The People's Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast

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. https://linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside read less
ScienceScience

Episodes

[TW] Can You Be Too Controversial?
6d ago
[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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Climate Twister: Arrested Musings Unleashed
11-02-2024
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Meetings, Doughnuts And Germs
04-02-2024
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
[TW] A Matter Of Life & Death
28-01-2024
[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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Environmental Intricacies Explored
21-01-2024
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Adapting And Surviving
14-01-2024
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
There Are Rarely Categorics
07-01-2024
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Who’ll Dominate Next?
17-12-2023
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
The LOAF Takeover: Undoing the Mess We Made with the Climate
12-12-2023
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Turf Talk
10-12-2023
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
To Do Or Not To Do Business, That Is The Question
05-12-2023
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Two Ears And One Mouth
03-12-2023
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Extraction Dilemmas
28-11-2023
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message
Shouldn’t We Just Send Artefacts Back?
26-11-2023
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 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thepeoplescountryside/message