved success You married Gracie I married Gracie, no Well, what if I tell her about the fender? Well, I'm going to tell her myself If she loves me, she'll forgive me Go and write her now and confess everything Gracie, I've been watching the garage Through the kitchen window and George didn't leave He's heading for the house right now Maybe he saw the fender and I smashed Oh, there'll be an awful fight if he did I think I'd better leave, Gracie I might be tempted to stick up for the week of sex Let George look out for himself The best thing for me is to just confess everything If he loves me, he'll forgive me Gracie, I'd like to... George, before you say anything Don't you think that when married people do something that other married people don't like married people should forgive married people especially if they're married We are married, aren't we, George?  Well, you are when it fits in with what I'm saying Well, I'll make my confession, then you make your confession All right I smashed the fender on Danny Kay's car Well, now for mine, I snagged I backed up and smashed the fender And now I feel better because I've confessed and you'll forgive me Like the sound of that You need to let me drive the car and then going out on a wild joy ride But I only... Tearing through traffic at 80 miles an hour But all I... Locking down widows and orphans Okay, okay, you've got me over a barrel Uh-uh, I got you over a hat box Hat box? That's right, remember the hat you said I couldn't get? Yeah Well, I'm keeping it Oh, so you already had it? Now see me Ashing through red lights, bumping into greyhound buses Okay, keep the hat Oh, sure, now get a dress to match it Okay Gloves to match the dress Aren't you carrying this a little too far? Waving at blondes, throwing empty bottles into the street Get the gloves, get the gloves Match them Smashing the car so badly that even the smiling Irishman wouldn't buy it Look here, all I did was... Well, answer the door, Barney O'Field Yes, dear Well, hurry up, Los Angeles driver Yes, dear Good noon, Mr. Burns Here's your mail Thanks, Mr. Postman My goodness, you sound low Having trouble with your wife? Yes Me too Women are beasts, aren't they? But we men are so gullible Along comes a pretty face and we're hooked Yeah Come to think of it, I haven't even got that excuse Oh, well, I guess you're happy that your wife wasn't hurt in the accident this morning The what? Oh, it wasn't serious She just backed into my wife's car and crumpled your fender Gracie crumpled the fender? Yes, I always say that it takes a woman to be a woman driver You're so right Well, goodbye, Mr. Postman Goodbye, Mr. Burns Remember, keep smiling Mr. Postman Well, as I was saying, I think I'll get it for a coat too Maybe a red fox... That's right He just delivered the mail, huh?  Yes, dear And that hat goes back to the store Goes back Yes All right, dear, if you say so Oh, honey, honey, don't cry I can't stand to see you cry All right You'll dry your tears, you can keep the hat Are you really? Well, sure, honey Now, why didn't I think of this method in the first place? I've been had it I'm George and Gracie, Meredith and myself Spent a lot of fun pinch-hitting for Danny K. tonight Night, everyone