Hi there, my name is Monty Johnson. I teach philosophy at the University of California, San Diego and in this video I'm going to talk about Aristotle's politics, book 3, the first part on the state and the citizen and on the kinds of constitution. Now to give an overall outline of book 3, the first five chapters are devoted to the fundamental definitional issues of what is the state and what is the citizen. Chapters 6 to 8 deal with the various kinds of constitution or government. 9 to 13 deal with political justice, equality and the claims to rule, while chapters 14 to 18 deal with kingship and the rule of law. But this isn't just a random grab bag of topics. Each successive topic builds on the previous ones. So after the definition of the state and the citizen, it becomes apparent that there are many different kinds or classes of citizens, for example, rich and poor. And as a result of there being different kinds of citizens given different access to the offices of state, there are different kinds of constitution or government. And these different kinds of constitution or government embrace different concepts of equality and political justice and rest on different bases of claims to rule. And so in the end, Aristotle considers the specific claims to rule and concepts of political justice and equality that exist in a soul rulership or kingship, and he discusses the relative merits of obeying a person like a king versus obeying the law and the comparative advantages of the rule of law. Now, throughout my discussion, I've been using the translation of Benjamin Joe it the Oxford translation published in 1921, although I've occasionally modified or adapted the translation for clarity. So let's begin where Aristotle begins. What is a state and who is a citizen, as he points out, the one who would inquire into the essence and attributes of various kinds of constitutions or governments. That is, Palateas in Greek, must first of all determine what is a state. And in Greek, the question is, what is a polis? Now, polis is sometimes translated city, sometimes translated say state, sometimes translated city state, and it's related to some other terms that Aristotle immediately invokes and glosses. So the statesman or politikos or legislator, the nomothetes is concerned entirely with the state or polis, especially the politikos because the root of the word statesman just means person who is concerned with the polis. And a constitution or government of Palatea is an arrangement of the inhabitants of a state or polis. But Aristotle points out a state is a composite, like any other whole made up of many parts. These are the citizens who compose it. It's evident then that we must begin by asking who is the citizen or Palateas. Okay, so the fundamental way that the state will be defined in fact depends on how the citizen or Palateas is defined. Now, Aristotle first considers some flawed definitions of the Palateas or citizen, and this is in chapters one and two. So a citizen isn't merely someone who lives in a certain place, for resident aliens and slaves live in the same place, but they aren't citizens. So according to Aristotle, resident aliens, deprived citizens and exiles are all like incomplete citizens. They're not full citizens. And of course, we don't consider them full citizens either. Now, a citizen is not just someone who has the rights of suing other people or being protected when sued by them. And that is because such a right may be enjoyed under the provisions of a treaty or by a resident alien. Again, a resident alien isn't a citizen, but does have rights of suing and being sued. And we could extend these rights by treaty anywhere outside of the state or the city, and we wouldn't thereby deform or change the constitution of the state.  In fact, and in practice, a citizen is defined as one to be one of whom both the parents are citizens, or sometimes we go even further back and say that you have to have two or three more ancestors that were citizens. And Aristotle admits that this is a short and practical definition, but it doesn't get to the fundamental issue because we ask the further question, how did this ancestor, how did these parents become citizens? How is this third or fourth ancestor if we push it back that far? How did they come to be a citizen? The words born of a father or mother who is a citizen cannot possibly apply to the first inhabitants or founders of a state. So we have to go back to the first inhabitants or founders of a state to determine the essence of what is a citizen, a polities of a polis. So Aristotle prefers a functional definition of both citizen and it turns out the state. So he says, quote, but the citizen whom we are seeking to define is a citizen in the strictest sense against whom no such exception can be taken. And his special characteristic is that he shares in the administration of justice and in offices. So the citizen is defined by their functions of helping administrate courts and the offices of the state. The citizen of necessity differs under each kind of constitution or government. And our definition, he says, is best adapted to the citizen of a democracy, but not necessarily to other states such as oligarchies or aristocracies, which may exclude some citizens from participating in those offices or in the administration of justice. But the most straightforward definition, he who has the power to take part in the deliberative or judicial administration of any state or polis is said to be a polite or citizen of that state. And so a state, a polis just is a body of citizens, he says, that suffice for the purposes of life. And later he qualifies that and explains how the state exists not just for the purposes of life in the sense of survival, but for the sake of the good life. And of course, there are many different conceptions of what the good life is. And that's part of the reason why there are different kinds of constitution. But if according to the definition just given, someone shares in the government, in the administration of the courts or the offices or both, then they were citizens. And so this is a better definition than the one according to ancestry, because we can explain why the first citizens of any state were citizens. And that is because they participated functionally in the deliberative or judicial administration of that state. Now, there's a difficulty about revolutionary states and their citizens and the identity of their citizens and the identity of those states. So Aristotle says there's a greater difficulty in the case of those who have been made citizens after a revolution, as by Kleisthenes at Athens after the expulsion of the tyrants. For he enrolled in tribes, many medics, both strangers and slaves. So medics are resident aliens, both foreigners and slaves were allowed to participate in judicial and other offices of the state by the Democratic actions of Kleisthenes. And so there's a question, should these slaves and strangers and medics be considered citizens? And Aristotle says, well, the doubt in these cases is not who is a citizen. Okay, so it's clear that if he extended to them the functional ability to participate in the offices or in the courts, then they were citizens. The question is ought to they they have been made citizens. And this is the question that all debate surrounds. Should resident aliens, manual laborers, slaves, foreigners and so forth to what extent ought they to be citizens, which again is the question to what extent ought they to participate in the judicial and deliberative administration of the state. This relates to a further question, whether a certain act is or not the act of a state, because if the state fundamentally changes its form, changes its kind of constitution, you can ask, is that still the same state? As Aristotle says, what ought not to be is what is false. Now there are some who hold office and yet ought not to hold office, whom we describe as ruling but ruling unjustly. And the citizen was defined by the fact of his holding some kind of rule or office. He who holds a judicial or legislative office fulfills our definition of a citizen. It is evident therefore that the citizens about whom the doubt has arisen must be called citizens. So whether or not we think they ought to be citizens and whether or not they ought to participate in judicial and deliberative administration of the state in so far as they do, they are citizens of that state. But again, what are the identity conditions of the state itself? We may know who the citizens are by who actually participates in the political offices and the courts, but under what conditions does the state say the same? So if the constitution changes, for example from an oligarchy or tyranny into a democracy, does it remain the same state? And Aristotle relates this to a further general difficulty on what principle shall we ever say that the state is the same or different? Of course, not just on the basis of it being the same place. That would be a very superficial view, which considered only the place in its inhabitants. For the soil and the population may be separated and some of the inhabitants may live in one place and some in another, but it still constitutes a state if they both administrate the same judicial and deliberative bodies. A further related difficulty. When are men who are living in the same place to be regarded as a single city? What is the limit? It's not just an issue of being surrounded by the same city wall, because you might surround all of the Peloponnes by a wall and some so called cities like Babylon are so large that they seem to have the compass of an entire nation, not just a city. And then a further related difficulty to this. Again, shall we say that while the race of inhabitants as well as their place of abode were made the same, the city is also the same, although the citizens are always dying and being born. As we say that rivers and fountains are the same, although the water is always flowing away and coming again. Or shall we say that the generations of men like the rivers are the same, but that the state changes. So actually a classic metaphysical issue about the identity conditions of anything, including a body of water like a river always being in flux. You can't step twice or maybe even once into the same river. Can you inhabit the same state? Ever. What makes it the same state since all of its citizens are constantly changing, either because they're dying or because new ones of them are being admitted or demoted as citizens. Here's Aristotle's solution. He says, what determines the identity of a state is its constitution. And he draws comparisons to a chorus and to musical mode. Since the state is a partnership and is a partnership of citizens in a constitution when the form of government changes and becomes different, then it may be supposed that the state is no longer the same. Just as a tragic differs from a comic chorus, although the members of both may be identical. So again, a functional definition, you could have the same actors performing quite different works, one a tragedy, the other a comedy. And we would describe the performance as being different according to these ends tragic or comic. And what determines the identity of the performance is not just the members that make it up, but whether, for example, it ends in a wedding or a funeral will determine whether it's a comedy or a tragedy. And another comparison to a musical mode in this manner, he says, we speak of every union or composition of elements is different when the form of their composition alters, for example, a scale containing the same sounds is said to be different, accordingly as the Dorian or Phrygian mode is employed. So again, same basic elements of sound, but arranged differently or divided differently, we have different scales or different modes. So we look to the end point and the use and the result of those modes to determine their identity and name them accordingly, not to the identical elements of sound that make them up. So if this is true in this analogy works, then it's evident that the sameness of the state consists chiefly in the sameness of the Constitution, and it may be called or not called by the same name, whether the inhabitants are the same or entirely different. So again, you might say, for example, that the United States of America is the same state, because it has had the same Constitution, and until the Constitution is overthrown and replaced with another one, it will remain the same state. But once it is overthrown and replaced with another one, then it will have to be considered different, even if the same citizens exist in it and have the same functional role in its offices and courts. And Aristotle points out it is quite another question, whether a state ought or ought not to fulfill engagements when the form of government changes. So if there's a revolution, should they fulfill agreements made by the previous kind of Constitution, he doesn't give an answer or have an elaborate discussion of that question since his goal here is to establish the identity conditions for a state. The next question is whether the virtue of a good person, so an ethically good person's virtue, and the virtue of a good citizen, a citizen of some state, whether that's the same. As he puts it, there's a point nearly allied to the proceeding, whether the virtue of a good man and a good citizen is the same or not. And the basic answer he seems to give, according to a number of different proofs or a number of different explanations, is that it is not the same, that the virtue of the good person and the good citizen are not usually the same. And so he draws an analogy to sailors. Citizens like sailors are members of a community. Sailors have different functions. For example, there are rowers, pilots, lookouts, and their virtue as sailors relates to their particular function. So it's different to be a good rower than to be a good pilot than to be a good lookout person, etc. But all of these have the same common goal, safety and navigation. So citizens have different functions, but they also have a common goal, the salvation of the community, a community which is the Constitution. So that analogy suggests that the virtue of each of those good persons will be different, but their virtues as a citizen of the community will be the same. And so the first full answer he gives is that the difference that might arise between common goals indicates that they are different. Since there are many kinds of constitution, democracies, oligarchies, aristocracies, etc., it's clear that there must be many different common goals. Because each constitution has a different common goal like promoting wealth and the power of the few for oligarchies or protecting those with freeborn status in a democracy. Those are completely different goals. Thus there must not be a single one but as many different kinds of virtue of a good citizen as there are kinds of constitution. So aristocracies, democracies, oligarchies, kingships all have different common goals. And so the good citizens in each of them will be different and so different from each other. But the good man per se, ethically good man, Aristotle says, possesses a single complete virtue, something in the ethics he just calls complete justice. Hence he now says it is evident that the good citizen need not of necessity possess the virtue which makes a good man. So the good man will always have complete justice but a good citizen for example under an oligarchy might be somebody who generates a lot of wealth. But generating a lot of wealth is not the same as perfect justice and so the virtue of a good person and of a good citizen would not be the same. He also says that specific goals differ so even under the same constitution the function or jobs of each of the citizens is different and different virtues apply to each. So the virtue of a good carpenter or a good banker is not the same as that of a good soldier or a good politician. Thus again the virtue of a good person which again is not multiple like this but singular must be different from that of a good citizen. For me to be a good citizen I have to be a good teacher or a good soldier or a good politician but that's very different from being a good person which has to do again with this singular all encompassing virtue of justice. Now he gives yet another answer to this pointing out that the virtues associated with ruling and being ruled differ. So the virtue of the good person is presumably a kind of ruling so ruling over one's slaves ruling over one's children ruling over one's wife taking your turns and ruling in the political realm etc. But the virtue of a good citizen is not just a kind of ruling but it's also a kind of being ruled and being able to be obedient when other people legitimately rule. There is a rule of another kind which is exercised over freemen and equals by birth a constitutional rule which the ruler must learn by obeying as he would learn the duties of a general or cavalry by being under the orders of a general of cavalry or the duties of a general of infantry by being under the orders of a general of infantry and by having had the command of a regiment and of a company. It has been well said that he who has never learned to obey cannot be a good commander. The two are not the same but the good citizen ought to be capable of both. He should know how to govern like a freemen and how to obey like a freemen. These are the virtues of a citizen. So the virtue of a ruler must include practical wisdom. The virtue of the ruled really need not include practical wisdom but only true opinion so that they follow the orders of the ruler that has practical wisdom. But the virtue of the good person includes the virtue of the ruler in all of these different ways that we've described. But the virtue of the good citizen includes the virtue of both the ruler and of being ruled or obeying. Thus the virtue of the good person and that of the good citizen are not the same. There is no very democratic consideration there about why the virtue theoretic account of the good person produces a different result than the theoretical account of what makes a good citizen. And what's key to the latter especially or maybe only in a democracy is not only that one has mastered various ways to rule and order other people but one has also mastered how to follow and obey them when the other rule is legitimate. But Aristotle also seems to argue that in the ideal state the virtue of a good man and a good citizen would be the same. And the crucial passage is this one. He says the same question may also be approached by another road from a consideration of the best constitution. If the state cannot be entirely composed of good men and yet each citizen is expected to do his business well and must therefore have virtue still in as much as all the citizens cannot be alike the virtue of the citizen and of the good man cannot coincide. One must have the virtue of the good citizen thus and thus only can the state be perfect but they will not have the virtue of a good man unless we assume that in the good state all the citizens must be good. So here in the local context of politics 34 the argument is used to support the conclusion that the virtue of the good citizen and the good man is not the same. But later at the very end of this book so in the next lecture in this series in politics book three chapter 18 this same argument is referred to to show that the virtue of the good man and the citizen is necessarily the same in the perfect state. It's just that this perfect state where everyone is simultaneously as good as possible doesn't actually ever come into existence. It's only a sort of ideal and it's an important ideal because it determines how people should be educated and habituated as we will see. But it is not Aristotle recognizes the fact of the matter that there is ever a situation where all citizens of a particular state are good. And yet it's possible that they it's possible to imagine that they all could be good and it's possible to train them as if all could be good and to educate them as if all could be good. Now which classes are allowed to be citizens because we've had a clear definition of citizen but that raises the question of who in fact gets to participate in the functions of state like in the courts and the assembly and the other offices. So Aristotle asks is he only a true citizen who has a share of office or is for example the manual laborer to be included if they who hold no officer deemed citizens. Then not every citizen can have this virtue of ruling and obeying for this man is a citizen and if none of the lower castes are citizens in which part of the state are they to be placed for they're not resident aliens nor are they foreigners. So manual laborers are important to the state the working class is important to the state no state could exist without them. The question is are they therefore to be considered citizens that is people who have a function in administrating the judicial or deliberative functions of the state. And Aristotle's position is that those who are merely necessary to the state are not necessarily citizens of it. So for example children are necessary to the state if the state is to have any future and foreign visitors are necessary to the state if we're to have trade for example and resident aliens and of course women are necessary to the state. And what about manual laborers and slaves they are no doubt also necessary to the state at least manual laborers if the state can exist without slavery and Aristotle does not think that it can. But surely the state cannot exist without manual laborers but again should they be citizens just on account of the fact that the state cannot exist without them. Well it depends on the kind of government so in an aristocracy manual laborers are not citizens. Why because no one Aristotle thinks can practice virtue who is living the life of a mechanic or laborer. So an aristocracy is supposedly government by the virtuous but it's not possible to cultivate virtue unless you have an extensive education. And if you're a manual laborer and so you're poor and have to work with your hands for a living then you don't have time to cultivate the virtues that afford political power in an aristocracy. In oligarchies of course these mechanics or manual laborers are also not citizens because an oligarchy is government by the rich and these people cannot be rich. But in some democracies they are allowed to be citizens. For example on the basis of weak ancestry requirements you can be a citizen if you are one or both of your parents were citizens. And you the family may have passed into poverty and so now you're manual laborers but you still meet the ancestry requirements. So you're a citizen so you're allowed to participate in the judicial and deliberative administration of the state. Now Aristotle thinks that they should be excluded so getting to the question not who is a citizen but who should be a citizen. Aristotle thinks that manual laborers and mechanics people who work with their hands should be excluded because it is impossible that they should be educated sufficiently for virtue and thus they shouldn't be given political power over other citizens. So in summary children are not considered citizens women are not considered citizens and we're not even in this country until a little more than 100 years ago slaves are not considered citizens. And in ancient Athens even manual workers were not considered citizens. So it's possible to have a democracy even without any of these participating if you give equal terms of ruling and being ruled to free born adult male people who have a high enough education and enough time to cultivate virtue. If they make decisions equally then in so far as they do you have a democracy. Now the next question Aristotle takes up is is there only one form of constitution or government or are they many. In order to answer this he digresses into a consideration of what the purpose of the state is before we said that it suffices for life but now he qualifies that the purpose is not only survival but also the good life. Quote man is by nature a political animal and therefore men even when they do not require one another's help desire to live together. Not but that they are so they are also brought together by their common interests in proportion as they severally attain to any measure of well being. This is certainly the chief end both of individuals and of states and also for the sake of mere life in which there is possibly some noble element so long as the evils of existence do not greatly over balance the good. Mankind meet together and maintain the political community and we all see that men cling to life even at the cost of enduring great misfortune seeming to find in life a natural sweetness and happiness. So the real purpose of the state is that we have something of that natural sweetness and happiness and we want not just life and liberty but the pursuit of happiness is crucial to the existence of a state. But this passage makes it clear that that doesn't have to be, for example, a rich existence. It doesn't have to have a lot of wealth. For example, it merely if it's able to provide for survival and a little bit of comfort, then that will be enough for people to want to continue on. But as he points out, a constitution is something different than this. And that's why there are several kinds of them. So a constitution is the arrangement of magistracies in a state, especially the highest of all the magistracies. The government is everywhere sovereign in the state and the constitution is in fact the government. For example, in democracies, the people are supreme, but in oligarchies the few. And therefore we say that these two forms of government are also different and so in the other cases. Now, according to Aristotle, legitimate authority, legitimate political authority is always in the common interest of both the ruler and ruled. So consider the relationship, for example, of ruler and ruled that holds between husband and wife or father and child. According to Aristotle, the husband rules over his wife, the father rules over his child, the father also the master also rules over slaves in the household. Now, according to Aristotle, each of these relationships exists for the sake of the common interest between the ruler and the ruled. So a husband's ruler for his wife isn't only for his own benefit, but is for her benefit. And a father rules over their children, for example, not letting them play in the street, not just for his own sake, but for their sake as well. And the relationship between a master and slave also exists for the exact same thing. It's like the relationship between a doctor and patient or teacher and student or coach and athlete. All of these relationships exist for the sake of the common good between the ruler and ruled. And so in politics, when the state is framed on the principle of equality and likeness, the citizens think that they ought to hold office by turns. And so sometimes ruling, sometimes being ruled. The conclusion is evident that governments which have a regard to the common interest are constituted in accordance with strict principles of justice and are therefore true forms. But those which regard only the interests of the rulers are all defective and perverted forms for they are despotic, whereas a state is a community of free men. Now, this leads to Aristotle's classification of the types of constitution. As we've just said, you can have a political arrangement where people rule in the common interests of both the rulers and the ruled. And this will be called a correct form of constitution. And we will call it a corrupt form of constitution if the rulers rule not in the common interests of the rulers and the ruled, but in the interests only of the ruler. Now, we may also distinguish soul rulers or rule by one rule by just a few people or rule by many, and there will be both a corrupt and a correct form of constitution of each of those kinds of rule. So starting with the correct form of rule by one, we call a kingship and the corrupt form of kingship is a tyranny. That is, again, rule by one in their own interest, not in the interest of the ruled. A true kingship requires that the king, though he's a sole ruler, rules not only in his own interest, but also in the interest of the subjects. Rule by a few, the correct form we call aristocracy or strength or power of the virtuous people, the corrupt form of this oligarchy, rule by the few. Aristocrats supposedly rule not only in their own interests, but also in the common interests of their subjects.  Now, as for rule by many, the most familiar form is, of course, democracy. But Aristotle considers that a corrupt form of government because he views Democrats as ruling, though they're the many, in their own interests. That is, in the interests of the poor, and so they unfairly treat and take possessions from the rich and take political power from them and redistribute it to themselves in their own interests, not in the interests of all those they rule over, including the rich. But Aristotle thinks that there is theoretically a correct form of the rule by many, and that he calls Politea, or constitutional government. Now, that name is the name of that species of government is the same as the generic name of all kinds of government, because kingships, tyrannies, aristocracies, oligarchies and democracies are also Politeas in the sense of being constitutional. But we also have a specific kind of government that we call constitutional, and that's a kind of democracy that incorporates also oligarchic, or, if you will, aristocratic elements. And so that the constitutional government rules, not only in the interests of the many poor, but also in the common interests of the few rich. And many of these points are made clear in the next chapter eight, where Aristotle explains the corrupt forms of constitution tyranny is a monarchy or soul rule, exercising the rule of a master overall political society. The monarchy is when men of property have the government in their hands and democracy the opposite when the indigent or the poor and not the men of property or the rulers.  That is when men of property have the government in their hands and rule in their own interests of the rich and not the many poor and democracy is when the poor, not men of property are rulers, but then that they rule in the interests of the poor and not in the common interests. So democracy in general is the government of many in oligarchy of the few, but of course it's theoretically possible that the many could be rich. And what if they are and they rule with this still be a democracy and what if the few just happened to be poor and they ruled with this then still be an oligarchy. Aristotle says that the real difference between a democracy and an oligarchy is poverty and wealth wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be fewer many, that's an oligarchy and where the poor rule, that's a democracy. So if you want to understand Aristotle's ancient concept of democracy, it is rule by the poor in their own interests. And it is everywhere the case that the many are poor, and the few are rich, no exception to that then or now. And so we can think of democracy as the government of the many poor and oligarchy as government of the few rich, both in their own interests. So that completes our discussion of the kinds of Constitution, why there are many different kinds of Constitution, what a Constitution is, and what a citizen, and what a state is. Thank you.


Hello, everyone, and welcome to Mentor Talks. My name is Asha Bay, and I'm joining you from the Office of Alumni Affairs in ECA at the U.S. Department of State. Our office opens the door to alumni networking, professional development, and grant opportunities. Where are you joining us from? Let us know in the comments.  This is your opportunity to connect with these leaders and mentors. Like our guest today, Carla Dirlikov-Kanalis, an exchange alumna, internationally renowned opera singer, and longtime U.S. Department of State Arts Envoy. Carla is a MesoSoprano opera singer, best known for her portrayals of Bizet's Carmen, which she has performed nearly a hundred times in more than 12 countries. Carla is also a social advocate and cultural entrepreneur. She's currently at Harvard University, serving as a 2021 Advanced Leadership Initiative Fellow, the youngest fellow in the history of the program to date. Before we get into conversation with Carla, we want to hear from you, our online viewers. What would you like to ask Carla? Post your questions in the comments. Now, let's turn to Carla. Hi, Asha. Hi, Carla, welcome. Thank you. Thank you so much for taking time out of your busy schedule to join us on Mentor Talks. Oh, I'm thrilled to be here. I really appreciate the invitation. You're welcome. Before we get to questions from our audience, we have one for you. You've been an Arts Envoy since 2005. What was it like being an Envoy last year? And what would you say is the value of making international connections through exchange? Well, Asha, ironically, last year was a really busy year for me as an Arts Envoy. And I learned a lot through the virtual programming that we were able to do. I really applaud all of the efforts of the staff at State because essentially I was able to do, I think, four different programs, one of which was a long-term program, a two-month-long program with Honduras that I don't know would have been possible in a non-virtual setting. So for me, these were among my favorite programs, even though I never got to meet folks in person, I felt like I had a lot of time during that program to get to know them and to get to know them in ways that were maybe more personal through email and through some of the assignments. So it was definitely a different experience, but one that opened my imagination to what would be possible if we can really utilize the technology that's available in particular the Honduras program was really interesting one because we created a curriculum which we called Campo de Valores, our values camp for kids. And it was an interesting challenge because the policies that I was looking at promoting for lack of a better word with the young kids were sort of anti-corruption or anti-immigration policies, but by looking at the opposite, rather than in anti, but a pro, what does it mean to be pro-citizenship? What does it mean to be a good citizen? We really developed some fascinating songs and ideas out of that program, which I hope might be utilized in some other programming. And other programs that I got to do were with Kazakhstan, Peru, and an ongoing start of the program with Montenegro. So it was fantastic. Wow, that's great. So you mainly like by doing a Zoom with people and then you get to also like do breakout rooms or connect with them that way? It's a good question. I'll return to the Campo de Valores example. So essentially we had two months for that, but the first month was with the younger kids. So every week we selected a different value. I sort of created this curricula around what does it mean to be a good citizen? Because that's something that both us as Americans and the folks I was working with as Hondurans, we both value that, right? So I think we covered on the first week integrity. We covered kindness. We covered certainly citizenship and I think discipline. I forgive me, I can't remember, but so each week we had one session and during that session we read stories and talked about this moral quality and then there was a song. And by the time it was the next week, each participant had to create their version of that song. So there was a lot of homework involved with it as well as writing assignments and so forth. So it was really kind of a continuous project even though we only met once a week through Zoom, because I was constantly getting homework and giving feedback and going back and forth with participants. We also used WhatsApp a lot. So that was really interesting to see how we can communicate more through these platforms. Cool, that's interesting to hear. So you're currently at Harvard. Can you tell us more about your fellowship project? Oh, sure, yeah, I'm really excited about this and I think it stems so deeply from my experiences as an arts envoy. I tell everyone that being an arts envoy has been life changing for me and I feel that because I got to start this program so early on in my life and my career, it set a very high standard for what a great experience would be musically and culturally and professionally. It's inspired me to start my not-for-profit but it's definitely been the reason that I applied for the fellowship at Harvard because I've seen firsthand how you can utilize and harness the power of culture to build bridges. And I've seen that through my experiences as an arts envoy. I feel that there's more we can do with that. Not just as Americans but through multilateral organization and by essentially using the power of cultural diplomacy to remind us of what we all have in common. Oftentimes we think of music as that universal language and as a musician I'll say, yes, I think that there's truth to that of course but I see this a little bit differently. I think our universal is our power to feel. We all as humans we have this capacity to feel joy or pain or sorrow or laughter and that's what unites us. And music offers us a tool to explore those feelings and explore that human condition but ultimately to me the superpower of the arts really is to open our capacity to imagine and it's through that imagination that we can potentially see a better world. See a place where we don't have the divisions whether domestically or internationally that unfortunately keep us apart more than they bring us together. And when we can imagine a way to overcome that and see how much we have in common I think that's a real superpower. And so I'm devoting my time at Harvard to exploring further ways to create programming like what I described in Honduras and to really speak with people in research what's being done with cultural diplomacy. So I'm very thankful for that opportunity. That's great. I think that leads us into one of our questions from our viewers. Earlier this year you wrote an op-ed in USA Today about a vacant post left in President Biden's cabinet. What post is that? Well, I wanna say first I did frame it in a slightly controversial or instigatorial way but that's because I think this is really important. Our country is one of very, very few countries that does not have a minister of culture or a secretary of culture or a delegated department or post for, exclusively for culture. What we do have is of course the work the amazing work that's being done at state which I feel very proud to be a part of and because I've seen the power of that work I would like to expand on that. I think it would benefit us tremendously as Americans. And the reason I wrote the op-ed was because I learned that the G20 is now created a ministerial track for culture. So all of the countries in the G20 who have a minister of culture which as I understand it are 19, they're having their cultural ministers meet and talk about this and explore ways to work together and to use that power of culture. Now, I hope that the United States will send some sort of representative but the fact that we don't have a delegated person who specializes in this who's familiar with the statistics of course the GDP statistic. We know that the cultural sector especially if it's defined as creative workers in the United States brings in a larger GDP than the agriculture sector and of course we have a department of agriculture. So I tried to make arguments both substantial economic arguments but of course arguments for my heart because it's my sector it's what I care deeply about and I see how many of my colleagues and close friends have been deeply affected by COVID that is an army of compassion. That is a huge network of underutilized artists when we have a deficit of the social values the artist can bring to the table. So I see that as a business proposition as a work proposition and something that can add great value to our country. Yeah, I agree. That's my personal opinion of course. Yeah, I was just gonna say that we've really seen artists step it up during this pandemic times. They haven't had, you know obviously people aren't going to the theater or the movies the way they used to but artists had been able to do other projects and work in other ways. We had like a grant for example where people were like poetry is like bread and they would go to different restaurants and recite poetry and the outdoor space and it was really cool. It was actually in New York where you are. Oh, I would have loved to have seen that. I think that we've seen such a beautiful recognition of the power of poetry in various ways but certainly a highlight was Amanda Gorman's poetry at the inauguration. And for me singing is that marriage of poetry and words and the power of words along with melody and music. So it's unique in music and that we really bridge those two together but that's the work that you're doing to support artists during this time. And the fact that the programming has not diminished in any way but rather it's kind of ramped up as I understand with over 400 programs from March of 19 to March of 20 or rather from March of 20 to March of 21 during that essential time of the pandemic you've really helped to support so many artists through this time. So I for one, I'm very thankful. Yeah, you're welcome from ECA and the State Department. So yeah, I also wanted to, you have an initiative called Hear Her Song and that's part of your the Canales project. Yes, yes, I was and have always been very inspired by the work as an arts envoy because if I can talk about this for a moment as a classical opera singer and I think for most typical trajectory it's very technical and it requires a huge dedication to just honing in that technique. And ultimately my job in those roles is to interpret what's on the page to the best of my ability. But as an arts envoy, I saw a totally different power and that was the power to utilize the arts and communication and let's say empathy to connect in a way I felt is much deeper than that traditional trajectory in building bridges because that was the end goal not the perfect technique or a sort of Olympic 10 out of 10 standard. And I'm not trying to diminish that there's definitely a lot of value in pursuing that and I still get enjoyment from that. But for me what really makes me tick and motivates me is that work of connection. So I started an offer profit with a mission of exploring issues of identity and culture comes largely from my own background my mother's Mexican, my father's Bulgarian so I've grappled with these questions my whole life. And one of the issues that was most core and came about early on three, four months after I started the not for profit is of course women's equality. We saw the Me Too March start in 17 and that was really when along with Vital Voices I started this project with the desire to just celebrate and thank remarkable women. We don't wanna point a finger at guys or it's not with any kind of negative connotation rather it's really to say thank you to so many women who've done amazing work to make a difference in the world. And the way that we do that is by commissioning female identifying composers to write songs that honor these female honorees. So we achieve a number of different things there. We're trying to provide equitable opportunities for female composers of all genres from Broadway, folk, classical, pop. And it really creates a very interesting connection when you see these women's words or our leaders put to music. So we're close to 50 songs now. We just came out with our debut album. We've literally worked with both composers and honorees from around the world. And I invite anyone who's interested to check out the new album, check out our website. If you have any ideas for us I'm always looking for suggestions and advice on the project. So please get in touch with me directly and I'd love to hear from you. Okay, that sounds like a great initiative. So speaking languages and cultures, you speak many different languages, Spanish, French, Italian, German and English. What's next on your list? For sure Chinese. I have a real hunger for Chinese culture, Chinese language, Chinese history. And that stemmed from one of my experiences as an arts envoy. My first trip to China was as such. And I remember that tour because I think I went to eight or 10 cities in the span of two weeks or something. It was such a whirlwind.  And more than anything, the warmth that I felt from the people. I just felt that there was such a curiosity and an interest in connecting. And that has started a long term, I think almost a decade now, long friendship for me with a number of venues and conductors and artists there, including recently I'm going to be doing a performance for the Wei Lun Foundation in Hong Kong where they're really doing important work to help women and children, particularly children who have lost a parent due to COVID. So for me, that's extremely important. And it goes back to what I'm trying to do at Harvard, which is better understand cultural diplomacy, historically what has worked, what would be some of the ROIs that we've seen from the Cold War initiatives, from jazz diplomacy, et cetera. And then taking a look at where are some of our priorities right now, the foreign policy priorities. And certainly there's a lot of talk about China. So for me, I'm really interested right now in utilizing the arts to bring us together. And if I may say just one more thing, since we touched on Hear Her Song, I also would like to extend an invitation to anyone who would like to join us thrilled to have the chance to be debuting a series right now in partnership, co-sponsorship with the Belfast Center's Future of Diplomacy Project. And it's called the Future of Cultural Diplomacy. So our initial conversation was between Nancy Zalwinski, who's the Director of Cultural Programming for State and Ambassador Nick Burns, who has been a long-term, long-time career diplomat and just an incredible source of wisdom. And next Monday, we will be having a session with Ambassador Caroline Kennedy. So it's a project where I'm really hoping to bring more artists to the table who have experience in this cultural diplomacy work. And I would especially love to, you know, be able to connect with alumni and are just artists who are interested in the subject. And I invite you all to join us for that session on Monday. Yeah, we'll be sure to post that, post the information about the session so alumni can join you. Thank you. Sure, you're welcome.  I could talk about this for a long time. Thank you for asking that question. First of all, it bruises my heart when I hear that narrative, that the relations aren't so great because I, let me tell you a story. It's not like I was a fanatic of China since I was a little kid. I thought as an opera singer, I would work more in Europe. I'd prepared myself linguistically and, you know, done most of my early work there. And the first time I went to China, I was very moved by the people. And there was a director who heard me on that trip as an arts envoy who turned out to be the casting director for the MCPA in Beijing, which is the National Center for Performing Arts, a beautiful stunning theater with, I think, a four or 4,200 seat opera hall. It's bigger than the Metropolitan Opera. And very graciously, he offered me the chance to return to China to sing two major roles, including Carmen and I think some of the pictures were shown previously. That Carmen production was what has changed my life in that, you know, I was the only American in that cast and it was very hard at first. I didn't understand why I wasn't able to connect with people. You know, normally you're in a cast, you kind of eat lunch together, hang out at the breaks. Yes, there was a language barrier, but I thought, hey, you know, we're all artists, arts should bring us together. And no, it was very distant and cold. And we got to the final orchestra rehearsal and I had a wonderful conductor. He was very supportive. And at one point he cues the oboist and the oboist doesn't play. And he cues the oboist again and the oboist stands up in perfect English and turns to me and says, I don't play for Americans. And all of a sudden it was a light bulb moment for me and I went, oh, wow, that's why they've been cold. I thought maybe it was my singing or my artistry. They didn't like, you know, what I was doing. And it made perfect sense, Asha, because it's a national center for the performing arts. This is Carmen, whole Chinese cast, why would they bring in an American? Why would they bring in anyone who isn't Chinese for this role? And I truly felt badly that I was in that position and I thought, well, we got to get through the show and little by little I started to try to understand where they were coming from, try to understand their culture, try to understand all of these different aspects. And by the end, long story short, I made such deep friendships through that production.  They called me their Lao Tzu, which is like a teacher or friend. And I've now gone back to do Carmen with that conductor many times and they become dear friends. But I think both of our countries in the same vein, we need to really put ourselves in the shoes of the other and understand where we're coming from. And it takes a willingness to sort of back off from one's own position and be prepared to learn something. And to me, that's true diplomacy. It's not so much about imparting knowledge as it is about learning and acquiring knowledge.  I think that really highlights the power of exchanges. Yes. So we have another question from our audience. They want to know, how did you get into singing opera? Oh, that's a good question. I mean, I don't know. I guess on one hand, my father is Bulgarian. There's a real tradition for opera there. And I grew up listening to that. And my mom is Mexican and there's a tradition for singing, just any kind of singing, rancheras, mariachi, all that. So there's always music around the house, but I wasn't a particularly gifted singer. I was just really loud. And I thought maybe musical theater or jazz, but my teachers were like, you're really, you've got this big voice. And singing opera is a bit like finding a diamond in the rough. You got to keep working at it. They say it takes 10 years to train these muscles. It's like being the marathon runner of sports. You have long endurance. You have to sing without a microphone over an orchestra, over a chorus. And there was something that was really attractive to me about that physical challenge, that it's all natural. But I think also operas, they're dramatic. It's the abysses. It's the highs and the lows. It's all of these unfathomable situations. But it's through that lens that you can sort of see the most extreme points of life and maybe gain a perspective that's unique from that. So I was attracted to that from a young age and was lucky that I had good teachers that shaped my wobbly, strange instrument into something usable. So I mean, I think I saw an interview where you actually had started out playing violin. Yes, that's right. Yeah, I did. And at a certain point, I would go to my lessons. My teacher would say, just sing the line first. Sing the melody for me. And I realized, I like the singing way better. And she was frustrated. She would say, why can't you just play it how you sing it? That's how I want you to play it. And then I was like, I'm done. Maybe I'm the wrong thing here. So it's obviously a lot less expensive also. That's one of the great gifts of singing. It's free. That makes a big difference. For someone like me, I come from a sort of, some might say, an underserved community in Michigan outside of Detroit. And finding that joy was really something very special that helped me through high school and got me into college. So I'm very, very lucky. That's great. And are there other art forms that you are exploring or ways of communicating? Well, I think as I got older, I kind of went back to the joy of the non-technical singing. And hear her song, for instance, the studio album. Of course, we use microphones. So I was interested in understanding that. I've also, I've always been interested in folk music. And I produced an album where I reimagined Spanish folk songs with electronics. I kind of was interested in bridging the worlds between the music I was trained to sing and the music I would listen to. Because backstage, I wasn't listening to paparazzi. I was listening to Bjork or Madonna or Rihanna or whoever to get pumped up. And I was interested in seeing, could I bridge those two worlds? And what would that feel like? And I love getting to sing that stuff. It's really fun. But there really isn't anything that challenges me physically the way that opera does. And perhaps because I'm trained to do it, but there's a sort of catharsis that comes from that big, screamy sound. OK. So I think we're kind of running out of time here. So I have another question for you. Before we go, what would be your advice for fellow artists on how they can be cultural envoys, even if that's not their official title? You know, I'm glad someone asked that. Thank you for that question. It's never about the title. It's about how you feel when you look in the mirror. You know at the end of the day, you're being your alma, as we say in Spanish, your soul knows the work that you've done. And you know if you've touched someone's life. And I think that's always the guide for me. There have been few times, but times where I've sung on the street. And I knew that in that moment, just sharing a song with someone was going to do something for them. And that's not cultural envoy in any formal way. But the work of that is the most important work that any of us as musicians can do. I think of this as a calling. And I often say I think we're beyond entertainers. We can be beyond entertainers. And perhaps the highest aspiration of that is to be healers. And the world needs healing right now. It's a very, very difficult time for so many people. And I think that if you can aspire to those moments of sharing. And it's walking a very fine line for me anyway between confidence of like, OK, I'm going to sing here without a mic, without an orchestra, without anything. But because I want to offer something of myself, of my soul. But also the humility and the vulnerability of doing that. And that's the challenge is to be genuine and to really give of your soul. The last thing I'll say is the inspiration for that album I mentioned, the Spanish album, is a word called duende. And if any of you have some time and are interested, that's a thing, man. Duende means the feeling we all feel, but no philosopher can explain. And it was a word that was developed by Federico García Lorca, Spanish playwright. But check out his work on it, because he really goes deep into this authentic experience that music and the arts can provide for us. And I think what he's tapping into there is soul. How is your soul? What connects to your soul? When are you touched in your soul? And to me, at the end of the day, that is what it's all about. That's what life is about. And we don't live in that realm all the time. We can't. It would probably be too intense. But I encourage anyone who's listening, who has an artistic inclination, and it doesn't have to be professional. But share of your soul. Share of yourself right now, because we need that in the world. I need that. I look for small moments of a smile from a stranger on the street. Or when I see a street performer or anything like this, those are little moments of someone giving you something. And I think the world can be a much better place if we start by giving in those small ways. That's great advice. Thank you. Love that. Thanks for the question. That was a really good one. Sure, you're welcome. And thank you very much, Carla, for being with us today. It was my pleasure. Thank you for everything you do for us alumni. And I really want to say to anyone watching, please be in touch. I really hope to hear from anyone who has suggestions, advice, or just wants to be friends and talk about the experiences. Would really welcome that. So thank you. Great. And I also like to thank all of our viewers today for participating and joining us. Are you interested in learning more about our awesome exchange alumni? You can visit our website at alumni.state.gov. And you can also follow us on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Twitter. Thanks for watching. And see you all soon for our next Mentor Talks.


Chumaker Citadel Defense and it's a beautiful June night here and in my backyard it's my neighbors some neighbor children playing over there so hard and all the interruptions are some planes flying overhead so we'll see how the audio turns out but I want to come out here and talk and make a video because I've had a couple ideas stacked up recently and so I thought this would be a good opportunity to make them all so the first thought I've had that I'm thinking about for a little bit is a while back I don't know five six months ago I made a video and I called it character matters and it was about the Cody Wilson incident if you're not familiar with that you can Google it or you can go back and watch that or whatever and that theme character matters has been rolling around in my mind recently so between all my classes and certifications I've taken I don't know how many hours of instruction a lot and I've seen a variety of different structures now on variety of different schools and variety of different teaching styles and they have their own certifications and backgrounds or whatever and I've also taken classes from teachers that I do respect on a moral character level and I've taken classes from people that I don't respect on a moral character level none of that I knew until I showed up and kind of saw their behavior in general and again character matters just because you're good at teaching someone how to shoot guns or just because you're good at shooting guns if you don't have a personal character level none of that matters right the thing that separates the good guys us from the bad guys isn't our skill in how we use our guns it's why we use our guns right because if you don't have character and you use a gun those people typically are criminals right that's what we call them so character matters right it matters if you have a personal character level and if you're not a respectable guy or girl and you have a low personal character one it makes your classes really distracted right because it's hard to take a class from someone that is talking about having sex with prostitutes while they're teaching glass been there it's hard it's hard to do that like I'm here to concentrate on guns I'm here to concentrate on learning and you're not facilitating that right so again find first of all be a person of substantial moral character don't be a moral I mean it sounds pretty simple to say but don't write because if you are you're just another bad guy with a gun and and more importantly yes in this context of this video is find classes from people that are upstanding guys and girls and take classes with those people because I promise you you'll enjoy it more just one and two and probably more importantly you'll be taking a class from someone you respect it really seeps in the knowledge and you get to be around people like there are there are some great people in the gun world and and some great people in our country and on our planet and to get to be around people like that is always it's a blessing right it's beneficial to be around someone who's a master of their craft who's dedicated to teaching you to be good at that craft and who's someone you want to emulate and be like right I'm 30 30-odd years old now and there are still people I look up to right and I'm sure I will say the same until the day I die there are people I look up to and people I want to be like and being around those people is helpful you get to you get to by osmosis you get to become a little bit more like them and I want to hang out and be around and learn from people that I want to emulate because that's that's what happens that's from there do I'm there to learn from them right so find that value character again without character we're just the bad guys there's no difference being good at guns is not an inherently positive trait can go both ways do brave deeds and endure


And now it's time for news from other parts of Africa. 11 children aged 9 to 17, including five girls, have been held by militants in Northeastern and the Arakonga. The rebels believed to be members of the Islamic State-linked Allied Democratic Forces, or ADF, abducted the group in a village in Etudi province on Sunday evening. Locals say all the civilians who were there, men, women and children were kidnapped before the men, women and some young children were freed, living two children, living 11 children still in captivity. The ADF is considered the deadliest of scores of armed militaries that roam the mineral-rich Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Fresh news updates


What is up you guys welcome back to another one if you are new to the channel I am Goldpony. I review cars on YouTube also have stangosaurus right behind me here But today's video is gonna be a little bit different than what I usually do because I was thinking the other day Got news that my press passes for the New York auto show coming next month have been sent in the mail Of course at the New York auto show There's always new cars coming out that everybody is seeing for the first time but also very very expensive cars as well So got me thinking what are the top 10 most expensive cars out there right now in the world? So that is what this video is going to be so let's hop back and stangosaurus and let's get started All right, so let me start by mentioning this list is going to be production cars sold to the public Even if it's a limited production, but I'm not going to quote prices found at auction like the new super selling for Two million dollars or anything like that What's so started with number 10 on my list the 2019 Pagani who ira and so this number 10 car actually sells for 2.6 million dollars Powering the beast is a six liter turbocharged V12 putting out 764 horsepower 738 pound feet of torque zero to sixty capable in 2.8 seconds with a top speed of 238 miles per hour But perhaps my favorite part on this Pagani is the interior or perhaps the gauges the whole interior is so unique Compared to all other cars out there right now. So gotta appreciate that Then coming in at number nine on my list the 2015 Ferrari Sergio Roadster And so this one was selling for three million dollars when it was produced And it did have a limited production of only six available to the public So I'm thinking if you were probably one of those six You could probably turn around and sell that for quite a bit of money right now But powering this one is going to be a 4.5 liter naturally aspirated V8 putting out 605 horsepower 398 pound feet of torque zero to sixty three seconds flat with a top speed of 198 miles per hour Number eight on my list the car that is not quite yet come out yet at the time of this video But is currently taking orders the 2019 Aston Martin Valkyrie This one is selling for three point two million dollars powered by a six point five liter naturally aspirated V12 putting out 1160 horsepower 664 pound feet of torque by the way one of the most unique things about this one the red light at red lines at 11100 rpm that's ridiculous not the Honda S2000 at 9,000 rpm was pretty decent I think the Aston Martin is going to take this one zero to sixty two point five seconds with a top speed of only 250 miles per hour that is a ridiculous car Moving on to number seven on my list the 2013 Bugatti Veyron Vavir by Masonry And Masonry is a German tuning company But this one was being sold for three point four million dollars Powered by an eight liter quad turbocharged W16 never gets hard to say in that 1001 horsepower 880 pound feet of torque zero to sixty and two point seven with the top speed of 252 miles per hour, but perhaps the best part in my opinion there is carbon fiber Absolutely everywhere on this Bugatti definitely contributing to that zero to sixty times shedding some weight off of this one Then moving on to number six on my list the 2013 to 2016 W motors like in hyper sport for those of you curious as I was when W motors first came out This is a united Arab Emirates based company and this car was also recently found in one of the fast furious movies But this one sells for three point four million dollars powered by a three point seven liter twin turbocharged flat six Putting out seven hundred eighty horsepower seven hundred and eight pound feet of torque zero to sixty two point eight seconds with a top speed of 245 miles per hour with insane styling that looks absolutely like nothing else on the road Almost like a batmobile if you will so quite an insane car coming in at number six, which moves us on to number five Number five on my list being the 2016 2017 McLaren P1 LM And I specify that because this one had a limited production number once again of six only six ever produced Ellen by the way meaning lasante motorsport another tuning company However, this one's sold for three point six million dollars powered by a three point eight liter twin turbocharged V8 986 horsepower seven hundred seventy pound feet of torque zero to sixty comes in two point four seconds That's crazy two hundred fourteen mile per hour top speed on that one Then moving on to number four being the 2013 2014 Lamborghini Vendino It's at this particular Lamborghini when it was produced sold for four point five million dollars And this particular car was actually produced to celebrate Lamborghini's 50th anniversary Powering this one is a six point five liter naturally aspirated V12 740 horsepower five hundred nine pound feet of torque zero to sixty and two point eight with the top speed of 221 miles per hour number three on my list being the 2006 to 2010 Kona said CC XR Churveda this one's selling for 4.8 million dollars That's quite a bit of money part of the reason being is there was only two cars ever produced And this Kona sake was specifically known for its diamond pattern carbon fiber weave Powering the beast is a 4.7 liter twin supercharged Don't see that too often V8 putting out 806 horsepower 79 pound feet of torque zero to sixty and two point nine with a top speed of 249 miles per hour Moving on to number two on my list the 2005 my buck Accelero interesting thing about this car is there was only one that my buck ever produced It is a one-of-one car and it sold for eight million dollars Powering my number two car is a five point nine liter twin turbocharged V12 Putting out 690 horsepower 752 pound feet of torque zero to sixty four point four seconds top speed 218 miles per hour and rumor has it since this is a one-of-one car who is the owner I was curious though, so I did a little research rumor has it that this one-of-one car actually belongs to the rapper named Birdman or otherwise known as Brian Williams. So well done birdman for snagging this one And then lastly on my list of top ten the most expensive car ever Manufactured by a car company is the 2018 Rolls-Royce Wheptail, and this is roughly based off the phantom coupe at the back end of this one actually looks Strikingly similar to a yacht, but so then the question everybody wants to know this one sold for 13 million dollars powered by a six point seven five liter twin turbo W12 453 horsepower 531 pound feet of torque zero to sixty time comes in at five point six seconds top speed of 150 miles per hour, but all those numbers may not seem all that exciting compared to all the cars I just went over but this one is more so known for its luxury rather than its engine or the Acceleration although it'll definitely still get up and go without a doubt But just to elaborate on some of the high-end finishes found on this one in the back that oh wait design that you're looking at there That was actually milled of aluminum before being hand polished and put on the back typically those emblems are made of Plastic on just about every manufacturer out there But typically not milled from ingots of aluminum and then hand polished to finish it off also in the back This Rolls-Royce has a custom wood cabinet in the rear with a mid shelf that's illuminated with a glass lip That's definitely very unique and to finish it off There are wood trims absolutely everywhere But not just any wood trims the most rare wood that one can find put in this Rolls-Royce including an open pour Poldeo wood veneer trim and that is the most expensive car in the world So that is about it for this video you guys hope you enjoyed this one switching up a little bit on the channel But it's always fun But anyways be sure to like the video and subscribe feel free to follow me on social media at the bottom of the Screen there, and I will see you guys in the next video Let's go


Hey everyone, my name's Trent. I've just come from a screening of Battle of the Sexes. Now the questions I need to ask is Doesn't maybe want to pick up my dusty old slasher and get back on the court, or do I want to smash it on the ground? Now the plot of the movie revolves around Billie Jean King and her push for women's liberation and equality on the tennis circuit in the 1970s, which eventually culminates in a battle with the outspoken self-proclaimed misogynist Bobby Riggs So this movie is a really big diamond in the rough I had no idea that it was even coming out and it was really quite refreshing upon seeing it because I come from a really big Tennis background and I'm very familiar with the with the whole push for equality of the gender pay gap and the Billie Jean King issues Throughout the 1970s and all that she accomplished So it was really refreshing to see all that come to life on the big screen now What was really exceptional for me was the cast there was some really really great supporting actors like Alan Cumming and Sarah Silverman They were the standouts for me in their particular roles as Gladys and Ted But the best part about the movie was the main leads Emma Stone and Steve Carell They literally did no wrong Emma Stone betrayed Billie Jean King absolutely phenomenally She had the look down. She had all of her mannerisms down Including the posture. She was really cute and you really got the sense of vulnerability and You could see the questioning of her sexuality when those scenes occurred in the movie it really really drew me as a viewer into that film and The the way everything was betrayed was just absolutely amazing. She did a phenomenal job There's already rumors of her being awarded an Academy Award and I can completely see why But that's not to put aside her co-star Steve Carell did a phenomenal job. The best part about him is That we all know that he's this funny guy But he has another side of him completely and you can see that come through in movies like this He's he's complex You know that he's gonna be funny and that he uses his humor as a defense mechanism But at the flick of a switch, he literally is able to change the entire tone of the scene that he's in Particularly with his wife when they were when they were going through the divorce or the separation He really showed just how fragile and the persona that Bobby Riggs May have shown in those scenes it was it was really quite phenomenal I really hope he gets an award for it because it was it was really really good now the film was set in the 1970s So it was really really good to get the atmosphere and the vibe the clothing the cars the the product placement of Smoking being the sponsor of all pretty much sporting events It was really really good to see that come to life on screen and it not being alive in the 70s I can only assume that that's what it was like So it gave me that kind of feel of this is what the 1970s is like What added to that even further was the cinematography They use cameras that had that grainy texture. I don't know if it was the cameras or if it was the filter But you had the grainy texture as if you were watching a production from 1970s and they did use actual real clips from the 70s and from the tennis match in This film which was refreshing because you could barely tell the transition So everything felt like it was actually happening in real-time throughout the proceedings now every good movie needs a good villain One would think that's Bobby Riggs No in this film. It's Australian Margaret Court And I think that's purely based on her outlandish statements that she's made earlier in the year That's kind of dug a hole for herself. So that's reflected in the movie. I don't think it's really necessary But it did establish her as a threat to Billie Jean King on the tennis circuit and why there might be those resentments because obviously Billie Jean is questioning her sexuality and having her hairdresser go on tour with her really brought up those those issues and Margaret Court was able to be thrown into that situation about how she disagrees with lesbianism and homosexuality but it was necessary in the in the fact that Margaret Court needed to be established as a threat and Be defeated by Bobby Riggs Which then led to Billie Jean King going on to defeat Bobby my only gripe with the movie is that The tennis match was not necessary. I felt the tennis match was not necessary We didn't need to see the entire match Well wasn't the entire match but we didn't need to see the match play out because we already know what happens We know that she beat Bobby. That's not a spoiler. We know that it happened. I Felt it would be much more effective if The movie had a finished with her going up to serve and cutting to black the aftermath and celebration didn't really add anything to the movie so it would have been good to have the film cut to black and then have the title credits start rolling and Summarize what the results of the match were what happened after? How all the characters in the film that were that were of importance finished with a happily ever after and The best part is a lot of them did finish with a happily ever after so it was a very upbeat movie Really good social social justice questionings on issues that are still relevant today the gender pay gap and acceptance of gay marriage so it's it's it was fantastic It's not normally my type of movie But these biopics are really starting to get a get a role on things and bring to light issues that a lot of people have Forgotten about and deserve recognition. So yeah, it's definitely a good movie I suggest you check it out. Leave a comment down below Let us know what you think of it once you've seen it and don't forget to like our Facebook page on so is it any good


Well, Harry Chapman's fired himself in them little pockets of space in the Stephenich half and creating chances There's Mark Hughes again. That's good to say the cheers you would have heard around us signals one thing And that's Mark Hughes with a lovely little touch couple of keep your face before giving it back to Matty fold


We're in West Bank, B.C., in the heart of the reserve, and I'm part of this heavy equipment operators course, and yeah, I'm loving it. With the Emil Anderson for about a year, but my whole life growing up, I was exposed to it a lot. My dad always showed me all the equipment. We get our class time, go through all that, and then after we get to go on the equipment for a couple hours and get used to it. When you leave here at the end of the day, you know you're more familiar with the machines and a basic understanding of how they work and what they do. I think it's amazing for the fact that clients actually get a lot of hours on the equipment. So usually when they go for training in this field, they get a couple of hours, but not necessarily everything they need to be successful. So it's more than just an education. They're getting the hours that employers are looking for when they make their hiring decisions. Give them a huge leg up compared to everybody else. The cool thing about these projects is it's based on what the community needs. So it actually comes from the partnerships between the institutions, employers, and education providers. So they actually create the project and then present it to us to see if there's a need to fill it. So it's extremely flexible, completely customizable for what employers need and what the issues they're facing. As an association, we're funded by construction companies who will join our association. And so what that provides us with is an opportunity to actually bring an employer to the table. So we very clearly understand what their needs are. They've communicated a need for skilled workers and this provided us an opportunity to fill that void. It deals with Velocity's capability to do the training on the ground and to essentially provide skilled workers for our construction community that needs those workers. I'm responsible for civil construction for various projects throughout the southern interior. There are many different contractors, including Aboriginal businesses. Adam Christian worked with us a number of years ago. Adam approached us to see if we could get back on. In his absence, he had attained some further training, equipment operating, and brought that back with him for us and we've been able to utilize that and make him more employable with us and just add more resources for us that way. Velocity offered from other safety training different tickets on top of the operating stuff.  Their instructors are competent and they're just good leadership in that nice atmosphere. The success rate is high. I think we're seeing something like 80% passing rate, really of greater importance. We're seeing something like a high 70% employment rate. So not only are they completed in the course, they're getting these skilled training. They're learning how to operate mobile equipment at the same time learning how to maintain the equipment, how to work around it safely. It provides them with a broad range of skills. I think the biggest thing is that if anyone has any questions around employment, come and talk to us. You know, a lot of employers aren't sure what could be a good fit or what is something that would actually work. And what we found, especially in the employment program, is there's so many things that we can do that's hard for us to describe in one sound bite. So if they come and have that conversation, we can really see how we can work together.


Let me ask you this important question. Why are you learning or doing marketing? What's the purpose of your marketing activities? You might say, George, that's obvious. I am learning marketing so that I can get clients so that I can get some sales, some more customers in my business. I said, okay, I'm gonna get customers for your business, good. So what happens after you get customers or clients? Well, then I can serve them with my gift, my talent, my skills, hopefully a skill or talent that I enjoy providing and see their fulfillment and feel like I'm on a path of purpose. I'm hoping you might say something like that. I'm guessing that the fact that you're watching my videos probably means that this resonates with you. So the problem of going from, I'm doing marketing so I can get clients and then eventually I can do work that is fulfilling and of service to others and helping the world move forward is that this part of it, the first part, do marketing so I can get clients has become so myopically focused by so many small business owners, solo entrepreneurs that they get sucked in, maybe you have as well, it gets sucked in easily to people who are selling you on make six figures, get a million followers, just follow the system and even have clients with the rest of your life and what happens? Well, you buy their expensive program, maybe it starts off with a $97 product and then a $297 product and then $597 product they're using persuasion or psychological pricing on you already and that should be a trigger for what's going on here and then $2,000 product and then on and on mastermind, $10,000 mastermind, what's going on here is that they are making millions of dollars by short circuiting your values. Essentially, what you actually want is to be able to express your creativity, to feel in service, in genuine service to humanity, to experience the fulfillment of watching others benefit, grow, transform, heal because of your effort. That's what you want, but when you follow the marketing of most of the experts I've seen out there, they are so hyper-focused, fixated on that first segment of do marketing to get clients that it's kind of like you're saying, I'm eating so I can get calories. That's all or I am exercising so that I can get muscles. That's a little bit better, okay, hopefully you're exercising or eating because you enjoy some of it or that you wish for a more wellbeing and more vibrancy in your body, mind, heart, rather than just the myopic focus on that immediate measurable outcome and the result. So much goes wrong when you focus on just the short-term immediate measurable metric. And that's what so much of people's businesses have become. Some of you watching this may have almost thrown in the towel and it's like, I can't do this business thing because the stuff I have to do for marketing feels not aligned with my authenticity. It feels pushy. It feels like not purposeful while I'm talking to you because that was me years ago when I started learning doing marketing is it was all about the short-term metric of well, you send this type of email that's cleverly copy written to manipulate the reader into doing something to press that call to action button or to buy the product or to sign up for your webinar or whatever, you send the cleverly written email and that hyper focus becomes where our energy and attention goes much of our working day when we're working on our marketing. And we lose touch with the actual purposeful, deeper values and the higher purpose of why we're doing it in the first place. And I'll tell you why I started talking about this years ago and I'm still talking about it today because well, I need to remind her myself and perhaps you do as well that if you can shift your focus from this Uber short-term metric based I do this marketing thing and this marketing action and I'll get this many likes and this much engagement and then I'll be fulfilled in my heart and soul I'll be living my purpose. If you can get out of that short-term focus and just widen your view more towards what you really want then you will see that your marketing actions and efforts can itself be deeply meaningful, deeply purposeful because let me explain instead of marketing so I can get likes, followers, opt-ins, sign-ups, clients, instead of that why don't we just jump to marketing so that I can feel fulfilled in service to humanity and growing my heart and soul and growing my skills and my character but what if could we possibly make that jump because what's amazing about this and I've been doing this now I've been in marketing for 14 years full-time and I've been making this transition for the last 10 years or so this shift of this short-term focus all the way down to the true end goal the deeper values, the higher purpose, the end goal that we actually want so what if you get likes and followers and that's not really why you're here on earth you get likes and followers so what even if you get clients could be bad clients for all you know could be clients that you really dislike working with I don't know but really you want to do the work that grows you as a person and practices your creativity allows you to expand into more of your whole authentic expression that's really what you want right I'm guessing that's why you're here so if when we do marketing to practice that end game that deeper purpose that deeper values and the higher purpose when we do marketing from there what happens is magically the middle part tends to get fulfilled as well when you do your marketing as an act of creativity fitness so that you can grow into more of your authentic expression and your marketing also is in service to humanity regardless of whether they buy see that's the thing when you're working from a deeper value set you're not saying well this better happen and that better happen otherwise what's the point no the point is to practice the deeper value set that's the point the point is to embody and express love and truth and courage and compassion and a heart of service like that is the point and if that is the point then how will your marketing be different really because some of you are following marketing tactics and strategies that you say if money were no issue if I had all the money in the world if clients were no issue if I had unlimited clients then how would I do marketing I wouldn't do marketing at all that's fine but you still would want to express yourself and try to help humanity if you had all your needs met physically speaking you would be bored unless you were doing some kind of service to the world I know you if that's not you then I'm sorry we're probably not the right fit you go watch other videos that's fine I wish you well but many of you here are saying yeah if all my needs were met I would want to use my invest my precious life energy and time and efforts to grow myself while being in service to others like that is the magical place to feel more and more authentically powerful as your soul highest soul self while you are in service to the greater whole like wow yes that's what motivates you deeply it's not the oh my god I got more likes sure that might be kind of dopamine hit kind of fun kind of like maybe even a little bit vulnerable as you get more followers and get more likes and oh you got a client that might make you feel hopeful financially but also the opportunity to do what's really at the end which is your calling your true livelihood that's really what you want to do so when you're following most marketing strategies and they're so focused on this and you know when they sell you their program they're talking about make six figures make seven figures or eight figures whatever or get lots of followers or use this turnkey system and you have clients of the rest of your life it's just again it's so myopically focused and you know when you start using their systems that your heart is not in it and you feel your conscience is saying something is not quite right about the system the situation so I let allow me therefore to share with you the way that I have found that is so much more fulfilling for me and for many of my clients authentic marketing that's what I call it you can call it however you want to some people call it you know red business some people call it sometimes I call it marketing as ministry or marketing as an act of service and growth and that is that's the point is you do marketing because you see the opportunity to grow yourself while being in service to humanity that is the most amazing marketing how well because for example there are essentially okay I'll tell you this they're essentially two arms of marketing okay that you're going to have to do if you're going to get clients and do your heart work hearts hearts calling your heart song there's content and then there's offerings like marketing has to have both of these right content is a little easier for me to explain to you which is when you see marketing as an act of service and you know with the result of growing yourself then content is that when your content you're simply showing up to say how can I be of inspiration and how can I shift helped to shift his mind and heart just a little bit today in a positive direction like that's content you see however you do it whether it's writing or whether it's you know videos or whether it's podcasts and I just have to take a quick pause and show you something on the screen here those of you who are watching oh let me let me turn off the oh I'm sorry you can't even see that can you now you can my dog is rubbing against something buddy buddy that's enough okay good boy alright got to blur the background alright so that's partly what brings me joy is these days when I make videos I get to see my my new yard and my dog anyway so content and offerings or content a little easier to understand how it is an act of creativity fitness in service to humanity and when you do it that way like I'm not thinking God this this video better get this many likes or this many comments otherwise you know what's the point of making this video like that is something I hear from people clients well hopefully I've shifted their value not to help them embody the value set more but I hear from people it's like George what's the point of content you know what's like point of content what about growth and service what do you mean the point of content no but I'm making money and like that happens in them that happens as a natural byproduct of growth and service it's not you know you you you create if you if you are passionate about growing yourself in service to humanity then and you see the content is an opportunity for that it's so such a clear opportunity because when you're creating when you're writing recording when you're you know sharing ideas you are growing like how do you how do you clarify your mind and your soul by expressing by practicing the expression of your voice and of your soul like that's how you grow like in terms of your thoughts and your your embodiment of ideas right so your content you you express and the expression probably will help somebody down the road it might not be in the very moment you post it it could be 10 days from now or it could be 10 years from now you know I've frequently gotten people who have watched videos from years ago and said my gosh that video was was was really helpful for me I'm like great I made this in 2015 or something you know and so content is a little easier to understand how we can reach the end but what about offerings when you you know me you if you want to get clients you want to make money you know you need to sell something right you need to sell so how can offerings rather than I'm making an offering so I can get clients well yes obviously that that you know that happens over time but how can offerings itself be growth and an act of service and when you make an offering when you sell a product or service and you can notice I sell frequently I sell every Wednesday on my Facebook business page most Wednesdays not every Wednesday I do you take about a week off per month sometimes two weeks off per month selling but most Wednesdays you go to my Facebook business page facebook.com slash George Cal community and you will see that I'm selling something or I'm pre selling something getting ready to sell and I'm making an offering for service and growth as well how because the most perfect product for you to sell is the sweet spot between what you love and what the market loves what other people love because your money comes from other people spending without other people spending money with you you have no income right so that intersection of what other people love to provide the service or this product it would it would be enjoyable for me plus what the market wants from you that sweet spot not only do you make sales but you also feel fulfilled in your work and the offerings is the effort of getting there the effort the practice of testing the market before that of market research conversations and then finally when I came up with in terms of what I believe is that sweet spot between what I love and what you love what do you think about this and you might have not gotten it right and that helps you practice patience and forbearance of yourself and others and curiosity and perseverance of well let me bounce back from this failed market test is just one test let me bounce back again right so even the offering itself is a practice of personal development as well as service to others because when is a great product they buy it they love it they're so grateful that they heard about you and that they spent the money with you so I hope this is clearer about how we shift from typically how you're going to learn marketing out there you're also myopically focused on either engagement metrics or numbers of followers or numbers of clients you get numbers of opt-ins and that tries out the soul that removes the heart and the deeper juice the deeper spiritual fire that is possible when you bring that to your marketing because you're not only do you feel fulfilled in your marketing the marketing itself is a worthwhile act not only do you feel fulfilled you also along the way people trust you because they see how you're doing your marketing and with trust comes greater reach and with trust also comes greater alignment as you talk with them and understand them better you can align naturally your content in your offerings to what they want and if you are selling what they want you're posting what they want it's not a surprise that they will respond so I hope this is helpful may you find that connection to your deeper values in your marketing so-called marketing efforts and therefore see the opportunity of showing up regularly consistently to fulfill that soulful practice and in that constant practice comes the natural byproduct of the response and the reciprocity from the market thank you for joining me on this journey I wish you well I wish you joyful productivity