 Rory, you just, the commercial world is a world of material failures. Not exclusively. You'd be a very bad manager, if you attempted to run people entirely using numerical metric incentives. The more astute business people are not quite as portrayed, I think that is fair. What I am heading at is, or what I wonder about is also related to the yw y rhan o Rodiwn. Yn ystod y mynd i'w ymweld? Yn ystod y bydwys i'r wych o'r ffordd o'n mynd i'r ffordd o'n mynd i ymweld ymweld y bod, mae'n ymweld ymweld yma. Rwy'n gweithio ychydig yn llwyddiadau o'r ffordd, mae'n ddigwedd i'w gweithio ychydig o'r humana. A'r ddigweddau, o'ch ddigweddau o'r ddigweddau o'r ddigweddau o'r ddigweddau o'r ddigweddau o'r ddigweddau Yn ddweud o'r rhan o'r rhan o'r cymdeithas, mae'r cyfnodau ym mhion. Mae'n cael ei wneud i'r peth yn ddweud o'r hŷr o'r cyfnodau sy'n ddoch chi'n gwybod. Rwy'n cael ei wneud'r rhan o'r gweithio. Ond yw'r hyn o'r cyrchaf sy'n ymwneud hynny, ond mae'r cyflwyno o'r cyflwyno a'r ysgolwch yn rhan o'r piwyd. I think first of all we're always looking at external agency as the reason for people being unhappy. First of all people are innately a little bit unhappy and indeed dissatisfied might be a better word. And it's rather good that they are, to be frank. That's the first point. The lot of man is not actually one of unending bliss and the eradication of all possible annoyance or irritation. The second point is we always blame things on external agency. Ond, mae'r cydnod yn gweithio fod yn bryd o'r iawn wedi'i gwerthio gyda'r cyd-brydau o'r cyd-brydau a'r cyd-brydau sy'n gyfweld sydd yn tryb i'r ysgol. Atheism yn cael ei mewn gwahanol wedi'i gwneud y chyfnod i'r hollol. Yn gyfnod o'r hynny, mae'r cyd-brydau, mae'r cyd-brydau sy'n gweithio erbyn yn gwneud i wneud i 150 a 300 yn ychydig o'r cyd-brydau gyda'r cyllidol, ymgyrch, yn ymgyrch yn ymweld i gweithio'r peidio gydig tynnu gweithio'r uwch yn oed yn gwybod iddyn nhw yn ystyried o identifiadau o'r hyn yn ddod, yn ymgyrch yn bethau. I'n ni'n bwrdd fawr o gyllid yn gweithio'r gwahoddiadau ac mae ymgeithio'r neym yn Marcus ymgyrch yn ysgrifennu o'r ymgyrch yn Dallos yn Hwsten a'r byw yn Bostwn. Mae'r byw yn gweld yn gweithio'r hemfyrdd yn ymgyrch o'r status, A gweithio'r sgwpio'r lleoli'r lleoli yn holodau ni'r lleoli'r lleoli yn bur Shaktai'n dweud am ymolau'r lleoli i gwasanaethau gweithio'r lleoli'n gweithio'r lleoli yn bur Mae lechio'r ei glas o'r cyffredin ni'n gyrddig yn campur, rwy'n gweithio'r lleol sefydlu sefydlu i'r oedd. Rwy'n gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Y ddiwrdd y maes gyda household yw sylfenau ym mhwyntrach, rydyn nod ymlaen i chi gweithi Peiton i ymlaen i chi'n Cymru. Ac mae'r gwaith i'r ffônwyr ynghylch yn mynd i gwahanol yn ddiffrwng. Mae'n gwirio'n gwybod ysgol. Mae'n gwirio'n gwybod ysgol o'r byw o'r byw o'r byw. A wnaeth o'r gwaith yma yw'r gwaith o'r byw o'r byw o'r byw o'r byw. Mae'n cael ei wneud o'r byw o'r byw. Mae'n gweithio o'r byw o'r byw. Ie, a moddiadau sydd wedi bod yn ymddangos, yna ymddangos yng ngyfgrifennu, yn y ddweud yma, yn ei wneud y ffordd o'r ffordd. Mae'r cyrraffi ar moddiadau. Yn ymddangos, mae'n ffordd yn ymddangos ar y margau. Mae'n ffordd yn ymddangos ar y stryd, ac mae'n dda'r ffordd o'r ffordd a'r ffordd o'r ffordd, yn ymddangos ar y stryd, mae'n dda'r ffordd. Second, it's a dissatisfied society because the first slogan of modernity was every person, every man, woman are born free. Never before have the utter dissentence. It was an absurd sentence. One was born a master, the other was born a slave. The moment we said all men are born free, we created dissatisfied societies because we are not free enough because some are more free than us. We are not equally free. So everyone is dissatisfied. There is nothing wrong with dissatisfaction. This is what I want to say. Because dissatisfaction keeps our society alive and kicking. In previous societies, in traditional societies, if you are dissatisfied, there came the crisis. Of course, crisis, I agree with you. It's a metaphor, okay? But according to this metaphor, the sick person either dies or recovers. Normally traditional societies die in crisis. Modern society, for the time being, recovers always from this crisis. Crisis belong to the life of modern society. Without crisis, you cannot survive. Without newspapers, you cannot exist. Without propaganda, you cannot exist. Because we need to remain dissatisfied. You need to be able to say what exists is wrong. Something else would be good. What exists is ugly. Something else would be beautiful. What exists is the most important. It's unjust. Something else would be just. Believe from this. Sometimes we are right, something we are wrong when we make the propositions about this something else. When we make the wrong proposition, disaster can follow as we know it from the 20th century. But it's our responsibility. Well, Anish, Heller has just given a wonderful demonstration of what it is to be alive and kicking. I felt the table vibrating under the effect of it. I actually wanted to say something else in response to what Rory said, which I think is very important. He referred to the transfer of populations from small villages to great megalopolis. How this causes enormous disruption and produces in itself a search for status of a new kind. I would just like to reflect on the fact that the great cities that have grown in the modern world have also brought along with themselves an art and a literature of loneliness. A loneliness of a new kind, which you find already in Balzac, but also in Flaubert, and of course paradigmatically in people like Kafka and so on in the Central European tradition. It's as though our need for each other, which is the thing that is most beautiful in human beings, is suddenly cut off from its fulfillment at the very moment when it can be so easily fulfilled in so many ways. I think this is the most interesting thing to reflect upon. This is the major transition that modernity has imposed upon us. This mass society where we're surrounded at every point by opportunities, by people, by opportunities of friendship and also opposition and so on. At the same time, there has grown within that this unassuageable core of loneliness. Very interesting thing, a beautiful point. When I moved to London, I grew up in the Welsh borders, I gained enormously in terms of financial capital, but in social capital I became rapidly impoverished. I have friends in London who I've known since the age of seven, probably about ten of them. There's nobody I can really call on now to pick me up from the airport this evening with the possible exception of my wife. So in terms of the favour economy, all those economies die out and are replaced by the commercialization of everything. Another very interesting correlation is if you look at American voting patterns, far bigger than race, sexual orientation or anything else is simply where you live. If you live in a town or city over 600,000, you're overwhelmingly Democrat if you don't, you're overwhelmingly Republican. Now, what you derive from that, you could say, that arguably rural communities actually find that what you might call free market capitalism actually works fairly well and is a fairly amiable part of their lives and their content with it, that everybody in larger cities feels that something desperately needs to change, but to what they're attributing their dissatisfaction may be entirely the wrong thing. Daniel, to start for all of you, but why is it that we embraced in the 80s, 90s this model of neoliberalism? Why is it that it could become such a powerful ideology that for at least two decades we wanted to believe that the financial world and everything related to that would be our future and why? I guess it comes out of a sense of collapse of a previous seemingly viable models, the sense of the collapse of post-war social democracy, or at least the crisis of post-war, if I'm allowed to use the word crisis, social democracy, obviously the Berlin Wall, the collapse of the division of the world into two systems, and a kind of triumphant discourse of neoliberalism that was sold to us and that appealed to something perhaps in many people linked with this idea of endless progress and growth linked in the way Rory was describing with perhaps certain illusions about infinite possibility, of course only for a minority of people in the world, but nonetheless a powerful, had a powerful grip on us. Of course there was that feeling of a model triumphant, but if we're thinking about modernity, which Agnes is inviting us to do, I think one should hold on to another side of modernity in this discussion, which is I'm thinking of Zygmunt Baumann's book Modernity and the Holocaust, that in a way the question then of what it was in modernity that doesn't produce this kind of more creative flux and change and emancipation, but certain kinds of risk and the pull towards the drive towards the world of camps and extermination or the world of a police state and so on, which has to be also the sort of other side of any conversation about modernity presumably of the emancipatory possibilities and that much darker side and how one understands those relationships because they're clearly very modern forms of barbarism. They're not simply some archaic remnant. There's something that modernity produced that is extremely ominous and that's, as a historian, I guess I'm interested in the history of the endeavor to understand those processes and what they owe to social factors, politics, but also perhaps to certain things about people, to the nature of mind, the unconscious and so on, that the Frankfurt School thought about, many people thought about in the 20th century. The book that came to my mind was Eric From's great book, which I still think people, it repays rereading, Fear of Freedom, which was also translated as Escape from Freedom in 1941, which was an attempt to think about in a way, you know, the fear people have of freedom and in a way the lure towards authoritarianism and that's also part of the story of modernity. I think it's very important to think what you said and what you said. It's basically impossible to compare gains and losses. That's our problem. You spoke about loneliness. That's very true, but loneliness is a loss, but solitude is a gain. So you cannot, this is what you cannot compare basically. I would not say it's wonderful, it's a progressive epoch, not at all. I said it's different from all the previous epochs, different characteristics and there are gains and there are losses. Basically communities are lost in modernity. That's a loss, but solitude is one which is important for us single individuals. We can be alone.