Skip to main content
The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast

The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast

By The People's Countryside

This podcast's for anyone wanting to explore the big issues, stretching your thinking in relatable ways. Well known personalities, Stuart ‘The Wildman’ Mabbutt and photographer William Mankelow, who aren't experts, but have opinions, authentic views and no scripts.

Join them on meandering conversations about nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. Sometimes joined by guests, or discussing listener questions between themselves. Always full of fun anecdotes and a bit of silliness.

linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside
Available on
Apple Podcasts Logo
Google Podcasts Logo
Overcast Logo
Pocket Casts Logo
RadioPublic Logo
Spotify Logo
Currently playing episode

TPC: Listener Question Time: How Do We Make Big Climate And Food Security Issues Less Scary?

The People's Countryside Environmental Debate PodcastJan 12, 2021

00:00
42:57
Festivals & Grief

Festivals & Grief

Welcome to The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, where the aim is to be a friend in your ear during these challenging times.

In today's therapy session for your co-hosts Stuart and William, you’ll take a dive into listener questions from Wally in Manchester, England, and Jayne in York, England.

We begin with Wally’s question, which is:

“What festivals do you guys like to celebrate yourselves?”

Off the back of Wally’s question William shares his joy of Midsummer celebrations in Finland, while Stuart reflects on a childhood, grounded in honouring seasons, spirits and solstices.

Together, they explore the significance of inviting others into our traditions, and promoting sustainable festivities.

We then move onto Jayne’s question, which is:

“Could you both share your own experiences and thoughts around grief?”

Inspired by Jayne’s question, Stuart explores the multifaceted nature of grief, acknowledging its impact is beyond the loss of loved ones, and delving into the complexities of missed opportunities and unfulfilled connections. While William shares insights into the evolution of grief, from moments of guilt to the profound realisation of personal identity beyond family ties, prompting introspection on mortality and legacy.

Tune in to this profound episode as Stuart and William explore the depths of human experience, finding solace and wisdom amidst life's celebrations and sorrows.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Mar 24, 202424:58
Emotional Numbness and Navigating Criticism

Emotional Numbness and Navigating Criticism

Join Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, the down-to-earth co-hosts of The People’s Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, as they dive into uncharted waters with no preparation, no scripts, just honest, genuine and relatable discussions.

In this episode, they tackle thought-provoking questions from Paco in Wimbledon, England, and Fanaka from Kenya.

First up is the question from Paco which is as follows:

“What does nothing feel like?”

From Paco’s question, Stuart reflects on the concept of emotional numbness, exploring the idea of experiencing a lack of feelings when confronted with some things.

William challenges the notion, asserting that as humans, feeling nothing, is impossible.

The conversation takes an introspective turn as they explore meditation, and the philosophical question of whether true nothingness, can ever be achieved.

The second listener question of this episode is from Fanaka, and her question is:

“As co-hosts you speak openly, but that opens you up to criticism in return. How do you deal with that?”

Inspired by Fanaka’s question, William and Stuart share their experiences of criticism, acknowledging that it's a rare occurrence, but a valuable one when it happens.

Stuart, known for his candid expressions, and not shying away from taboo subjects, discusses how there's a feeling of frustration within him, with certain topics rarely openly being discussed, which is sometimes relieved by discussing some of the questions sent in by listeners. He also goes onto talk about how he welcomes criticism as a tool for growth.

During this discussion the co-hosts speak about when they revisited a past controversial episode, with a ‘critics' points in mind during that particular second discussion, demonstrating their commitment to evolving themselves and engaging in meaningful discussions.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Mar 17, 202418:41
Unworn Sweaters And Curry Sauce Regrets

Unworn Sweaters And Curry Sauce Regrets

Alan, a listener from Northway, Oxford, England sent in this question for discussion - “Is it excessive for the build up to Christmas to start in September, October and November? Is it a December thing?”

Ah, the Christmas festive frenzy! William’s got a point: September to December can be like a shopping marathon – you start shopping early, stash gifts, often consuming them yourself, and then sprint at the end to buy more. 

But Stuart’s onto something too. Those Christmas displays? They’re like tabloids – full of sensational nonsense. We should just say, “No thanks” 

And that tat, Oh, that tat! People flaunt it like, “Look at my wealth – I’ve got a plastic snow globe!” 

Stuart’s right – Christmas stock’s are like that old sweater in your closet: always there, never worn.

Let’s voice our unhappiness! 

So, here’s to September to December – a season of chaos, tinsel, and more “ho ho ho” than a caffeine-fueled Santa! 

Heather, a listener in Ablington, Wiltshire, England sent in the second question for today - “Do you believe anyone when they say they don’t have any regrets?”

Stuart always says he doesn't have any regrets, he sees it as a mindset thing. He consciously moves on. It’s often down to personal prioritising, that you end up with regrets because you’ve prioritised something else.

It’s like when you’re standing in the queue at the chippy, right? You’ve got your eyes on that tray of golden, crispy chips, and you’re thinking, “This is it, this is the moment!” But then, just as you’re about to place your order, your mate Dave elbows you and says, “Oi, mate, they’ve got curry sauce today!” And suddenly, your whole world shifts. Curry sauce! It’s like the universe just handed you a winning scratch card.

Now, priorities, they’re a bit like that. Life throws 'em at you, all unexpected-like. You’re there, juggling work, family, and trying to remember where you left your car keys. And then, out of nowhere, your brain goes, “Hey, remember that time you didn’t call your grandma on her birthday? Yeah, that’s a regret right there.” And you’re left standing in the queue of life, wondering if you should’ve ordered the curry sauce.

But William, he’s got it figured out. He’s like a zen master of priorities. He’s standing on the edge of a cliff, wind in his hair, and he’s thinking, “If I could time-travel, would I tell my younger self to invest in Bitcoin or just buy more socks?” And you know what? He wouldn’t say a word. Because life’s a bit like a dodgy GPS – you take a wrong turn, end up in a field, but hey, at least you’ve got a nice view of some sheep.

So, William’s got regrets, sure. Maybe he wishes he’d learned to play the ukulele or finally tried that pineapple pizza. But he doesn’t dwell on it. Life’s too short for that. Instead, he’s out there, chasing sunsets and making peace with the fact that sometimes, you’ve just got to choose between chips and curry sauce.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Mar 10, 202418:48
Natures Rhythms and AI Benefits

Natures Rhythms and AI Benefits

Fred, a listener from St Just, Cornwall, England, set the first question to be explored today - “In the UK we put the clock back an hour in October and forward an hour in March. Now we have digital clocks that automatically alter, and now we live in a world of quick communication, and we buzz between time zones readily. Is it time for the UK to stop doing this? I think we started doing this in the early 1900’s to save and conserve energy. Not sure if it's true but I read William Willett, the great-great-grandfather of Coldplay’s Chris Martin, set up a campaign before the first world war pushing for clocks to go forward in spring and back in winter so that people could spend more time outdoors during the day and save energy”.

William your co-host suggests that the time difference might be related to harvesting. He acknowledges that not all countries have adopted this system, especially some US counties. He views it as being linked to labour.

Stuart the other co-host believes that the main advantage of clock changes is providing school children with more evening light. However, he thinks confusion arises for those who don’t adjust their clocks. Stuart proposes reimagining work schedules to alleviate congestion caused by synchronised movement, routines and start times.

In summary, the clock-changing debate involves practical considerations, nature’s rhythms, and potential benefits.

Heather, a listener from in Ablington, Wiltshire, England sets us the second question in todays episode - “What do you think about AI, good or bad? Is it a friend or foe? Should we rage against the AI machine?”

William views AI as a powerful tool, not sentient but capable of both good and bad. He highlights its use in monitoring potential tsunamis in the Indian Ocean, and specific prompts crucial for effective AI interaction. The biggest danger for some, according to William, lies in AI potentially replacing artists, but he doesn't fully agree with this. He appreciates music’s rough edges and encourages playfulness with AI. Stuart raises concerns about AI running amok, trapped in self-reinforcing cycles. Stuart’s advice: Reflect on AI’s impact in your own life. It’s already woven into our existence.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Mar 03, 202424:49
Nature, Politicians, and All-Terrain Wheelchairs

Nature, Politicians, and All-Terrain Wheelchairs

Welcome back to another wild ride with Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and partner in podcast crime, William ‘The Waffler’

Mankelow. In today's episode, they dive deep into two listener questions that have them pondering the mysteries of life, politics, and the great outdoors.

The first comes from Alan in Northway, Oxford England, his question is:  “In October 2023 Rishi Sunak, UK Prime Minister, cancelled the Birmingham to Manchester leg of the new HS2 fast railway (what's the point then of the leg that is to be built from London to Birmingham), and also dropped or altered a lot of policies that could help reduce the effects of climate change in the UK. In the run up to a general election, this all looks like an aim to gain more votes. This stuff has an impact on humanity well into the future, so is it time for the big decisions like this to be made by a larger coalition, and not just one political party and one leader?”I ask is it right legally or ethically for the agreed timeline for the UK to meet Net Zero to seemingly be changed at will by the PM.

While discussing Alan’s questions, William takes us on a journey through the stages of big projects and questions the management of HS2, while Stuart wonders if politicians are fit for setting long-term policies, or for just playing the short-term game. Is HS2 a vote winner, or is Rishi Sunak's replacement the real show-stealer?

The second listener question is brought to us by Vandana in India, and her question is as follows: - “It's said the human species has 250,000 years of genetics running through its veins. Our universal appreciation for the beauty of the natural world comes from those genetics as we came from caves and the land. If the appreciation is genetic then can the ability to so easily remove ourselves, lose awareness of, and not connect with the natural world be genetic too? If it is, then we are seemingly being pulled away from and pulled towards at the same time. Is it in our genetics to get the balance right?”

Off the back of this question, Stuart challenges you to dig deep – what's fueling your nature vibes? Genetic predisposition, upbringing, or a mix of both? And William's got a remedy for any nature-phobia – get outside, explore those green spaces, and let Mother Nature work her magic on your soul.

Join us in breaking down barriers for Stuart! Your support not only provides him with an all-terrain wheelchair for outdoor workshops, but also creates a sanctuary for him to start working from again. He’s engaged around 20,000 clients with nature over the years. Let's make a difference together and help him engage 1000’s more. Check out the fundraiser here: justgiving.com/crowdfunding/wildmanonwheels

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Feb 25, 202431:39
[TW] Can You Be Too Controversial?

[TW] Can You Be Too Controversial?

A trigger warning is issued for this episode, as the conversation delves into the sensitive subjects of suicide and death. We urge listeners to consider their comfort level with such topics before proceeding.

Prepare yourself for some delightful waffle in this episode! We appreciate the 26 listeners questions we have lined up; thanks for sending them in. If you have a burning question, feel free to drop us an email at ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com.

Welcome to another thought-provoking episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, where hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William ‘The Waffler’ Mankelow dive into two intriguing listener questions. In this episode, they explore perspectives from Alan in Northway, Oxford, and Vandana from India.

Alan’s question is as follows:

“Chris Packham recently tweeted “Personally , I've now reached a point where I believe breaking the law for the climate is the ethically responsible thing to do”, do you think as a public figure he should be saying such things? He seems to be becoming a disrupter, and a humanity hooligan, is this wise for his career?”

Stuart passionately contends that breaking the law is a personal choice, emphasising that it's not merely about the action, but the impact on others. William, curious about the outcomes of such actions, questions the achievements of actually breaking the law.

Vandana’s question is as follows:

“I heard Stuart you are getting a couple of wheelchairs to help with your mobility issues, so, which bits of the countryside are you looking forward to reacquainting yourself with?”

Stuart shares his anticipation of being back out in nature, emphasising that he won't fully grasp what he's missed until he's immersed in it again. William reflects on the emotional impact of being in nature, emphasising the experience over a specific location. The hosts explore the idea of nature helping people reconnect with themselves, and the importance of an all-terrain wheelchair for Stuart in facilitating these experiences for the public. The link to the fundraiser we’ve got running for that extra chair is here: justgiving.com/crowdfunding/wildmanonwheels

Join Stuart and William in this engaging episode as they navigate the complexities of ethics, activism, and the profound connection between humanity and nature.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Feb 18, 202436:55
Climate Twister: Arrested Musings Unleashed

Climate Twister: Arrested Musings Unleashed

Ivy, from Worthing, West Sussex, England poses the first listener question in todays episode for your co-hosts do discuss: Link to the question

William and Stuart – the dynamic duo of deep thoughts and questionable life choices, offer their musings.

William starts with the stigma of being arrested. It can be like a membership card/medal/trophy for some. Picture this though: William’s at a climate protest, wearing his “Save the Planet” T-shirt, and suddenly the cuffs come out. He’s torn between two worlds: eco-warrior or accidental trespasser. It’s like he’s playing climate change Twister – left foot on “awareness,” right hand on “impending arrest.”

William thinks getting arrested might backfire on your message. Imagine you’re mid-protest, and the police swoop in. Suddenly, your chant changes from “Hey, hey, ho, ho, fossil fuels have got to go!” to “Hey, hey, ho, ho, my bail’s set too low!” Not exactly the eco-friendly revolution you had in mind.

Stuart – the guy who’s like a human Sudoku puzzle: complex, but ultimately pointless. He flips the script and asks, “Is it ever wrong to be arrested?” Deep, right? He’s got a point, though.

But being arrested – is it the new status symbol for some though, something to brag about. Move over, Gucci handbags; it’s all about “Cellblock Chic.” Imagine the Instagram captions: “Just got arrested for climate change. #EcoGlam #Cellfie.”

Then Stuart drops the mic: Getting arrested – is it like a window into some people’s possible intellect, meaning their message could be overruled more easily by the ultimate decision makers?

Next time you’re at a protest, remember: “To be or not to be arrested?” That is the question. And if you choose “to be,” make sure your mugshot shows off your good side. After all, even in the clink, it’s all about those eco-friendly angles!

Mary, from Gorse Hill, Swindon, Wiltshire, England poses the second listener question today: Link to the question

Stuart and William discuss the “us and them” attitude, inspired by another listener named Elaine from Telford who asked a question in a previous episode. Stuart emphasises that despite feeling insignificant, we must take action against the climate crisis. He advocates for varying language and attitudes to keep messages fresh.

Common ground is crucial, even when sharing personal experiences. Stuart highlights the power of silence in getting a message across. He warns that perceived bullying and an unwillingness to drift too far from entrenched views, may actually be our own behaviour too.

William, while still flying, focuses on mindful consumption at home. He emphasises adapting communication to cultural context and suggests seeking common ground by sharing barriers.

In summary, both hosts encourage meaningful dialogue and self-awareness to bridge divides and avoid preachiness.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Feb 11, 202426:47
Meetings, Doughnuts And Germs

Meetings, Doughnuts And Germs

Elaine, from Telford, in Shropshire, England sends in this first listener question for discussion today.

“Like you guys probably, I’ve been to many public meetings, run by scientists who specialise in systems thinking, filled with community activists, trying to develop new more sustainable circular systems that society can then hang itself on, and frame itself around. The aim being to try and mitigate the climate and ecological crisis that we all face. We don’t have to try too hard these days to convince people we need to act to avert disaster, because unless the natural world's health is generally good, then humanity will struggle to survive.

The general issue and barrier to people making changes in their lives is there's a lack of leadership and direction from the people with the power to galvanise us. The leaders, decision makers and people with vested interests in maintaining the ‘business as usual’ attitude, rarely attend these meetings, or absorb the feedback these meetings produce. How do we break down the ‘them and us’ culture that's evolving in the adaptation process we’re all in, and how do we get everybody at these meetings, instead of the separation and separate meetings we see now?

It's not too late, we’ve not yet polluted as much as we think, and the unfairness in the world's societies is not too advanced either. That's just my view, and my view is there's still an opportunity for a fair and just survival”.

Stuart infers that Elaine’s question pertains to the doughnut economy framework, which proposes a social and ecological boundary for human development. He asserts that one of the challenges to implementing this framework is the low self-efficacy of potential stakeholders. He illustrates this point by recounting the case of someone he knew who shunned meeting attendance, irrespective of the agenda.

Stuart observes that meetings often induce a herd mentality, where individuals conform to the prevailing opinions and suppress dissent and alternatives. He recommends that a more productive strategy is maybe to distance oneself from emotional attachments, listen attentively to diverse viewpoints, and refrain from judging others.

William worries that these meetings can make certain attendees feel dumb, because one can’t always follow the jargon thrown around.

The second listener question discussed today is from Paco, in Wimbledon, England.

“I’ve seen viruses and pathogens that have been extinct for 30,000 years, but found frozen in the world's ice caps, have been reactivated in the laboratory when pairing them up with ameba. If these frozen viruses emerge from the melting ice and find their way into the world's rivers and oceans, do they pose a new threat to humans as they could morph into something else if the conditions are perfect, like in the lab?”

William wonders if living in the wrong place as it were, your geographical location, can make you more susceptible to falling sick, and wants to know who’s waking up the germs from their long naps. He wants to understand why and how the viruses and pathogens are being reactivated? He thinks maybe they’re just cranky because they missed their breakfast.

Stuart discusses the problem of Methane, which is trapped in ice sheets and released into the atmosphere, and how it will take millennia for it to be fully emitted, but, even a partial emission can have detrimental effects.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss on this podcast? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends https://bit.ly/45vuCPP⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://bit.ly/3UmtDyr⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Feb 04, 202428:28
[TW] A Matter Of Life & Death

[TW] A Matter Of Life & Death

A trigger warning is issued for this episode, as the conversation delves into the sensitive subjects of suicide and death, we urge listeners to consider their comfort level with such topics before proceeding.

In this thought-provoking episode, Stuart and William embark on a journey, prompted by questions from listeners Iris in Wetley Rocks, Staffordshire, England, and Fanaka in Kenya. Two people geographically distant, but brought together through listening to this podcast. The hosts dive deep into the realms of life and death due to the nature of these particular questions.

The question from Iris in Wetley Rocks, Staffordshire, England is as follows,

“I’m back guys, still listening. My next question is, who would cry at your funerals?”

In response, Stuart raises a poignant point about why people cry at funerals, attributing it to a range of emotions such as guilt, missed opportunities, sadness, and attachment. The hosts refuse to dictate who would shed tears at their own funerals, leaving it to the unpredictable nature of genuine emotions. William reflects on his personal experiences of grief, describing it as a natural process, that goes beyond societal pressures. He draws inspiration from his mother's influence in navigating moments of sorrow.

And here is the question from Fanaka from Kenya:

“If you hadn’t met one another what would you both be doing with your lives now?”

From Fanaka's question, the hosts grapple with hypothetical scenarios, contemplating the impact of their collaboration on their individual lives, and what would happen if they were to part ways.

As the episode unfolds, Stuart and William find a profound connection between the questions raised by Iris and Fanaka—one about death and the other about life. The exploration of these themes intertwines, revealing the intricate balance between the two fundamental aspects of our existence.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Jan 28, 202415:11
Environmental Intricacies Explored

Environmental Intricacies Explored

Nature can be a puzzle when trying to unravel the threads of and the motivations behind tree planting, and population growth.

Welcome to another episode of The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, where your cohosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow delve into the intricacies of two thought-provoking questions posed by listeners.

In this episode, listener Elaine from Telford, England, sparks a debate about humanity's place in the natural order. Elaine’s questions is as follows:

“Right from the start, life's evolution has always formed and influenced the makeup of the Earth's atmosphere, with various tipping points along the way. Why wouldn’t man’s population passing 9.5 billion again be a tipping point? When will we all admit that human existence will have positive and negative effects on the planet? Will there ever be a time when we’re not motivated to change just because it has a personal benefit on us or our pockets?”

William resonates with the idea that we are an integral part of nature, questioning if our current population growth is simply a facet of the natural process. Stuart delves into the consequences of human actions, emphasising the conscious impact we have on the environment compared to previous species. They explore together the concept of sustainability, touching on the challenges of controlling population growth and the complexities of an ageing demographic.

Listener Roman from Slovakia, brings forward a question on the effectiveness of tree planting in addressing environmental issues. The question is as follows:

“Is tree planting the best thing for conservation? Natural succession gives you functioning communities of trees and shrubs genetically suited to their environment, plus all the species that go along with that. Firstly, planting trees by-passes the natural successional stages that so much of our biodiversity depends on. Secondly, many planted trees are not from local genetic stock and sometimes not even from the same country.  Thirdly, many/most planted trees are not properly looked after and many die. Fourthly, and leading on from the above, planting trees costs a lot of money and if many/most die it's arguably a waste of money. Is it better to reduce the amount of trees we are cutting down and the drivers behind that cutting?”

Stuart challenges the notion that tree planting alone can solve problems, highlighting the importance of considering how, when, and where it's done. William expands on the idea, stressing the need for diverse habitats and cautioning against a narrow focus on creating forests. The cohosts examine the deeper implications of planting trees, contemplating the anthropocentric perspective and emphasising the importance of caring for the trees we plant.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Jan 21, 202438:36
Adapting And Surviving

Adapting And Surviving

“Hi guys, I’m back, always listening but not sent in a question for you to discuss too often these days. Can I ask, who do you feel the BBC is lining up to replace Sir David Attenborough? Who do you think could replace him?”

That’s the first listener question sent for discussion, and that comes from Vandana in India.

There are people like Chris Packham and Simon Reeve, who though aren’t exactly being lined up to replace him, are perceptibly doing more.

Is there really a conscious choice to replace David Attenborough? We all know that we can’t. His influence will go on, as it is huge.

Stuart’s conclusion is that the BBC aren’t trying to replace him, and they really shouldn’t be, and should move onto someone else. William talks about the idea of replacement being incorrect, that you don’t replace, you get something new.

Pedro, a long standing listener from Portugal has sent in the second question for discussion today, and is as follows:

“40% of the Earth's surface, that isn’t frozen, is given over to intensive monoculture style farming, and the volume of plastic and concrete in the world is already more than the world's total biomass. To play devil's advocate for a minute, I could suggest humans are brutally efficient and growing and feeding most of the world populations, though distribution leaves a lot to be desired. The current process of sustaining our species means we are imitating the volcanoes that heated the world millions of years ago, by the volume of CO2 we are pumping out. Where do we search for hope though, do we look at humanity's own inventiveness to reverse this? For us to survive I feel we need to put planet Earth first, otherwise it will continue to evolve without us”.

William agrees with Pedro’s devil's advocacy, and that as a species we’re brutally efficient at survival. Even something like the black death didn’t kill us off, and in some ways did lead to how we live today.

Stuart finds the analogy that humans and their habits are like a giant volcano, interesting. It echo’s a thought he had in a previous episode where he believed that us humans are like a giant panda, an evolutionary dead end.

In conclusion, your co-hosts feel we as a species are often at our best when we’re pushed into action, when we’re cornered.

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers. This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss on a future episode of this podcast? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Jan 14, 202429:57
There Are Rarely Categorics

There Are Rarely Categorics

2024 starts with a new format for this podcast. Instead of releases at 10am UK on Tuesdays and Sundays, with one listener question covered in each episode. We’re now just releasing on Sundays, but still at 10am UK time. Now though you’ll get two listener questions per episode. So we're going longer form.

Debs, Didcot, Oxfordshire, England sets the first question of the year, which is:

“Is the male/female opinion societally influenced, genetically influenced or independent of all outside influences, and how does that influence our willingness or unwillingness to live sustainably?”

Stuart explores that at different moments it can be any one of the three (societally influenced, genetically influenced or independent of all outside influences) it can be an overlap. There are rarely categorics.

William asks whether males have truly different opinions than females? That’s how he’d interpret part of this question.

Ella, Heaton Mersey, Stockport, Greater Manchester, England then sets the follow up listener question:

“In the UK MP’s seem to be drifting away from thinking their role is a service to us, not a job. A job within a mosaic of other jobs and outside interests. They seem to take well paid speaking opportunities over appearing in parliament. We shouldn’t get jealous about people making money, but I think lines are often crossed where MP’s constituents are not the priority. What role does this all take in MP’s not understanding the very real concerns of their constituents when it comes to climate change?”

William concludes with an action, and that is to check out what your local MP is doing so you can make an informed judgement about them. You may find this link useful in that https://members.parliament.uk/findyourmp

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Jan 07, 202429:56
Happy New Year

Happy New Year

Stuart and William would like to wish you a Happy New Year, and don’t beat yourself up too much if you are unable to take your New Year’s resolutions beyond the 10th January.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Jan 01, 202402:20
Revisiting A Classic: Social Media Reality Distortion
Dec 31, 202341:11
Revisiting A Classic: Volunteer Burnout
Dec 26, 202312:35
500th Christmas Celebration
Dec 25, 202301:38
Revisiting A Classic: Flexibility In Figures
Dec 24, 202310:19
Revisiting A Classic: Are Humans Just Another Giant Panda?
Dec 19, 202324:28
Who’ll Dominate Next?

Who’ll Dominate Next?

Co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow explore thought-provoking questions sent in by listeners on a wide variety of subjects, which they discuss, chew over, analyse, break down, and sometimes even debate.

We like to give you an ad-free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

In this episode, Alivia from Ridgway, Illinois, USA, sparks a fascinating discussion, with her question: "What do you think could be the next dominant species after humans, or is it impossible to tell?"

Stuart and William take a balanced view between ethics and knowledge, delving into the complexities of predicting the next dominant species. William argues that it's impossible to determine the future, drawing parallels with the unpredictability of human emergence after the dinosaur extinction event. Stuart, on the other hand, posits that insects, particularly ants, could be the contenders for the next dominant species.

Your hosts explore the distinction between dominance and impact, considering the environmental influence of both humans and insects. They grapple with the "what if" scenario of humanity disappearing overnight and contemplate the unpredictable evolution of life on Earth.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Dec 17, 202312:03
The LOAF Takeover: Undoing the Mess We Made with the Climate

The LOAF Takeover: Undoing the Mess We Made with the Climate

Welcome to The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, where co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow delve into the pressing questions sent in by listeners. In this special episode, we join forces with The LOAF Podcast, hosted by Lukas Seifert and Oliver Walsh, to tackle the following crucial question sent in by Rory from Darwin, Australia:

“The world has an opportunity to reverse human caused climate change, so why doesn't it?”

Stuart and William kick off the discussion by questioning the feasibility of reversing human-caused climate change, highlighting the historical carbon impact spanning over 150 years. Stuart reflects on the psychological and biological aspects of our species, emphasising the need for intergenerational thinking.

The conversation pivots to the importance of unity among humans, as William argues against the prevalent "us and them" mentality. Stuart proposes that a shift in mindset among business leaders and politicians towards long-term thinking could reshape policies and priorities.

On the other side, Lukas and Oliver from the LOAF Podcast, explore the deceptive comfort provided by greenwashing and superficial environmental efforts. They shed light on the socio-political challenges hindering global environmental initiatives, including the fossil fuel industry's influence on political narratives.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Dec 12, 202328:01
Turf Talk

Turf Talk

Welcome to another episode of The People’s Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast. Co-hosts, Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, delve into a thought-provoking question, sent in by Gavin from Grove,Oxfordshire, England. Gavin raises concerns about the environmental impact of artificial turf, quoting conflicting statements about its effects on the environment. His question is as follows:

“I’ve heard one commentator say "Fibres from artificial grass make up 15 percent of plastic pieces found in samples of seawater near Barcelona". I heard another commentator say “In the desert many homeowners have switched to artificial turf as a “green” alternative to real grass. Artificial turf has helped to conserve millions of gallons of water in the desert”.

Should it be banned? That is debatable, as there are two sides to every coin. I’m just playing the devil's advocate here. We have to be careful not to demonise things that do not fit our agenda. Others could argue that artificial turf is good for the environment. I think people need to weigh the facts and come to their own conclusions.

Is artificial turf the right choice for me? Is it environmentally responsible for my needs? The answer is very different for different people in different regions. Food for thought folks. Wondered what you guys thought?”

William initiates the conversation by questioning if the key to artificial grass is effective management.

The co-hosts both go on to explore the versatility of artificial turf, with William sharing his positive experience of playing football on improved artificial pitches. Stuart introduces the issue of regular turf replacement due to wear and tear, prompting William to ponder on the ecological responsibility of maintaining and disposing of artificial turf.

Reflecting on Gavin's points, Stuart emphasises the need for the judicious use of artificial turf. The hosts then shift gears to discuss the personal use of artificial grass, critiquing its aesthetics and questioning the motivation behind its adoption.

Does replacing real turf with plastic turf really balance the need for using less water to keep grass alive? Or are we still strangling ourselves as a species, just in a different way, that may not be any better, if not worse?

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Dec 10, 202311:00
To Do Or Not To Do Business, That Is The Question

To Do Or Not To Do Business, That Is The Question

“After the Coutts Bank/Nigel Farage scandal, do you think banks have the right to close accounts of people that hold political views they don’t agree with? Ok they were wrong to discuss Mr Farage details with a journalist, but should they be allowed to decide who they do and don’t do business with?” That’s the listener question, this time sent in by Elaine, in Telford, Shropshire, England, which co-hosts Stuart and William will try to unpick.

William understands that the whole issue was that Nigel Farage didn’t have enough money to be able to have a Coutts bank account. He hadn’t heard of it being made political, other than those trying to make it so, because of it being Nigel Farage. William doe’s explore though whether we’re collectively giving the banks too much power, and that surely the bottom line for a bank is, how much money an individual has?

Stuart isn’t sure that this issue was purely a political thing, it’s just that Coutts may have wrongly revealed that he didn’t have enough money to bank with them. Because he’s on the edge, it’s easy to believe that someone made the decision purely based on who he is and what he represents.

Stuart raises the point that shouldn’t all businesses have the right to dictate who they do business with and who they don’t? Are we saying that not all businesses are the same? If a bank is more powerful and corrupt, are, and should the internal ethics and processes be the same as other businesses, or should they be monitored differently?

William raises that maybe it’s all a difference between ethical and legal. He asks the question: how do you balance allowing businesses choices about who they serve and don’t? He himself couldn’t get a Coutts bank account, and asks is this discrimination, or is it just a business choice?

William feels that it was a bad move business wise for Coutts to talk publicly about the situation to a journalist. These types of conversations should be held behind closed doors. He gives the example of the football manager Sir Alex Ferguson, always keeping a lot of the criticism of his players behind closed doors. A difficult discussion would be better done privately and ideally face to face.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Dec 05, 202315:29
Two Ears And One Mouth

Two Ears And One Mouth

We need to listen twice as much as we talk, that’s the big takeaway from today's episode. Which is the thinking inspired by today’s listener question, sent in by Gavin, in Grove, Oxfordshire, England.

”In life, and whatever culture you are from, should we pause more, and take more moments of reflection, and ask others what their perception is of any given situation, or are we already doing that, and what we should be doing more of is taking action?”

Co-host of this podcast, William, believes it’s always good to pause for reflection, and tries to live by the idea of having two ears and one mouth, so you listen twice as much as you talk. He further raises the point that you need to allow the person you’re speaking to the opportunity to say what they need to say, as you never know what you’ll learn from their words. Lessons come in many forms, and recognizing that is a key life skill.

Your other co-host, Stuart, agrees. He feels we need to pause more, reflect more, appreciate more. We don’t need to change our lives too much though, as many of us already have those foundations in place. They just need solidifying.

He goes on to say it’s not what we do, it’s how we do it. Asking other people’s perception of any given situation, and setting it against your own, is a useful reviewing tool, particularly in dangerous situations. Action comes in many different forms.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience.We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Dec 03, 202312:46
Extraction Dilemmas

Extraction Dilemmas

Welcome to another thought-provoking episode of The People’s Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, where Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow delve into the following question from Ramona from Paraguay: “Some Pacific islands are doing deals with mineral and metal extraction companies that could have negative impacts on their indigenous societies, as well as good, as there are financial profits to be made for them, and the companies. Developed countries did this so why shouldn’t these smaller societies?

These same societies are likely to be impacted worst by climate change, potentially caused by other countries in the past, in the form of rising seas levels, flooding, crop failures and forced climate migration of their peoples. Isn’t it a good thing for these extraction companies to be part of the mosaic of solutions needed to combat climate change, as many of the metals they extract, can be reused when products containing them come to the end of their lives, and then made part of the other new items?

Recycling surely! Or maybe you think there’s enough resources in circulation already for us to survive on, and the decision to extract fresh materials as they become needed should be made by a body outside of the extraction companies themselves? Extraction companies left to their own devices could well decide to extract their substances whether or not there's enough already in circulation, before moving on to their next target, so should they really be steering the ship? Further, is there still a place for the oil industry in the mosaic of solutions to combat climate change, or should they be removed from existence entirely?”

Stuart, right from the start, questions why developing countries shouldn't be allowed to extract minerals, emphasising that the challenge lies in our failure to provide them with a better system.

William spotlights a potential future dilemma for smaller countries, wondering if they might be playing catch-up with the world that has already transitioned to greener alternatives. Stuart acknowledges the extractive industry's role in the mosaic of climate change solutions, while William suggests reevaluating the oil industry, by focusing on the valuable skills of its workforce.

As the conversation unfolds, Stuart emphasises the importance of improved recycling practices, and raises critical questions about managing already extracted materials in a rapidly evolving world. The co-hosts discuss the challenges of relying on independent bodies, and acknowledge the difficulty of steering the environmental ship toward a more sustainable future.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 28, 202317:01
Shouldn’t We Just Send Artefacts Back?

Shouldn’t We Just Send Artefacts Back?

Co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow dive into the controversial realm of repatriating cultural artefacts. Prompted by a question from listener Debs from Didcot, Oxfordshire, England.

Debs’ question is as follows:

“There’s lots of talk that artefacts in British museums gained through colonialism centuries ago should be relocated back to their countries of origin. The downside with that is leaving them where they are means more people will see them. Returning them ‘home’ could mean less people see them. What do you think?”

William argues for a straightforward solution: send the artefacts back. His stance is rooted in the belief that these items lack resonance for those without a genuine direct connection to them. Stuart introduces the recent tour in Kenya by King Charles III, where he apologised for British atrocities, prompting a reflection on whether apologies for colonial links can ever truly end.

The conversation deepens as William draws a direct link between the prosperity of the UK and the historical slavery in Jamaica. A connection that fueled the industrial revolution. Stuart advocates for a reimagining of museums and challenges listeners to consider the impact of colonialism on their lives, actions, attitudes, and opportunities. William recommends you to watch a routine by James Acaster, providing a unique perspective on the subject. Watch the routine here.

Stuart leaves listeners with a compelling call to action, urging them to reflect on colonialism's tendrils in their lives and encouraging open conversations, especially for those directly impacted. 

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 26, 202315:31
Illusions, Bankruptcy, Reality

Illusions, Bankruptcy, Reality

Join co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow as they delve into a fascinating question, posed by our listener Alivia, from Ridgway, Illinois, USA. Alivia challenges us to consider whether the world is but an illusion, financially bankrupt, and propped up by artificial structures.

Alivia's question: “The world is largely an illusion and bankrupt, because it spends more money than ever exists at any given moment in time. With that knowledge, when one looks at any high street and its parade of shops, it's all artificially propped up. With that knowledge, insurance seems pointless and we’re insuring something that's already dead. Just because a shop's open, it really doesn’t mean it's a viable business. With that knowledge, what do you guys think about the world we live in?”

As Stuart and William unpack Alivia's question, they explore the complexities of the modern economic landscape, the sustainability of businesses, and the perceived illusions that shape our world. Drawing from their unique perspectives, the co-hosts engage in a candid conversation, that challenges conventional wisdom.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 21, 202316:26
Ruffling the Feathers of the Debate on Captive Birds of Prey

Ruffling the Feathers of the Debate on Captive Birds of Prey

Join co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, as they embark on the kind of conversation you’d overhear at the pub. This discussion was prompted by a thought-provoking question sent in from listener Alvaro in Spain, which is as follows:

"Do you feel the use of captive trained birds of prey is a good way of dispersing other birds like pigeons and gulls?"

Stuart shares a poignant tale of clashes at a local rubbish tip, revealing the complexities of labelling creatures like gulls and pigeons as vermin

The discussion extends to the root causes — our burgeoning rubbish piles. William questions the true efficacy of using trained birds, while Stuart introduces a compelling analogy: these birds are like brooms, clearing the immediate surroundings. The debate explores whether using these birds is a practical solution, or, just a PR gesture.

The discussion extends to the root causes — our burgeoning rubbish piles. William questions the true efficacy of using trained birds, while Stuart introduces a compelling analogy: these birds are like brooms, clearing the immediate surroundings. The debate explores whether using these birds is a practical solution, or, just a PR gesture.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 19, 202314:47
It’s Not What You Say, It Is How You Say It

It’s Not What You Say, It Is How You Say It

“As podcast makers do you feel any kind of responsibility toward your listenership?”

That’s the listener question that's been sent in for discussion in today's episode by Ramona, Paraguay.

William kicks off the conversation by saying that turning up AND being reliably present for the listeners is one way of showing responsibility to the audience. He goes on to talk about how it's important to communicate any changes made in the podcast, for example our new release schedule for 2024.

Also you’d find as a listener if you met co-hosts Stuart and William, that they’re pretty much the people they are on the podcast. They are in some respects caricatures of themselves, as podcast hosting is a performative work.

William hopes they strike a balance between having you, the listener, in the forefront of their minds during recordings, but at the same time challenging themselves, which in turn challenges you as a listener.

So then William feels the responsibility as a podcaster is two fold. One that he and Stuart are careful in what they say, and two, that they still challenge you as a listener by talking honestly.

Stuart raises he and William have a responsibility for what they say, but not how a listener responds. William carries on this point by asking that if anything he and Stuart says triggers a response, get in touch with them, tell them what that response is, and get that conversation going.

Stuart brings up an action: it’s not what you say, it is how you say it.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 14, 202314:01
Is Going To Court The Answer?

Is Going To Court The Answer?

“Do you think Prince Harry spending a reported billion pounds taking the UK press to court is doing society any kind of favours?”

That’s the listener question that’s been sent in by Russ in Harcourt Hill, Oxford, England, for co-hosts Stuart and William to discuss.

William and Stuart start off by talking about what exactly Prince Harry is taking the UK press to court for. William goes onto say that Prince Harry isn’t the only person taking the UK press to court.

Stuart raises how the world of law is expensive and goes on to to talk about how Prince Harry uses the media to help him, but it goes too far the other way. There is some bad journalism out there. He asks whether we drive what journalists produce, or do they drive us?

Stuart finds the question leaves him a bit cold, so the court proceedings might not be relevant to the rest of us. He feels that there’s all kinds of psychology involved in what is motivating Prince Harry to pursue this, and an action for us to take is to maybe explore options outside the court of law. Is that a last resort, and what are the measures before that?

William feels that this case is highlighting that the behaviour of the press needs to be monitored. He sees that would make the press fairer. He further raises that the press know how to create antagonistic headlines to generate an emotional response, to get people to click or buy.

William asks if Russ is asking where the money is coming from? Is it private or public?

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 12, 202313:45
Shop Locally

Shop Locally

“We have eaten meat for thousands of years, so why is it now so wrong to still eat it?” That's the listener question that's come in for discussion on this podcast from Debs in Didcot, Oxfordshire, England.

William kicks off the episode saying that to him what makes it wrong to eat meat is the exploitation and the industrialisation of the meat production process, together with the devaluing of those animals we consume. He understands why someone would be against using beeswax, as it's taking something from the bees that they actually use. Though he feels using fish in aquaponics doesn't exploit them in the same way as they are there to fertilise the plants whilst being looked after, and usually go to good homes afterwards.

William raises the point of how meat is often seen as needing to be the centre of the dish, but this doesn’t need to be the case. Also it's not always understood how to properly cook certain vegetables either. He concludes by saying that we can feel very threatened by change, and by someone who is different. He encourages us all to engage with that person, and ask them why they do what they do, and be open yourself up to listening.

Stuart asks the questions: how far do we take the idea of not consuming animal products?

He raises that even with high welfare in meat production, there can still be exploitation. He concludes with a good point about your food. Make it as local as it can be whatever you consume, and as good as it can be, and then start to consider the wider ethics.

Announcement Time: This podcast release schedule is altering in 2024 to once a week on a Sunday at 10am UK time. That means Stuart and William will be discussing two questions per episode, instead of one, so the episodes will become longer.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

What do you make of this discussion today? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 07, 202319:54
250 Years Before Positive Environmental Change

250 Years Before Positive Environmental Change

“A report produced in the US claimed that if every country went net zero now it would be 250 years before the climate reacted positively. So, should we be doing more than aiming for net zero?” That’s the listener question sent in by Billy, Saugus, Massachusetts, USA.

Co-host William kicks off the conversation by stating that we’ve been putting out a large volume of carbon for decades, and agrees that we should be doing more, or do less, consume less for example. He brings up again that we have been piping out pollution for a very long time, going right back to the beginning of the industrial revolution. He raises the question of what a positive reaction by the climate would actually look like?

Stuart, your other co-host, believes we should always be doing more, but maybe we’ve striven in the wrong areas. He goes on to say it may be too late, and that the world's population will be affected in ways we haven’t even considered yet, and asks that if it is going to take 250 years for the climate to react positively, then it won’t be stable for a number of years.

Stuart throws in there that if we’re going to have to adapt, is that adaptation going to take our eye off the ball for changing? Are we going to keep doing what we’re doing and then adapt to the consequences, or are we going to change?

During this episode it’s mentioned the Wildlife In Everyday Garden Talk Stuart and William are giving for The Flore Gardening Society in Northamptonshire on November 8th at 7.45pm in the Chapel Schoolroom at the Flore United Reformed Church. Details here https://www.floreurc.org.uk/community/garden-society/

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Nov 05, 202307:07
Ethical Debate on Animal Rights

Ethical Debate on Animal Rights

How do misconceptions about the meat and dairy industries, like the one Suzi shared about cows producing milk because they are pregnant, contribute to the way we view and treat animals in our society?

Listen in to this episode, as your regular hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, joined by Suzi Darrington who once again takes her seat in the listener's chair, as they take a deep but relatable dive into this compelling listener question posed by Nigel in Blackbird Leys, Oxford, England: 

"What have Vegans got against eating butter and eggs, or drinking milk? How do those things hurt animals?"

Throughout the episode, Stuart, William, and Suzi explore the complexities of veganism, ethical consumption, and the importance of raising awareness, without alienating individuals. 

Among other things they discuss the ethical implications of consuming products meant for other animals' babies, the environmental aspects of different diets, and the ethics surrounding the treatment of animals in the meat industry.

At one point Stuart plays the role of the devil's advocate, prompting a question: should vegans dictate to meat eaters when the production processes of vegan food are not entirely sustainable either? 

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 31, 202341:25
Unearthing Meaning in Everyday Monarchy

Unearthing Meaning in Everyday Monarchy

In this engaging episode, co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow discuss the following question sent in by Ronny from Denchworth, Oxfordshire, England:

“I saw parts of Charles's and Camila’s coronation, and when they stood on the balcony at Buckingham Palace afterward, both wearing crowns, Camila especially seemed to be waving to the gathered crowds in a very stilted and mechanical way. Is this reflecting how their reign is going to be?”

Stuart takes us on an exploration of consistency, longevity, and reliability as key attributes of a successful monarch, setting the stage for a deep dive into the ever-evolving societal hierarchy. Is there a fundamental human need for a leader, even in isolated cultures?

William poses a profound question: Have we forgotten that, despite our technological advancements, we are still fundamentally animals, driven by instincts and desires?

Stuart wonders about the underlying motivation behind Ronny's question, believing there's a story concealed within.

In conclusion, the co-hosts challenge us to contemplate the value of our daily actions. Is what we do today any significance in the grand scheme of things? With a reflective lens, they ponder the essence of our existence, urging us to unearth the meaning in the mundane. Is it all worth it? 

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 29, 202318:07
Why Is the UK at the Centre of World Maps?

Why Is the UK at the Centre of World Maps?

Join us for an insightful and engaging exploration of maps, time zones, and their connections to our shared history. Is the centre of the world map a reflection of colonial legacies, or is it a matter of practicality and tradition? Listen in to find out!

This is the podcast where we explore thought-provoking questions from our listeners. In this episode, Debs from Didcot, Oxfordshire, England, sparks a captivating discussion with her question: "Most world maps have the UK at the centre. Is this because of the time zones or a subtle link back to our colonial pasts?"

Your co-hosts, Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow, embark on a journey to uncover the complexities of map representation, time zones, and their historical connections.

William kicks off the conversation by highlighting how maybe the centre of a map depends on where you buy it, and how it can vary between an atlas and a map. Stuart directs the focus to world maps, and the relationship between their layout and time zones, suggesting a connection to colonial history.

The discussion delves into the concept of perspective, William speculates on how our perspective could change if viewed from an extraterrestrial standpoint, alluding to common sci-fi and alien invasion depictions.

To add an interactive element, William recommends a practical experiment: turning your phone's map so that south becomes the top. It's a thought-provoking exercise that challenges preconceived notions about map orientation..

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 24, 202313:15
Embracing Inner Fullness

Embracing Inner Fullness

In this compelling episode, co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow embark on another journey of self-discovery, sparked by a question sent in by listener Derrick from West Hendred, Oxfordshire, England. Derrick’s question is as follows:

“We hear we should live life to the full. What exactly is that? How do we know if we are doing that, or wasting and frittering our lives away?”

Stuart kicks off the conversation by exploring the societal tendency to pass judgement on how others choose to live their lives. This judgement, he notes, often reflects our own internal insecurities and judgements about ourselves.

William chimes in with a personal anecdote, sharing how he's been questioned about his pursuit of learning the Finnish language, despite having no immediate plans to relocate to Finland. He suggests that such pursuits serve as an exercise for the brain, forging new neural connections and pathways, and expanding horizons.

The co-hosts contemplate the idea of a "full life," with William emphasising that it can encompass a myriad of meanings and activities. Stuart delves into the psychology behind our judgments, and the ways they connect to our own self-perceptions.

In conclusion, Stuart underscores the elusiveness of definitive answers, and encourages listeners to reflect on the concept of a full life, and draw their own conclusions.

William's parting advice is to strive to live the best life possible, and to be kind to yourself along the way.

During this episode Stuart mentions the Wildman On Wheel fundraiser, here a link to that fundraiser: https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/wildmanonwheels

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 22, 202315:22
The Planet Can Be Cooled

The Planet Can Be Cooled

A short bonus episode this one.

Having listened to a previous episode, listener and collaborator Tommy Serafinski has been in touch. 

Tommy and William also collaborated on another podcast series too, Have You Ever Considered?

Have You Ever Considered? “Hey guys, I'm writing as a listener after listening to your recent episode ‘Climate Contradictions’. Indeed the planet can be cooled by dispersing into the atmosphere sulphur dioxide. Of course, there would be some slide effects (for example the sky would be red - seriously, like in the movies) but overall it's quite easy to do. The number of flights required to achieve noticeable cooling of the planet (1 degree, etc) is actually a tiny fraction of what any old commercial airline operates. So the danger is actually that it's too easy to do and some rich nations (Saudis anyone) could decide on their own for the rest of the world to cool down the planet. Apparently, calcium carbonate also could be used for that purpose but I didn't read any deeper analysis about that. You can read about this (and much much more) in this excellent book. https://tommysoutdoors.com/2022/01/11/the-wizard-and-the-prophet-by-charles-c-mann-a-book-review/ If you'd like to buy it - of course use my affiliate link - see, ended up not being entirely disinterested! Cheers, Tommy”.

Stuart raises as an action, that we should read the book which Tommy has recommended.

William suggests that the idea of cooling the climate down, according to conspiracy theorists, is already happening, with the use of what they call chemtrails creating more cloud cover to reflect more of the Sun’s energy back into space.

He raises how we’re in a time where feelings trump facts, and even that some people still wonder if we can really be impacting the climate negatively? Then goes on to talk about the effect of grounding all the flights in the US when 9/11 happened, when the average temperature went up by a degree.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 20, 202307:37
Cracking The LTN Controversy

Cracking The LTN Controversy

In this bonus episode, co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow dive deep again into the world of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs), addressing a question from long-time listener Hedley Thorne. They were once again joined by Suzi Darrington in the listener’s chair.

Hedley’s question is as follows:

"LTNs, I believe, are a relatively recent invention, and so what has brought about the requirement for them, and what are their positive and negative effects on the local community and businesses?" Low Traffic Neighbourhoods or LTNs have become a hot topic, polarising communities and sparking protests, particularly in the picturesque city of Oxford. Right from the start, Stuart and William tackle the basics of what LTNs are, and why they evoke strong reactions. Special guest Suzi Darrington, a familiar voice in the Listener Chair, joins the conversation once again. The trio discusses the historical use of roadblocks in Oxford, with William shedding light on the fact that LTNs are not a new concept.

Suzi is quick to highlight the positive aspects of life with LTNs, seeing them as a crucial step toward building better public transport links. She also delves into the recent anti-LTN protests in Oxford, and how they are tied to the idea of the 15-minute neighbourhoods. Stuart raises the question of whether this is merely about reinstating local communities. William explores the role of media, and the impact of ingrained habits when it comes to LTNs.

Stuart makes a key point: LTNs aren't banning cars; they're just gently nudging traffic in different directions. Suzi shares her experiences using public transport and cycling around Oxford, highlighting the advantages of reducing car dependency.

William mentions businesses that claim LTNs have caused their closure, but Suzi points out that these neighbourhoods emerged during the COVID pandemic, and there are other factors at play. Stuart calls for transparency, requesting to see the businesses' financial records to gauge the direct impact of LTNs.

William argues that many businesses, not just recently, but for years, have failed to adapt to changing circumstances. Stuart emphasises the significance of location for businesses and suggests that they might need extra assistance in relocating and adapting.

The episode concludes with a discussion about what the council should do. The consensus is to persevere with LTNs, with Suzi highlighting the enthusiasm of the younger generation for addressing the climate crisis and their willingness to embrace change without ingrained habits.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 19, 202331:51
Brainwashed By The 7 Main Polluters

Brainwashed By The 7 Main Polluters

“We’re brainwashed into thinking we as individuals can save the world, when I’ve heard 7 companies are responsible for most of the carbon humans have ever emitted. Is getting out on the streets and protesting the only answer?” That’s the listener question sent in by Eve, in Haslam, Nottingham, England for co-hosts Stuart and William to explore. Stuarts states right off the bat that there is never just one singular answer to anything. We’re distracted at times by the big corporations, it's true, and we can feel pressured into doing things as individuals, which can take the onus away from the big companies to do anything themselves. The big quandary we have is that there really needs to be a big change in how we all live, but how on earth do we go about that? Stuart’s conclusion is that street protests are one but not the only answer. We need to do our best to transition in as many ways as possible, because it’s very hard to change the wind of change when they’re coming at it from many different routes.

William is amazed by who owns and influences what, and what one company owns when you drill down. For example, Goodreads is run by Amazon, and how many breakfast cereals does Pepsi have a stake in? It’s very difficult to avoid the 7 companies that Eve has alluded to, as their tentrills are everywhere, so is protest the only answer William inquires? Yes, in a way, but there are many ways to protest. Stuart elaborates on this point, for example abstaining from using a particular product is an act of protest. You can protest by just talking about it, and by keeping it in the public eye and not letting it get buried.

An action your co-hosts came up with for this particular episode is to try to seek balance, but also not sticking with the status quo either.

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Oct 17, 202311:00
Social Media’s Reality Distortion

Social Media’s Reality Distortion

Suzi Darrington is once again sat in the ‘Listener’s Chair’ alongside Stuart and William for this listener question from Ronny, in Denchworth, Oxfordshire, England.

“Are young people's perception of reality distorted by the cultural influences of their preferred social media platforms?”

Suzi talks about the different phones she had when younger, saying her first smartphone was at the age of 12. Her generation grew up with social media, and has always had it as a big part of her life. She’s never had a phone that didn’t have social media on it. In the past you’d have to dedicate time to social media, she now carries it around in her back pocket. This makes her feel a bit trapped, but acknowledges she puts it on herself. The conclusion is social media is an addiction, it taps into addictive behaviours, similar to how fruit machines entice people.

The next generation are getting much shorter form content, that’s more addictive, and Suzi can see how this kind of content could shape views. There's a growing community of men who hate women, with the social media world reshaping reality. Suzi delves into the reality of how these men hate women, and how they look up to individuals who perpetuate those thoughts. Her conclusion is that she’d need to be really self aware to fully understand the impact Instagram has had on her, with the content being so clean and saturated. She feels Instagram has placed a pressure on how she looks and gives her an unrealistic expectation of reality. Even the content that’s supposed to show reality, itself has been curated and selected.

Social media has a bigger influence on her when she isn’t busy. When she’s got things to do, she uses it less. After re-reading the question Suzi talks about how each social media platform has a different feeling, and in fact over her lifetime these platforms have changed.

Material that is against what you believe is pushed to you just to get a reaction, as it keeps engagement on that platform’ It engenders arguments, which in turn distorts people’s perception of reality. Suzi feels that social media is heading towards more short form content, more outrage, trying to keep people on the platforms as much as possible. Consuming, commenting, reacting.

Tik Tok has been accused of causing frenzies of activity, and yes, social media can be a great place to connect, but a bad place to feel you truly belong.

William raises an action we can all consider is to do nothing, and feel comfortable with being bored, and to change the word to want rather than to need. We need to stop filling our time with ‘stuff’ and activity, and spend time actively just sitting and being.

Stuart asks where this kind of thinking and behaviour is going? Both he and William lived before the advent of social media, which prompts Suzi to ask what they actually did with their time.

They just got on with life!

During this episode this fundraiser is mentioned, check it out https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/wildmanonwheels

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 15, 202340:30
Should Landlords Be Demonised?

Should Landlords Be Demonised?

Regular co-hosts Stuart and William are joined by Suzi Darrington. an Oxford University Crankstart Intern with them in the summer, who returns to the ‘Listener’s Chair’ to give her two pennies worth and because this question really resonated with her. She will be back again in future episodes. The following question came from listener Derrick, in West Hendred, Oxfordshire, England.

“Should landlords be demonised as they are after all providing homes. Even if they put the prices of rents up too much though and no one can afford them, the homes are still there though, and could be turned into AirB&B’s?”

Is the core of this issue how we look at renting and home ownership? Stuart compares the property ladder to a pyramid scheme: people jump on this ladder believing they’ll make money but that horse has bolted. He says people don’t like moving and mentions the north/south divide as well as the unfair distribution of property in the UK. The North East has a lot of empty houses because the population has moved out. How can we get people to move to places that have a surplus of housing, and make it fair? Also, the social housing that building companies should create often falls short of the target. How can we change that? 

William feels a home is a sanctuary where you feel safe, not a transient place you just exist in. He mentions how the major UK supermarkets were pulled up by the government for potentially profiteering from the cost of living crisis. Are landlords profiteering too? He says we need more equality and a wide variety of properties, particularly affordable rental places. The social housing stock is low, and the bar to be eligible for a home is high. William compares going up the property ladder with going up in society. He asks where the drive for homeownership in the UK comes from. He and Stuart conclude that it goes way back. We live on a crowded island and are protective of our property. William cites the episode with guest Heli Paulasto where the discussion was framed around the different attitudes around the right to roam between Finland and the UK. He points out that in the past large housing estates were built, e.g. in Glasgow, with no amenities, and that it still happens with housing projects today. He goes on to raise the idea of the 15-minute city.

Suzi looks at the sinister side of all of this. We appear to be shifting in attitude towards a more privatised service industry in every aspect. She believes we have an obsession with ownership, an unachievable dream particularly for the younger generation. She asks is the desire to own our own home a reflection of sovereignty and is this baked into the British character? 

They conclude with a conversation around why people move or stay, the mistrust of immigration, and the impact of air b&bs.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 10, 202341:30
Are Anti Cycling Issues Undoing Pro-Cycling Measures?

Are Anti Cycling Issues Undoing Pro-Cycling Measures?

“We seem to be cycling less since Covid. Councils really encouraged us to cycle more during the lockdowns, but it seems to be they too easily undo the pro-cycling measures when anti-cycling issues are raised by motorists and others?”.

That’s today's listener question up for discussion, sent in by Rob from East Lockinge, Oxfordshire, England.

We always give an ad free experience on this podcast. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

As someone who cycles himself, co-host William believes that the Oxford City Council are at least trying to be more cycle friendly. He doesn’t label himself as a cyclist but more as someone who cycles. Using a bike is just one method he uses to get around the city. 

William feels that the Oxford City Council are more pro cycling. He wonders if the perspective of this question sent in by Rob, in a rural area, shows the trend in the countryside, where again more people were potentially cycling during the lockdown and have gone back to driving more now that we are back to more “normal times”.

As far as William is aware, bus usage levels haven’t recovered since COVID, and he believes that overall, COVID has had a major effect on all our lives, particularly how we travel around. Maybe more people are now opting for the car, which can feel like a safer environment than going back to public transport.

Co-host Stuart raises that during COVID he became aware that more sections of the road were being given to cyclists, and maybe those are now being removed in some areas. He goes on to suggest that potentially more people are now taking the bus or driving, rather than cycling, but also that he knows people who picked up the cycling habit during COVID which they’ve kept up.

He feels that to explore this topic more, we need maybe a local councillor, as this debate is bigger than he and William. William wonders though whether a councillor would want to be a guest on the podcast, as their words are always picked apart by people.

Stuart suggests that what has changed is that many people’s lives are busy again, so it could just appear that people are cycling less. This whole idea needs to be monitored fully to really find out the answer to this question.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 08, 202311:30
Future Pandemic Governance

Future Pandemic Governance

In another thought-provoking episode of The People’s Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, your co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow dive deep into another discussion, prompted by a question from listener Gavin, from Grove, Oxfordshire, England.

The question Gavin poses is:

”In the UK there are governmental subcommittees reviewing the benefits and costs of decisions made around the Covid-19 science during the pandemic in the UK. Its hard to do this when using hindsight as the decisions our government and other world governments made were done in real time, with less information. If decisions had been made with the benefit of the hindsight we’d have now, would the experience have been any better? Is this review an impossible task?”

Stuart kicks off the conversation by reflecting on the Scottish government's response to the pandemic, pointing out that criticisms have emerged, suggesting a need for a more people-focused approach, rather than just infection rate-focused decisions. He highlights the inherent challenge governments face in real-time assessments of the impact of their choices on the public and emphasises the importance of proactive support measures.

However, William provides a fresh perspective, shifting the conversation from what should have been done to, what we can and should do in the future. He acknowledges the value of hindsight, but also its limitations, arguing that the review is a vital tool for shaping responses to future pandemics.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 03, 202314:00
It’s Black History Month
Oct 01, 202302:60
Uncomfortable Truths When Unearthing The Past

Uncomfortable Truths When Unearthing The Past

Join hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow in this thought-provoking episode, sparked by a question from listener, Rob from East Lockinge, Oxfordshire, England. Focusing on the world of museum culture, they delve deep into the complex issue of artefact ownership, colonialism's lingering legacy, and the stories we choose to tell. The question sent in by Rob is as follows:

“British museums could ultimately close if they start returning artefacts and exhibits obtained due to colonisation? It could be the thin end of the wedge with loads more things being returned to their original cultural owners. If the floodgates are opened institutions like Cambridge University could also be returning stolen colonial treasure as it were, that they use for educational purposes. 

Even though there's no law enforcing the return of items, it is perhaps a good time to really progress this, especially as more new requests are coming in from the original owners. Do you feel telling the story of these items is best done collaboratively and fairly? Not in a protectionist approach that risks distorting the item's story and its cultural relevance now, today?”

During this episode Stuart reminds us of the profound impact of colonialism on the industrial revolution, and on the very fabric of society in the UK, and how confronting this history is essential for finding answers to the questions posed. He asks, who do these collections of items in museums really serve? We need to be telling the whole story, including the good and the bad.

William delves into the significance of understanding the origins of these items and the permissions granted for their display. Is an item's educational value determined by its backstory and the care taken in its presentation? What lies at the heart of a museum's mission?

As always this podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Oct 01, 202319:45
Are Humans Just Another Giant Panda?

Are Humans Just Another Giant Panda?

How can we discern genuine eco-friendly intentions from greenwashing in large businesses, and is it inevitable that there will always be a level of suspicion when it comes to their environmental efforts and motives? Are we, as a society, at a point where we can still make choices to change our future, or have we already passed the point of no return in addressing pressing environmental issues, like E-waste?

Join co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow in yet another thought-provoking episode, as they delve into the complex world of E-waste, and its environmental implications.

This conversation was sparked by the following question from Derrick, West Hendred, Oxfordshire, England:

“E-Waste is growing 3 times faster than the population. Eyes roll when we’re told big business is going sustainable as it's just out to make money. I feel though we need to urgently decouple growth and enviro sustainability, for them and us, it's not an either or. Perhaps enviro sustainability can still mean growth, just not as much? Some even say Hydrogen fuels are a distraction, but it does seem to fill a gap that electricity can’t access. Maybe hybrid fueling is the way forward for business, consumers and us?”

As the discussion unfolds, the hosts delve deep into the human condition, the potential for meaningful change, and whether we have already crossed the point of no return in shaping our livable future. Stuart even presents a unique analogy, suggesting that human society resembles a multi-level marketing business, or even a pyramid scheme.

Stuart introduces the idea of the reusability of lithium, while William highlights the challenge of discerning genuine eco-friendly intentions from greenwashing in businesses. The conversation takes a philosophical turn, exploring the concept of growth, not just in terms of monetary wealth, but as personal and human development. They also ponder whether humanity is on a collision course with its own demise, akin to an evolutionary dead-end like the Giant Panda finds itself in.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sep 26, 202322:12
Shaping Beliefs And Perspectives

Shaping Beliefs And Perspectives

Who truly sets the standards for how countries should behave, and can we influence change without imposing our beliefs on others? Are bans on countries with societal unfairness hosting major events a solution, or does it inadvertently create echo chambers and hide underlying issues?

In this thought-provoking episode, co-hosts Stuart 'The Wildman' Mabbutt and William Mankelow engage in a candid conversation, sparked by a question from listener, Kate in Rowstock, Oxfordshire, England, whose question is as follows:

“A workman on my roof was shouting his views to his work colleagues the other day, do you agree with him? He said (and I’ve edited out his prolific swear words, 3 in one sentence at times. Not much room left for what he was saying!)

During the football world cup in 2022 players and the sport were politicising the event by ramming the rainbow and gay rights down our throats. Some countries frown upon homosexuality, and that should be respected. Protest brings about change but is using sport that way a step too far?

Surely the debate is better maintained by banning countries hosting and competing in these events if they have unfairness in their society, like Qatar does? Or will that push discrimination underground?

Who decides if another countries views are wrong? Many powerful countries who criticise others have rules others don’t like either so are they really purer than pure?

Surely dialogue and reason is the way to go? Although if we want diversity why do we hit countries over the head because of extreme beliefs? Gay, women, abortion, its all hypocritical. No culture is right but are we talking about fairness?”

Stuart kicks things off by sharing his observations on profanity and intelligence, suggesting that there's more to it than meets the eye. William then raises the important question of cultural relativism, challenging our preconceived notions about what's right and wrong on a global scale. They both agree that timing plays a crucial role in using platforms like sporting events to protest effectively.

Stuart emphasises the need to confront and engage with beliefs different from our own, while William suggests a practical approach of questioning the origins and motivations behind people's opinions, to facilitate meaningful dialogue. Every country has beliefs that other countries don’t have, don't agree with. For example the UK largely deny how things are connected with colonialism.

Stuart believes there is a lot of homophobia that is wrapped up in pretend acceptance, and he feels that is why we haven’t moved on as a world society.

This episode is a reminder that meaningful change begins with dialogue, and no disagreement has ever been resolved without people discussing and challenging their beliefs.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sep 24, 202322:55
Influence and Silence

Influence and Silence

A slightly surreal episode, not the first, won’t be the last, as co-hosts Stuart and William tackle today's listener question, which is from George, in Upton, Oxfordshire, England.

“Actress Kate Winslet has stated she feels the government should tighten up  the online bill in the UK, to protect vulnerable users. Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver ran a campaign to improve school dinners. Then there was the Blackpool Football Club player who came out and announced he was gay last year. Should those with influence use their voice to raise issues, or stay quiet? Those that dislike them, rarely seem to listen to anything they say anyway. Maybe even turning away from issues because of who has raised them?!”

William raises, right off the bat, how he and Stuart know someone who detests Jamie Oliver. Stuart tells the story that the person referred to was quite happy to accept bad school dinners for his kids, just so he didn’t have to say that Jamie Oliver was right about the appalling state of them.

William points out that you often see a person’s true motivation by presenting them with silence, as they are often expecting a reaction to what they’re saying if its slightly controversial.

Stuart discusses that if you are going to use your voice to influence others, you need to choose your battles wisely. It also needs to be at the right time. Those that dislike certain celebrities rarely listen to what they have got to say, which needs to be dismissed, you just need the critical mass to absorb the message. It’s not about speaking up, it’s not about staying quiet, it’s about speaking up and staying quiet at the right time. Sometimes silence says more than speaking.

Stuart further raises that different audiences need different role models, different messages, different language, different vocabulary, different approaches. There isn’t anybody who shouldn’t speak up.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sep 19, 202315:28
Is Our Inner Voice Ever Based In Fact?

Is Our Inner Voice Ever Based In Fact?

During this episode Stuart and William talk about the WOW Effect / ⁠Wildman On Wheels⁠ where we are raising £24,000 to help fund two wheelchairs enabling Stuart to continue bringing nature into the daily lives of others, sharing a lifetime of outdoor wisdom.

Here is a link to that fundraiser: ⁠https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/wildmanonwheels⁠ Through the Wow Effect (Wildman On Wheels) we aim to show that even if you have a green space you can enjoy within 15 minutes of where you live, is that space really accessible if you are in a wheelchair or have another disability and can't get in when you arrive? We want to reframe the understanding of accessible countryside.

So on to today's listener question sent in by Francis, in Blewbury, Oxfordshire, England, and Stuart and William set about answering it.

“The inner voice that we all have, is what it says fact?”

Stuart raises right off the bat that the inner voice says isn’t fact, and that opinions are just passing momentary consciousness. It’s not fact, it is just your opinion at that point in time. So, if the inner voice is a series of thoughts, and a set of electrical impulses, can there ever be a time when what we think can ever be interpreted as fact?

He further raises that we get confused with when our brain is processing stuff, and then assuming that that it is a good barometer of what we think, and we feel at any given point. In the long run little of that really means anything. It is however the actions that come from these thoughts and processes that can be damaging or positive, it's up to us.

William goes on to say that at all times of the day, he believes, your brain is trying to make sense of the world around you, and it tries this by thought, so he agrees with Stuart that the inner voice isn’t fact. William always tries to take his inner thoughts as another person talking to him. He can then choose whether he engages with it, or not. Sometimes it is a good idea to allow these thoughts to flow through you, as they can be irrelevant, they can be harmful.

Stuart concludes by asking are we stuffed because we’re trying to bring meaning to something that isn’t really there? So maybe there is no meaning to the inner voice? He does go on to say that the inner voice should not be totally ignored. It comes back to the balance we should seek in our lives. Balance and measure.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sep 17, 202309:14
Who Is In Charge of the Internet?

Who Is In Charge of the Internet?

Todays listener question for Stuart and William to explore has been set by Cedric, in East Hagbourne, Oxfordshire, England

“Who is in charge of the internet, or is it multiple players?”

William believes that nobody is in charge of the internet, and that the internet is a mesh of networks, with gatekeepers, for example the internet providers. 

William marvels though at the fact the internet allows seamless communication.

Stuart on the other hand believes that someone invented it, people own aspects of it, certain people manipulate it in certain ways, but questions who’s in charge? Hasn’t it gone beyond ownership now? 

Stuart asks where the internet is, and what exactly is it? What freaks him out is there are massive cables under the ocean, but with the internet becoming more and more wireless, will all those cables currently in use be dumped, and just left to litter the ocean floor? It’s the same disposal habits over and over again.

William’s action for the episode is to think about how you use the internet, and Stuart’s is to take your rubbish home with you.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sep 12, 202307:38
Is King Charles III Good For The Environment?

Is King Charles III Good For The Environment?

Yet another question for co-hosts Stuart and William to explore today, sent in by regular listener Molly, from Oxford, England

“Now King Charles 3rd has to talk, behave and guide from a non-political place, will all his good work dealing with the climate and ecological crisis be lost? Or were plans put in place for Charles’s work to continue once he became King? Maybe though you feel that although King Charles has to step away from some of the good causes he was involved with during his time as Prince Of Wales, he may now be able to provide a new space for people to come together and discuss the big issues, which could be how he makes the role as King his own, and differentiates his reign from his mothers?”  

Stuart raises that King Charles, now he’s monarch, has to in theory, guide in a non-political way, which maybe he didn’t do before. He seems like a person who thinks about things on a pretty deep level. Stuart feels it's perhaps a shame for him to come to the throne so late in his life.

There’s a concern for some people that all his work and influence dealing with the climate and ecological crisis could be lost? Stuart points out that though he’s stepping away from good causes, he’s 75 years old, so was most likely already stepping away anyway.

Stuart feels that with Charles being king, he can potentially take these subjects to places maybe other monarchs haven’t? For example he recently spoke about the Windrush generation and had a celebration about that. You wouldn’t necessarily have seen this during Elizabeth’s time. Or would you?

William points out the obvious aspect that he’s a very different monarch to his Mother because we know him better than we did Elizabeth. We’ve heard a lot more about what he’s thinking, so William asks how much will be diluted because Charles is now monarch? William mentions that it’s going to be a long time till we have a young monarch again.

An action Stuart comes up with is that everything, whatever it is, should be bigger than just one person. It is a weak point if it isn’t.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience, so be assured, that will never happen. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice. 

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends ⁠https://podfollow.com/the-peoples-countryside-environmental-debate-podcast/view⁠ , support our work through Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠ or just 'follow' to avoid missing any public posts. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: ⁠https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside



Sep 10, 202315:04