Works in Theory

About Works in Theory

For anyone interested in utopian social theory but who don't want to read. The hosts read works in political and social theory and do our best to explain them in simple terms through casual conversation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

Publisher

Theory Reader

Category

news · science · society & culture

Language

en

Explicit

Yes

First episode

17 Dec 2020

Latest episode

12 Nov 2021

Latest episodes

13 episodes in the feed.

1. 

   12 Nov 2021

   Ep 12: Season 1 Retrospective

   Today’s episode is sort of different - instead of discussing a book, we look back on the past year of our show and discuss what we liked and where we’re headed. We’re going to take a short break to regroup and get ready for season two, but we’ll be back in 2022! Follow Works in Theory on Twitter (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/), and our website (https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com/). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

2. 

   22 Oct 2021

   Ep 11: What’s the Point If We Can’t Have Fun? (w/Coffee with Comrades)

   “The ultimate, hidden truth of the world is that it is something that we make and could just as easily make differently.” - David Graeber, The Utopia of Rules Dedicated to the memory of David Graeber. Rest in power. Today's episode is a collaboration between Works in Theory and Coffee with Comrades (https://coffeewithcomrades.com/) to discuss David Graeber's What’s the Point If We Can’t Have Fun? (https://thebaffler.com/salvos/whats-the-point-if-we-cant-have-fun) (2014) Thank you to Coffee with Comrades for having us on your show! Support Coffee with Comrades on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/coffeewithcomrades), follow them on Twitter (https://twitter.com/coffeewcomrades), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/coffeewithcomrades/), and their website (https://coffeewithcomrades.com/). Follow Works in Theory on Twitter (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/), or our website (https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com/). Works in Theory & Coffee with Comrades are both proud members of the Channel Zero Network (http://channelzeronetwork.com/). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

3. 

   3 Sept 2021

   Ep 10: The Cartographer Wasps and the Anarchist Bees (w/ Left Shelf)

   Today's episode is a collaboration between Works in Theory and Left Shelf (https://www.leftshelf.com/) to discuss E. Lily Yu's The Cartographer Wasps and the Anarchist Bees (https://clarkesworldmagazine.com/yu_04_11/), a short fiction piece from 2011. Thank you to Left Shelf for having us on their show! You can also hear an audio version of the story here (https://clarkesworldmagazine.com/audio_04_11/). (It’s really good!) You can find Left Shelf on: Twitter (https://twitter.com/LeftShelfPod) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Left-Shelf-Podcast-102469351651831/?modal=admin_todo_tour) Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/left.shelf/) Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEcWvkDFS11J6jbGwaojlEA) Email (mailto:leftshelfpodcast@gmail.com) You can find Works in Theory on: https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com (https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com/) Twitter: @workstheorypod (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod) Instagram: works.in.theory (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/) Produced, edited, and transcribed by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com/) Theme song by http://woulg.com/ (http://woulg.com/) Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

4. 

   13 Aug 2021

   Theory Bites 2: Youth Liberation & The First Prison

   Ep 9 - Theory Bites 2: Youth Liberation & The First Prison We’ve got another short Theory Bites! First we discuss Youth Liberation - (I)An-ok Ta Chai, 2004 (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/i-an-ok-ta-chai-youth-liberation), and then First Prison - William Gillis, 2018 (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-the-first-prison) Case Closed / Detective Conan (https://www.crunchyroll.com/case-closed/episode-1-the-big-shrink-759807) (video) Flanders’ Parents (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkKwyjsJGxk) (video) Dead Poets Society Dad (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-Wqu-awI7g) (video - was that last episode?) Rutger Bregman Real Life Lord of the Flies (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/09/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what-happened-when-six-boys-were-shipwrecked-for-15-months) (article) Angelica’s Last Stand (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNuLEAAY1N8) (paywalled video) When schools become The Lord of the Rings (https://twitter.com/Miss_Snuffy/status/1411214874970050560) (tweet) https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com (https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com/) Twitter: @workstheorypod (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod) Instagram: works.in.theory (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/) Produced, edited, and transcribed by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com/) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com/)/ Transcript: Works in Theory Theory Bites: Youth Liberation and The First Prison Elysha: [00:00:00] Hello, and welcome to another Works In Theory - Theory Bites. I am Elysha here from Works In Theory Podcast, and I am here with Tom- Tom: Tom! Elysha: And Nate. Nate: I'm Nate. Elysha: Yes. I don't know why we wanted folks to say their own names, but I did. And they did it. And I love that. So thank you. Nate: Yeah. Elysha: We're going to try and smush two articles together today for this one bite. So this is big bite or two small bites. Both of these articles came from the anarchist library dot org. Which is sort of a loosely moderated library, archive of different anarchist texts. And I wanted to mention that because they're a great resource. If you're interested in browsing around for yourself, Tom: But you shouldn't have to, our podcast is all you need. So don't worry too much [00:01:00] about that. Elysha: Yeah, but just, just so that, you know, the tool is out there, you don't need it. You don't need you. Didn't, it's fine. But like it's, anarchist library dot org, and I just really wanted to mention it for these two texts because, the authors of these, you may not have heard of in the same way that you've heard of Emma Goldman. So we've got two pieces here. I'm really not sure what order we're going to do them in, but we've got one by William Gillis, which is called The First Prison and one by (I)An-ok Ta Chai, which is called Youth Liberation. Nate: So I say, let's start with the youth liberation piece. Both because it's written earlier it's from 2004 versus the other one is from 2018. And because it's a little shorter. Tom: Yeah. So the the premise of this one, the kind of question that I think I took out of it was we treat adults as infallible and self-sufficient children are incapable. But like, is that true? And are we just conditioning children for subservience to the state capitalism, other forms of control? Or [00:02:00] should we treat them with mutual respect and treat it like any other issue, any other anarchist position? And it's similar to the Goldman piece, but I think it's it's got some distinctions. For one thing, I think it's a little more extreme. Nate: Yeah, for sure. Yeah. In fact, you keep saying children, but the author actually would prefer that we say kids. Tom: Oh, you're right! Nate: Yeah, they bring up the fact that children sort of has like a connotation of like "childish", of like, "less developed" you know, just like built right into it. And even though the piece is called Youth Liberation, they said youth tends to refer to teenagers, which is, you know, generally correct. And so what they're talking about as a, gerontocracy like just an overall system of like hierarchy in which adults have domination over kids. Elysha: The piece kind of opens up, asking the question of: how are people in society treated? And you can tell a lot about society based on how they treat their children and they're elderly. And I feel like we're kind of at like, [00:03:00] an era of reckoning with that, at least around here, we had so much trouble with like care homes for elderly people through the pandemic and schools brought up their absolute array of challenges as well. And you know, not all of those are specifically rooted in like how we treat children, but kind of they are. And the idea that yeah - what we're talking about here, that kids are entirely dependent on those structures and require that control that like you have to go to school, you have to decide every aspect of their lives and it needs to be within the structure. Maybe our, all of our lives would be a lot easier if we were a little easier on like those early years. Nate: Yeah, definitely. And you know, you bring up this idea that kids according to our society, like need to be controlled need to like, not be able to make their own decisions because they're dependent, you know? The other says it's an often [00:04:00] unspoken notion that adults are omniscient or infallible or not dependent on help and support while kids are. Which of course is not true. Right? Like adults make mistakes all the time, just like kids do. But we don't base any sort of specific hierarchy over adults that way, like, I thought this was kind of interesting food for thought. The other says: "It all becomes apparent if one reflects on how it proposition to systematically dominate people who are physically ill, injured, ignorant ill-informed, or intoxicated, all of which are also temporary conditions like childhood that would be universally laughed at and dismissed." I guess the idea here is the same arguments that say kids, you need to be dominated. Could also be used to say that injured, ignorant or intoxicated people need to be dominated because, you know, they can make stupid mistakes or they are not infallible or omniscient. But of course we wouldn't say that it's right for those people to be dominated. Tom: Yeah. If we didn't let intoxicated people have free will, we wouldn't have much of a government, [00:05:00] I think. Elysha: Or a lot of art. Tom: That's true too. Nate: It's interesting you bring bec ause we talked about this a little bit offline, but when I was reading this part about the idea that we wouldn't let adults who are, you know, in some way in capable of making their own decisions, we wouldn't let them be dominated. That's actually not exactly true. You know, and I brought up the, the whole Free Britney thing with Britney Spears and her conservatorship. Like the whole idea behind that is that she is not, you know, for whatever reason able to make her own decisions. And therefore, like there are other people who are legally able to dominate her and make decisions for her. The whole Free Britney Movement is the idea that we recognize that's wrong, that she is able to make her own decisions and she should be allowed to make mistakes just like anybody else. But it's all premised on this idea that she's somehow more childlike, you know? And that brings in this idea that, that like, well, why is, why is that accepted for children? You know, I think a lot of the arguments for Free Britney would use [00:06:00] language like, "Well, she's an adult. She can make her own decisions." But like children can make their own decisions too. Tom: Yeah. And like, this comes up a lot with acting, especially where, like children are often taken advantage of by parents and by agents or whatever. They work them a lot and make a lot of money off with the kids and the kids don't see any of it. And usually end up kind of wrecking their lives because it's very traumatic to kind of like have that duality of life where you're seen as a superstar that doesn't make any money and has no will. Nate: Yeah, exactly. It's hard to imagine that these kids would be any worse off if they were allowed to make decisions themselves. Elysha: No doubt. Tom: I have a quote here: "The domination of kids breaks the wills of people and inserts authoritarian programming, so that they can later reproduce situations such as the state capitalism and gerontocracy when they get older themselves." Nate: Yeah. A hundred percent and yeah. So I don't know how you, you all feel about this. Like how much you agree with the idea of youth liberation. You [00:07:00] know, I think I do agree with it and it's broad terms. I don't think I agree with everything we were going to talk about in both of these pieces. One point that the author makes towards the end, which I think is salient and worth keeping in mind is that like these kinds of things that seem really natural, these like hierarchies that seem really natural are like exactly the type of things that as anarchists we should be questioning. Cause every hierarchy at some point was considered natural. Tom: They say: "Youth liberation is not a new idea, a lot of people have written about it and articulated it in different ways. There are already a number of people out there practicing, or at least trying to practice autonomy, respecting ways of relating with kids. With this being the case, it only makes sense for anarchists to have youth liberation fully integrated with the rest of the anarchist perspective, gerontocracy needs to be right up there with capitalism, the state patriarchy and white supremacy as institutions of social control that as anarchists, we aim to destroy." Elysha: Can we spend this into a discussion of one of those other institutions of social control - the piece by William Gillis that we're reading is [00:08:00] called The First Prison Nate: I think it's time to move on to that one. Elysha: One of the main points that we wanted to highlight is the idea that adult supremacy, gerontocracy, paints itself as a kind of meritocracy, you're only denied political agency because you don't yet have mental agency, but there is no mechanism, not a single one under adults who primacy whereby a six year old might prove qualifications to obtain their freedom and equal status. So in this world that we live in, there's nothing a kid can do to prove to you that they deserve to make whichever decision is that you're withholding from them. The only way to do that to gain that freedom is to graduate away from childhood turn 18, turn 14, turn 16, turn 21, whatever the arbitrary number is that all of a sudden means that yes, we can finally make those decisions for ourselves out of nowhere. And this is probably like tying back into some of the other conversations we've had [00:09:00] of not being given the tools of like critical thinking and like that decision making, like that first taste of freedom is like, just when your ID says that you are old enough. Nate: Yeah, or well, and Gillis says in his mind, it's actually that you, the reason the teenagers are given autonomy is simply because they're now big enough to fight back. They're big enough to beat up their parents. Elysha: They can band together for resistance and physically overwhelmed their masters. Would you say, would William Gillis say. Nate: Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Which is interesting, you know, like, and this. Did give me pause. You know, when you think about it, like it is obviously, if you were to try to explain youth liberation to somebody who'd never heard about it, I think one of their first responses would be something like, "well, you know, kids just aren't smart enough or aren't mature enough to make their own decisions." And then, you know, if you come back, could a child do to prove to you, they were mature enough? Like, would you accept some proof from a six-year-old that they were mature enough to make their own decisions? And, you know, I certainly can't that go, [00:10:00] but that would be so. Tom: That's one of the, I think the major premises in this article is about, you know, if you were suddenly transformed into a child, it's a very like Detective Conan, anime sort of premise of like, if you were a kid, would you suddenly be able to convince people that you know enough to do things without them controlling your life and - probably not, but I don't know. I found it interesting that as time went on, we went from a hundred years ago to, you know, 2004 to now 2018 in this one, it has gotten more and more - I mean, like of course we have cherry picked, we just gotten three articles, but - it just got more extreme sounding. Maybe it's something to be extreme about. Like, it's been a hundred years since Goldman wrote, you know, about the child and its enemies. And we're still basically dealing with the same question: at what point do we treat children like people or sorry, kids. I keep doing that. I honestly think that (I)An-ok Ta C hai made [00:11:00] a pretty good point, that we use children as a derogatory kind of word. So I've been really trying to think about like, should I, maybe I should exercise that from my vocabulary and just say kids. Elysha: Yeah. I'm probably not gonna like fight people over it, but I think it's definitely worth considering just because of how powerful, like the words that we use and their connotations are. Right. The idea of like childish and all those negatives. But it sort of painting the idea of like lacking that autonomy, lacking the good sense to be able to make decisions. And that is "childish," like trying to separate those from the young human individuals in question. Nate: From the kids. Yeah. Yeah, totally. And actually I think Gillis even sort of expands on that a little and, and adds a little bit more weight to that argument. He points out that like all hierarchy is like, whether it be white supremacy, patriarchy, et cetera, like they're all sort of premised on this analogy of the oppressed class [00:12:00] as childish, you know, as more childlike than the oppressor class. So, it's built into the very language of all hierarchies. Elysha: We talk about, you know, what is the root of like injustice in our society. And there is not one that is how it got to be. It gets to be so pervasive. Like just all the different layers that we all get fucked around in the world. And like, yes, absolutely age is one of those. And gerontocracy is one of those right alongside, obviously with different historical weights, of you white supremacy and the other ones that you mentioned, patriarchy. Tom: Yeah, there's a quote in this piece that says: "Every hierarchy, every abuse, every act of domination that seeks to justify or excuse itself, appeals through analogy to the rule of adults over children. We're all indoctrinated from birth in ways of, "Because I said so." The flags of supposed experience, benevolence, and familial obligation are are the first of many paraded through our lives to celebrate the suppression of our agency, the dismissal of our desires, the reduction of our personhood. Our whole [00:13:00] world is caught in a cycle of abuse, largely unexamined and unnamed. And at its root lies our dehumanization of children." Nate: And I think that sort of brings it back to what I mentioned earlier about this sort of like seeming natural, this like hierarchy of adults over children seeming natural. Opponents of this idea of youth liberation might point to like non-human animals, and be like, well, look like every, every species has adults or at least mammals have adults that in birds have adults that take care of children or that are like in charge of children. And I think that, like, that kind of puts me in the mind of, of Bookchin's argument: the hierarchy is different than having different roles. So like, yes adult bird has to feed and teaches children how to fly, but in no sense, does a dominate the baby birds, does it like tell the baby birds what to do. And so I think that we can use that notion of hierarchy as being like, sort of like a systemic thing an institutionalized thing to dispense with the idea that somehow the [00:14:00] hierarchy of adults over children is natural. Tom: Yeah, but appeals to nature- they don't do it for me. So like, even, even if you're able to be like, yeah, but the mama bear, I don't know, puts their cubs to bed at 8:00 PM. I'd be like, I don't care. Like mama bear, can't speak. I need to talk to humans about human things. This also is a pretty I think contentious essay when we talked about it, we were a little, like, some of this maybe is, is advocating for a position, but not giving a lot of evidence as to why I think. And for instance, there was a point in it about the cool aunt and I think we all had kind of, some questions about that. I don't actually have anything written. Does anyone have anything written about. Nate: Well, Hey, let me let me find the quote here so we can give the listeners some context. Gillis says: " The cool aunt, the preschool teacher functioning as an aid relief worker to come briefly to take selfies with you as a prop. They're not co-conspirators, they're the incomplete flotsam, the corpses of children who tried to make it over the finish line intact. Incomplete insurgents into adulthood were worn [00:15:00] down and forgot that mission. They're not undercover children, but the warped remains. Poorly formed adults perhaps, but adults still." He's talking about, people who try to give children more agency, I guess, or try to like respect children more. Yeah. That's not cutting it for Gillis. But like you said, Tom, I'm not exactly clear on why. Elysha: Yeah. Or like what, the alternative is that Gillis wants from us. Nate: Yeah, what would be a complete insurgent or an undercover child. Elysha: Cause there is definitely a gap there that needs to be bridged. Because like we are told like we've been talking about here, like all of these experiences in childhood. Lead us to then reproduce that gerontocracy that same like hierarchy of adults over children. And, you know, the idea here that even the cool aunt, who's trying to show up for you. Like they're still not doing it. And I get like the impulse to be combative at [00:16:00] that, but it doesn't really provide any sort of like, ideas of like how we can make that better. It's just "this sucks." And like, "they're not here for you and no one's coming to free you." Tom: Is the only real solution here that this cool aunt, or this person should like take you from your parents and be like "here's a hundred dollars on a car, have fun. Your life begins now." Like, what is, what is the what is it, the inclination, what are we supposed to do with that feeling? It paints a good picture of, you know, there's the uncle that smokes weed or whatever. And they're cool. They're not real strict and they're not whatever, but at the end of the day you have to go back to your parents. And so I guess they're not liberating enough, so, but I don't know what it would be. And maybe Gillis is just pointing out that these things exist and they're not contradictory to what I'm saying. Nate: Yeah, for sure. And you know, maybe it has something to do with, like, if we're [00:17:00] taking, Gillis' worldview at its word. Because it's so systemic because like we live in a adult supremacist society, a gerontocracy like adults can never be totally complicit because they can always if push comes to shove, resort to ordering children around. But yeah, like, I don't know, that's it just seems like a bleak picture. Like can there not be a John Brown of adults for children? I don't know. So what do you all think about this idea of youth liberation and everything we've read in these two essays and the Goldman piece? Tom: I think it's really gotten me to think a lot about it. Of course I don't have children, so it's hard. I can't put anything to practice. I can only be the cool uncle or whatever which I've been trying to be. My, my partner is doing better than me, even there you know, telling their brother stop yelling at your kids. But I don't know, the main issues I see with this is that it's kind of like a chicken and the egg thing of like, well, how do we get to a point of youth liberation without fundamentally changing all of society? [00:18:00] But how do we fundamentally change all of society without changing now that you're liberating you with? Right. Nate: Yeah, definitely. You know, and I think, I, I agree with you in that, like it's given me a lot to think about. And as I mentioned, when we were talking about the first piece, I think that we should be questioning things that seem natural, hierarchies that seem natural. And I think that there's definitely an amount of adult supremacy in our society. Maybe the answer is something that we talked about in the Dewey episode. That idea that like adults have had more experience and that can guide children while still letting children make the decisions themselves. I don't think it's oppressive to stop somebody from touching a hot stove, right? Elysha: Something that I've been thinking about a little bit is so, near me, there is a Land Back camp. Some of the local indigenous folks have come together and reclaimed some land. There's just so much that they are learning and some of it they are sharing. I heard a really wonderful [00:19:00] conversation about the ways that youth leadership emerges in their land back camp and how really, it feels like it comes down to just giving everyone involved the space to be themselves and just, you know, treating everyone as humans, treating kids as humans because they are, and they have agency and they have ideas and they have passions. A lot of like beauty and like new ceremony and stuff, has come out of teenagers who have proposed ideas for action to everyone and like just the power that comes out of that. I think that Indigenous resistance movements like from what I've noticed, like they do a great job of centering youth as the future. Nate: And just like acknowledging that I good ideas can come from youth, right. You know, there may be some things we know better than kids, just because we've been around longer. But in a sense, this is like that old thing of like, deferring to the boot maker in [00:20:00] the topic of boots.Right? To tell a kid that doesn't know that a hot stove is going to burn them, not to touch a stove isn't being oppressive. Just like plumber is not oppressing me when he tells me how to do something with my plumbing. And what we just have to be careful not to. Turn that into an idea where we always know better than kids in every circumstance, but like you were saying, Elysha acknowledged that kids can teach us things too. Elysha: And there are definitely things that can come with experience. If we're specifically talking about this Land Back camp experience, there are youth there that probably don't know a lot of the traditional, like land skills, like, building shelter and like keeping fire and that kind of thing. That all needs to be taught as well. You're not oppressing people by sharing what, you know, in that way. It's kind of just how building those relationships work. Tom: You know, I was trying to think of like, when did we show respect to kids? When do we treat them as adults? And it's usually when they do something for, I'm going to say [00:21:00] capitalism? Like, you know, they invent something, they, make some progress, some invention or some science thing. I understand that science is not directly capitalistic inherently, but it's kind of like it's in service to it right now. And so, much of what we see of kids as being like, you know, good work is usually you're doing, you know, something that we expect from adults. Nate: Or like,, I don't know, on a more positive example, like Gretta Thunberg. Elysha: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Tom: Which once, once that started you know, kind of bucking against the system, she got a lot less play time. Right? Nate: Definitely. And even that though, like, and this is something that Gillis points out when he talks about "how would you be able to prove yourself?" If a kid somehow like does prove to be incredibly intelligent, skips a bunch of grades and goes to college as a kid, you know, it's like, they're just treated as like precocious, but like, it's not like they get autonomy.It's not like their parents don't get to make decisions. Tom: There's a [00:22:00] really great episode of Rugrats if you've ever seen that that show or that episode where angelica starts a lemondate stand, but like as a capitalist and then the workers basically rise up unionize, start their own stand, like make it a worker co-op. It's really incredible. Speaking of kids working, that's a very dangerous topic maybe to bring up. But I think it's, you know, it's not in any of these pieces, but it's something I think we talked a little bit about and I've been just thinking about it a bunch. When can kids work? What is child labor? We don't bat an eye at Bob's Burgers really, cause it's a family affair, and it's a cartoon. But like that's allowed, right? Like kids can work for their family. I think under the normal age of legally working. Nate: Yeah. And so it like brings up this question of like, would youth autonomy, would youth liberation mean that like kids were free to be wage slaves? But I think, you know, we talked about this a bit offline. I think that, like, what's interesting about that is it sort of like brings up the [00:23:00] libertarian argument of the, you know, the sort of lie that when you become a wage slave, like you're somehow entering into like, like you're, you're choosing to enter into a contract. That you're like, you know, like making a free choice to, to become an employee. It's sort of reinforced by the idea that we don't let kids do it. Well, kids can't become wage slaves because that's a mutually agreed upon contract. And only like adults who are able to make those sort of decisions can become wage slaves. But maybe the answer is just that all work is exploitative, whether it's with adults or with children. Elysha: There's a lot of work that we do that's not really considered work though. Like if we're talking, talking about like, what does it mean for kids to work? We were talking about this a little bit too, and I don't know if it gets too spirally, but like what qualifies as work and what work is appropriate for kids? Tom: And like, I can see if, if you take out the, the need to make money to survive, that opens up a lot more of the dialogue- how do we [00:24:00] determine what's appropriate? And it's kind of interesting because he would still end up with, you know, the parents would probably have some amount of a say over what kind of jobs or what kind of work that a kid would do. But you'd also wouldn't require it, right? It would be a lot easier to figure out, I think those kinds of thorny areas of, you know, what is appropriate, what is not, because it would just be kind of obvious. It'd be like, well, look, this is very difficult work. It's dangerous, children shouldn't be doing it. You shouldn't make your children do it. There's no reason to do it because we don't need money. You know, you're not doing it for a profit or whatever. So it just takes away a lot of those incentives to make people do stupid, bad things at an earlier age. Nate: Yeah, the idea being that is wrong to make kids work because it's wrong to exploit them, to force them to do something they don't want to do. But then like, it's okay to exploit adults. It's okay to force adults to do something they don't want to do, but maybe, we just shouldn't be forcing anyone to do anything they don't want to do. Tom: Thinking about, you know, the inverse of this, what happens with [00:25:00] youth liberation and the common conception I think of what that looks like is something like Flanders parentsin The Simpsons where it's just like, "we've tried nothing, we're all out of ideas." Like they don't know how to raise their child, they don't do anything. And I think that can be something that can be done, but I don't know, like where, what is the middle ground? Is it actually true? Like as someone, without kids, I don't know what it would be like to not punish children or to punish children. Right. Like, I don't know the actual material consequences of what happens when I make a decision based around my own personal belief system or whatever. Like does it play out? And that's the thing that I think is missing from these essays, maybe. And I don't have a clear understanding of what it is. And that's, I think again, like what the Dewey book was trying to get at was more structure around that. Nate: Yeah. So you're saying the popular conception would be, well, if we don't force kids to do stuff that just kinda like run wild and [00:26:00] be like terrible little brats or something. Tom: Yeah, Yeah. Nate: Again, like with us not having kids talk to say whether that's true or not, but, I think that, especially like in the Goldman piece, she talked about, well, no, like children are humans who can come to their own conclusions of what's good and bad. And, you know, I think that these authors would, would say that that's not the case that letting kids do what they want is not going to lead to total chaos. And like you said,in Dewey, he says we can guide kids and use our experience to suggest to them what might be the best experiences to have. But that doesn't necessarily have to be the same thing as forcing them to do what we want them to do. Tom: Yeah, not to answer my own question, but there was that Lord of the Flies article, which I'll link in the show notes, but where, you know, a lot of people look at Lord of the Flies as an example of what would happen if kids could do whatever they wanted. And that it would just be like just terrible tribal chaos, basically. When really it just ends up being like trying to do the right thing, do the best thing as you can. Nate: Yeah. And she was saying something like, you have to [00:27:00] basically this argument that we've been talking about, that you have to like force rules on kids or else it's going to be Lord of the Rings/Lord of the Flies. Tom: But always trying to steal your precious. Nate: Yes. Elysha: It was a bad tweet, but we could link that in the show notes too. Tom: Yeah, I'm good. Elysha: All right. Well, we did it. Thanks for making your way through another Theory Bites with Works In Theory Podcast, and we will be back when we're back! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

5. 

   31 Jul 2021

   Theory Bites 1: The Child and its Enemies

   We're trying something new this month! Today's episode is about youth liberation, and Elysha, Nate, and Tom discuss Emma Goldman's The Child and Its Enemies (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-the-child-and-its-enemies). Check out our website: https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com (https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com) Come by and say hello! Twitter: @workstheorypod (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod) Instagram: works.in.theory (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/) Produced & edited by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com/) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com/)/ Transcript: Works in Theory - Theory Bites - The Child And Its Enemies [00:00:00] ELYSHA: Hello, and welcome back to Works In Theory Podcast, we've got a new section that we're trying out on the show this week. We're calling Theory Bites because it bites, but they're also small. We're going to be doing shorter essays and articles rather than entire books to try and give you a little bit more variety and us a little bit more variety in the show that we're putting on. So, we're hoping that these theory bites can be enjoyed on their own or as part of a well-rounded meal with some of the longer Works In Theory episodes. As usual, I'm Elysha and I'm here with Nate and with Tom. TOM: Hello! ELYSHA: And today our first Theory Bite is on an essay by Emma Goldman called The Child And Its Enemies. TOM: Yeah, this is written in 1906. And I thought it was really good. It had a lot of really just well-written like the language that Goldman uses. You can tell that Goldman writes, [00:01:00] right? It's not It's not a strictly, in service of getting a point across, but it's done really well. NATE: Yeah, definitely. I don't know if it's just people wrote better back in like the 19th century or something, or if she's in particular a good writer, but yeah, it was really a joy to read. It makes me look forward to reading more Emma Goldman stuff. ELYSHA: I think there are plenty of writers who wouldn't be looked at with such praise by at least me from the early 1900s. So I think Emma Goldman is a great writer. NATE: So the piece again is called The Child And Its Enemies. This is going to be the first of a couple of pieces we're going to read on the general topic of youth liberation and very early on, she's got a quote that sort of like sums up her thesis in this she says: "Is the child to be considered as an individuality or as an object to be molded, according to the whims and fancies of those around This seems to me to be the most important question to be answered by parents and educators." And so that's sort of, where she's going to be going with [00:02:00] this. The idea is she's obviously going to come down on the side that like children are human beings. They have, you know, their own intrinsic drives. They have their own personhood and autonomy and a lot of the institutions of our society, especially the school try to. Turn the child into an object don't they don't treat the child as a person, but as a commodity or again, an object. ELYSHA: And not just any object, but one who needs to fit within the restraints and respectability of that social era and society. NATE: That's right. She says, "Every institution of our day, the family, the state, or moral codes sees in every strong, beautiful, uncompromising personality, a deadly enemy." ELYSHA: Yeah, that's a powerful line for sure. Bringing back the idea that education isn't benign. It's not just about teaching basic skills like reading or math or whatever else you [00:03:00] learn in school. It's a very critical piece of our like formation as young people and our experiences in school. The way that these skills are presented, the way that like our aptitudes or whatever are measured or like the way that we're treated in school makes a big difference. Probably in how the rest of our life goes. TOM: Yeah, there's a lot of you know, talk from people about children and their future. And like, this is when people are molded and when they're most like when people get their most I guess are instilled with ideas. Right? But we don't really talk about that we structure things in a way that really puts people in a certain direction of, obeying and not questioning which again, every time I say these kinds of things, I feel like I become the conspiracy theorist, but it's, I mean, it seems very obvious like that you know, [00:04:00] school is, is largely not about trying to figure things out. It's about trying to memorize and regurgitate what other people have figured out. Whether or not that's true for all of those things is why now there's a big debate about critical race theory because the right is, is very upset. I'm going way, way, tangent. This is nothing to do with 1906. ELYSHA: It doesn't have to, we don't live in 1906. We're looking at this through 2021. In fact. To just give ourselves away. Cause I have no idea when this is actually going to be released. It is July 11th, 2021. Kind of tying on into that, because the idea that school is where we go as young people and young people on the whole are very, very curious and excited about the world and like interested in making their mark on the world or with the world. And the quote here is: "...when with [00:05:00] large wondering innocent eyes, the child wishes to behold the wonders of the world about it in the schools and in the family life and whatever quickly lock the windows and doors and keep the delicate human plant in a hot house atmosphere where it can neither breathe nor grow freely." NATE: This is just turning into a string of quotes, but at the risk of that, here's one more: "...every effort is being made to cramp human emotion and originality of thought in the individual into a straight-jacket from its earliest infancy; or to shape every human being according to one pattern; not into a well-rounded individuality, but into a patient work slave, professional automaton, tax-paying citizen, or righteous moralist." And so sort of what all of this is getting at is this idea that the school was being used to take, like, what is, this sort of innate like Elysha, you were talking about the innate curiosity, like originality like self-directed learning of a child and [00:06:00] squelch it and put it into a certain mold. Create, you know, citizens of a capitalist state, basically. ELYSHA: Yeah. And it's kind of like Tom was saying, it makes me feel like a weirdo conspiracy theorist sometimes too, because it is just like, school is just so foundational to the way that we're brought into the world. You are a very young age and you go there for many hours a day and reading pieces like this, that really speak to the idea that the state and those who write the curricula, they're looking to. Give folks the skills that will allow them to participate in society in the way that is like clean and easy and simple and to their whims. They want you to be able to do basic math or be literate and then go on to, I mean, in our recent sort of generation, we go onto more education and more education [00:07:00] because that's all of a sudden, a very big deal, but more in the era that our piece is written in education wasn't a K-12 sort of thing that everyone did for up until you're 18 or whatever it is, but you would get the education that is mandated and then go off and get a job or have more kids and just live within this like tightly curated and restrained... NATE: Yea, absolutely. TOM: This piece sort of goes in all directions. It kind of hits every place. Especially I thought the railing against leftist, like railing against radical parents. Like here it says: "Radical parents though emancipated from the belief of ownership and the human soul still cling tenaciously to the notion that they own the child, that they have the right to exercise their authority over it. So they set out to mold and form the child, according to their own conception of what is right and wrong, forcing their ideas upon it with the same [00:08:00] vehemence that the average Catholic parent uses." There's a whole kind of area at the end where Goldman talks about you know, you're basically doing the same thing that everyone's doing, but you know, the problems that you see in other people you're exhibiting them yourself. Your child can regurgitate and they know the names of radical leftists or whatever. That doesn't mean that they agree with it. And it doesn't mean that they're not going to just, you know, become reactionary basically later because you have basically forced them to believe a thing. And I, I thought that was a really good call out. NATE: Yeah, for sure. Yeah. And so like taking a step back for a second, she is like, you know, the piece is called The Child And Its Enemies. It's not called the child in school. And so part of what she's talking about is that it's not just the school, but even like the family, the family itself is, is acting in this sort of way to not allow the child to develop of its own accord, but to, to mold it in a certain [00:09:00] direction, again, like as if it's an object to be molded, not like living, breathing one of my favorite lines in the whole book she says: "Scriptures tell us that God created Man in his own image, which by no means has proven a success. Parents follow the bad example of their heavenly master. They use every effort to shape and mold the child, according to their image. They tenaciously cling to the idea that the child is merely part of themselves, an idea, as false as it is injurious." We hear that and we're like, oh Yeah. you know, I, I know for my part, at least my parents were Catholic and obviously they tried to raise me to believe in Catholicism and things like that. But you know, she wants to make sure that we're not just thinking, this is an aspect of like conservative or religious parents, but that, you know, just parents of any stripe, including radicals, who, by trying to force their child to be a radical, they're doing the exact same thing. Even if we might believe it's in a better direction or something. ELYSHA: I feel like I can throw back to our Dewey episode because that one is already released into the ether. [00:10:00] And in that we talked a lot about the importance of learning. To use tools versus learning to memorize facts. And tools like critical thinking skills that you can make your own judgements that, you're setting like a solid, and this is where I'm obviously still like biased towards like, people are good and what we need to do in order to establish like a good, like moral baseline is instilling values about sharing and mutual aid. And those are things that, you know, ideally it doesn't super matter if your parents are voting on what one end of the spectrum or not like the idea of, learning to see the world and make your own decisions that like, ideally against where the like leftist bend is. We're doing that for the good of, not just ourselves, not just immediately, but like [00:11:00] everyone that we possibly can without overwhelming the kid, obviously, because kids can get very overwhelmed. It's not about memorizing facts. And I think that, in this piece, Emma, Goldman would agree with that, is that like the radical parents just cause it's like, you know, or you feel like, you know, the right way to do things like every parent or teacher or like person in authority, feels like they know the right thing. And that's not always the case. And like maybe the right thing could be helping your child to bloom. NATE: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, I like that you bring up Dewey, because I think that this sort of dovetails with that really well in the sense that what she's talking about is that sort of like more democratic, more like self-led learning, right. Where it's not even necessarily about what the content is, it's about letting the child discover it themselves. TOM: Yeah, there was that part in here where she said, do your own research -it's a little frustrating because that has become such a cliched nonsense phrase. ELYSHA: To reframe [00:12:00] that discovery is the fun part. NATE: Yeah, So continuing on this idea of like self-directed learning and democratic learning. I want to once again, quote at length here, I think it like makes a very good point because, Elysha, what you were talking about is this idea that obviously we, you know, especially as leftists, we want to sort of direct the child to be like what we think of as a moral person to do the right thing. And it might sound strange to say that well, by trying to force the child to do the right thing, you're like still forcing the child to do something. And I think that she has like an interesting answer to that. So she says : "The terrible struggle of the thinking man and woman against political, social, and moral conventions, owes its origin to the family, where the child is ever compelled to battle against the internal and external use of force. The categorical imperatives: You shall! you must! this is right! that is wrong! this is true! that is false! shower like a violent rain upon the unsophisticated head of the young being and impress upon its sensibilities that it has to bow before the long [00:13:00] established and hard notions of thoughts and emotions. Yet the latent qualities and instincts seek to assert their own peculiar methods of seeking the foundation of things of distinguishing between what is commonly called wrong, true or false. It has bent upon going its own way since it is composed of the same nerves, muscles, and blood. Even as those who assume to direct its destiny. I fail to understand how parents hope that their children will ever grow up into independent self-reliant spirits when they strain every effort to abridge and curtail the various activities of their children, the plus in quality and character, which differentiates their offspring from themselves and by virtue of which they are eminently equipped carriers of new invigorating ideas. A young, delicate tree that is being clipped and cut by the gardener in order to give it an artificial form will never reach the majestic height and the beauty as when allowed to grow in nature and freedom." I think what she's saying is so we might be like, 'well, we gotta like, make sure the child grows up to like, believe the right thing and be a good person.' But what she's saying is that like, well, the child's a human being just like [00:14:00] you, it's capable of coming to these conclusions of what's good and what's right on its own. And in fact, you may right. And trying to like clip the tree into a certain shape. You may actually be curtailing it. It might be possible for the child to rise above even beyond what you think of as like the good and right things that you know. And by, you know, trying to force it into that mode, you're potentially curtailing it. ELYSHA: I think it's very well known at this point that none of us actually like have children closely in our lives. But I think something that I've really tried to develop more in like dealing with kids is the fact that, they are absolutely human beings and like, you're not going to, you know, it, it, doesn't, it's always funny to see folks who like super don't have any experience with kids and they're just, they walk up to like a four year old and like, Hey, what's up bud? And then Buddy's like, 'I got new shoes." That's not meeting the kid necessarily where they're at. You don't [00:15:00] have the same structures and formalities in conversation and in navigating the world with a young kid, as you do fellow adults often. I just feel like a lot of the time, like less is more in pruning a tree. You don't need to sit there and lecture at length about whichever, like moral thing you are trying to instill whatever value it is that you're trying to like share. NATE: I think you're exactly right. That it's like, if you just treat them as human beings, then you're on the right path. You don't need to, force them or mold them in any sort of way or talk down to them or act like they don't know what they're talking about or what they're thinking. ELYSHA: Yeah, because kids know about freedom and they know when you're trying to limit them and they push back against that. That's like all they do. And it's great. And it's a matter of navigating and negotiating that as like you both [00:16:00] develop in the world that you currently live in. Kind of on the same idea of how challenging it is in the ways that we have, or I have anyway, like being conditioned, how challenging it is to take that step back and let people explore things on their own. It says here just after that quote about radical parents and like trying to just still be forcing this morality on people: " What is more astonishing is the fact that parents will strip themselves of everything, will sacrifice everything for the physical wellbeing of their child. We'll wake nights and stand in fear and agony before some physical ailment of their beloved one, but will remain cold and indifferent without the slightest understanding before the soul cravings and yearnings of their child. Neither hearing nor wishing to hear the loud knocking of the young spirit that demands recognition. On the contrary, they will stifle the beautiful voice of spring of a new life of beauty and splendor of love. They will put [00:17:00] the long lean finger of authority upon the tender throat and not allow vent to this silvery song of the individual growth of the beauty of character, of the strength of love and human relation, which alone make life worthless." TOM: I felt at that point that Goldman was kind of saying, you know, I don't think that parents are monsters that are doing these things. They're kind of just doing what society says we should do. And like they care for their children. Right. But, they're not caring. Like most parents take it to the you know, well, as long as I'm protecting the child, as long as I'm, you know, feeding them and housing them and clothing them, then like, I'm a good parent. That's basically like all you gotta do. But then, you know, controlling children nobody really talks about that. When people do talk about it, it ends up being dismissed as like,.... ELYSHA: Because children to be objects, right. Like their property. And we're still fighting against that basic notion. TOM: But I liked that Goldman kind of [00:18:00] laid out a little bit of sympathy, I guess, for parents like that they, that Goldman understood that. It is somewhat conscious, but it's not a conscious, like malevolent effort. NATE: At the very end here, she likes sort of takes the tact where she's not even as much, well, like you said, she's not like beating people over the head being like, you're doing this wrong. You're bad people for doing this, but she points out that like, if you try to do this, if you try to direct your child in any direction, whether it's toward religion or toward conservatism or toward socialism, you run the risk of the child, just like rebelling against you to rebel against you. And basically just like producing the exact opposite of what you're trying to produce. And so you might as well just try to give them free rein anyway, and, you know, set a good example. ELYSHA: Yeah I love that. Setting a good example is just so powerful and like trying to take the do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do approach is probably how you get kids or anyone to just do the exact opposite. NATE: Yeah. ELYSHA: I mean, not that doing the exact opposite of what you're told [00:19:00] is always a negative consequence, but generally speaking. NATE: Oh, no. In fact, she says when talking about kids tending to do the opposite of what they're told, she says: "Such a condition of affairs may be very painful to the parents who wish their children to follow in their path. Yet I look upon them as very refreshing and encouraging psychological forces. They are the greatest guarantee that the independent mind at least will always resist every external and foreign force exercised over the human heart." It's almost like , this tendency of children to resist being controlled is like a guarantee that like, there's always going to be like a spark of freedom in humanity that you're never going to be able to really like beat people down to create a totally like compliant populace because every new generation that's born is going to be filled with children that hate to do with their parents tell them. ELYSHA: Youth stuff is just wonderful. And I'm always hopeful for the future largely because of the work of youth. NATE: Yeah. The children are the future. ELYSHA: Cool. Hey, that sounds like a great natural conclusion to this very first Theory Bites episode. [00:20:00] NATE: Yeah, absolutely. If I can, I'm gonna end with one more Goldman quote at the very end of the essay, she says: "If education should really mean anything at all, it must insist upon the free growth and development of the innate forces and tendencies of the child. In this way alone, can we hope for the free individual and eventually also for a free community, which I'll make interference and coercion of human growth impossible." ELYSHA: Thanks Nate. And thanks for being here for our very first Theory Bites. Again, we are hoping to release these ones kind of in between our main episodes, but as we're figuring all of that stuff out, you'll probably just see this pop up as one of our monthly releases, but we really appreciate you being here for what is effectively our first attempt at podcasting. And we're hope you're having at least almost as much fun as we are. ,We'll see you next time or you'll hear us next time. Or however that goes. TOM: We will see you, but you will not see us. That's [00:21:00] how it works. So don't worry. ELYSHA: Exactly. Surveillance. It's everywhere. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

6. 

   29 Jun 2021

   Ep 7 - Education

   Elysha, Nate and Tom discuss: The Origin and Ideals of the Modern School: Chapter IX ( (https://libcom.org/library/chapter-ix-reform-school)Francisco Ferrer, 1913 (https://libcom.org/library/origin-ideals-modern-school)) (https://libcom.org/library/chapter-ix-reform-school) Francisco Ferrer and the Modern School (Emma Goldman, 1917) (https://libcom.org/library/fransisco-ferrer-modern-school-emma-goldman) Experience & Education (John Dewey, 1938) (https://ca1lib.org/book/768992/09d67c) Produced & edited by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com/) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com/)/ Twitter: @workstheorypod (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod) Instagram: works.in.theory (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/) Website: https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com (https://www.worksintheorypodcast.com) Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

7. 

   28 May 2021

   Ep 6 - Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You!

   Elysha, Nate and Tom continue their discussion of Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-fragments-of-an-anarchist-anthropology), and then ask themselves: Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You! (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-are-you-an-anarchist-the-answer-may-surprise-you) (Both by David Graeber) Other mentioned works: Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (Peter Kropotkin) (https://archive.org/details/MutualAid) Produced & edited by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com/) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com/)/ Twitter: @workstheorypod (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod) Instagram: works.in.theory (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/) This headline doesn’t end in a question though. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

8. 

   23 Apr 2021

   Ep 5 - Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology

   Elysha, Nate and Tom discuss Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-fragments-of-an-anarchist-anthropology) by David Graeber. Tune in next week to find out: Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You! Other mentioned works: Debt: The First 5000 Years (https://archive.org/details/DebtTheFirst5000Years) The Utopia of Rules (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-the-utopia-of-rules.pdf) Bullshit Jobs (https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-bullshit-jobs) In Loving Memory of David Graeber (https://blog.pmpress.org/2020/09/03/in-loving-memory-david-graeber/) (Blog Post) A Celebration of David Graeber’s Life (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZlXJ3YqkMA) (Video) Produced & edited by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com/) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com/)/ Twitter: @workstheorypod (https://twitter.com/workstheorypod) Instagram: works.in.theory (https://www.instagram.com/works.in.theory/) Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

9. 

   26 Mar 2021

   Ep 4 - Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (Part 4)

   Elysha, Nate and Tom discuss Mutual Aid Amongst Ourselves, chapters 7 & 8 of Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin Produced & edited by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com/) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com/)/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

10. 

    3 Mar 2021

    Ep 3 - Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (Part 3)

    Elysha, Nate and Tom discuss Mutual Aid in The Mediæval City, chapters 5 & 6 of Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin Produced & edited by Allyson https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com)/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

11. 

    22 Jan 2021

    Ep 2 - Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (Part 2)

    Elysha, Nate and Tom discuss chapters 3 & 4 of Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin. Produced & edited by https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com)/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

12. 

    25 Dec 2020

    Ep 1 - Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (Part 1)

    Elysha, Nate and Tom discuss the introduction and first two chapters of Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin. Produced & edited by https://www.forestfreeter.com (https://www.forestfreeter.com) Theme song by http://woulg.com (http://woulg.com)/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

13. 

    17 Dec 2020

    Ep 0 - Who are we? What are we doing?

    In the introductory episode of Works in Theory Pod, listeners are introduced to the hosts Elysha, Tom and Nate. The hosts talk a bit about their hopes for the podcast and their reasons for doing it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy (https://acast.com/privacy) for more information.

Reach and audience

Public platform figures. Ratings count people who left a rating, not total listeners.

Apple Podcasts (US)

5.0 / 5

10 ratings

Contact Works in Theory

Guest appearances

Books guests

Based on episode analysis; this does not confirm that the show is currently accepting guests.