The Black female voices Part 3. For Harriet

Hi this is Fred from IVisible

For those who do not know my channel I encourage you to check my previous videos and most importantly my website by clicking on the link in the description box of this video.

This video is part of a series so if you want to start from the beginning of this series just click on part 1 in the video library of this channel.

Today we will enter the world of the channel For Harriet

Truly For Harriet is enjoyable.

Nonetheless, I do not necessarily agree with all of her statements and she does make me think about the topics that she covers in a deeper level.

There is a warmth about her her communication style that is highly appealing . Beside she shows a lot of maturity and her beauty is to be recognised.

To me Harriet is doing a great job at voicing her opinions and I would love to hear her exploring more conversations with other youtubers about topics such as Politics, societal issues and/or health care.

The flow in which she is able to convey her thoughts is impressive.
In truth, it is non aggressive , it is also funny and very rich in discourse. This is very important to point out because it is so easy to get stuck in channels that do not bring much intellectual wise.

Not that we expect to hear a lecturer but at least the content should be stimulating enough so that the viewer feels at home.

This what For Harriet is.

A very keen communicator that makes you feel like you are listening to your friends chit chatting at the coffee shop next door. The piece of cake is, of course, required though !

I love hot chocolate so I often have a cup of it whilst watching For Harriet.

That is all for me today, I hope you did enjoy this video and let me know what you think of For Harriet in the comment section.
Thanks for listening and see you in part 4 of the series.

Reference (n.d.). Why don’t I just date out? | Black Love follow-up. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022].



‘Blimey’: James O’Brien simply blown away by these words on physics and politics

James O’Brien:

You were irresistibly drawn to the subjects you weren’t necessarily the best out of school, because you weren’t drawn to the subjects where you could bluff your way to an eighth like you can in history of an English and you weren’t drawn to the subjects that encouraged the admission of not knowing stuff. You were drawn to the subjects that had an actual destination, a subject where you could sit back, even if it took seven years and say, done it. 

Brian Cox :
Yeah, I mean, I have a lot of history academics who would be offended by what you said but for good reasons…

James O’Brien :

But what would they because there’d be another history academic over there who completely challenges their analysis as why, you know, Charlemagne…

Brian Cox :
I think you need all of these disciplines. They’re necessary, but not sufficient to understand the human condition, understand our place in the universe, run a peaceful world, you need them all. You need it obviously…

James O’Brien:
Yeah, imagination as well as knowledge.

Brian Cox :
And again, it goes back to behaviourists. Right? Is it the idea that, you know, you say, Well, I’ve got a PhD in history, therefore, I know how to run a country or I got PhD in physics therefore I know how to run a country. The truth of the matter is that all these human pursuits, the arts, humanities, sciences, music, theology, philosophy, all of them. All of them are attempts to understand what it means to be human, only these finite fragile lives that we have. And honestly, their attempts to get along. That is what politics is. I mean since we are talking about politics, that is why I think we have a problem at the moment, because it’s become so adversarial. I think we’ve forgotten what we are supposed to be doing. We’re not supposed to be winning the argument actually, we’re not supposed to be putting forward a vision of society and winning as much as making sure that this wide mixture of opinions that you naturally have in a country of 60,70, 80 million people is accommodated. You’ve got to understand that you’re not right. It’s not your vision that the way to run the country is not necessarily or even possibly the right one, because there are lots of different views.

James O’Brien :
I don’t know whether this will surprise you or not, but last week’s guest was Mike Lynch leader of the RMT who actually espouse to quite similar thoughts sitting in that chair about the you know, the the myth of the of the ultimate victory as it were about it is about achieving some of what you want while accommodating some stuff that you don’t want because that’s what getting along is really. 

Brian Cox :
Yeah, Oppenheimer in his reflexions, that is the transferable skills, then quantum mechanics. There isn’t an analogy. Imagine that you think about an electron. And it’s like it’s sometimes a single particle. You have to think of it as a point-like object , a grain of sand. Probably. Most of us were not thinking about looking at particles. But actually also we understand we have to think about it in some cases as an extended wavy thing that fills the space that it’s in. So you’ve got these two things that look contradictory, point, like object extended wavy thing. The truth is that it is neither of those. It’s a very complex kind of behaviour that this thing has. And these are two good analogies to try and think about it. And they’re applicable in different circumstances. So they look like ideas that are completely at right angles to each other, that you have to be mutually contradictory, but you have to hold them both in your head you have to have the skill, which is hold them in your head. And nature forces you to hold those two things in your head simultaneously, in order to get a full picture of the system or a better picture of the physical system. And of course, you know, I’m going to say it comes down too and so it is with politics. You’ve got to understand that human beings have individual needs and they have individuals, you know, that they go to work and they want to keep as much of their money as they can or wherever it is, you know, they have an individual life. But also human beings have a social life, the community exists, and all human beings understand that they have to compromise and work together. They’ve been compromising. and worked together 

James O’Brien :

Brian Cox :
And so they look like they’re pulling in different directions. You could often either say you could call them capitalism and communism, right, because he was talking in the 50s. Right? And MacArthur was pursuing him at the time, communism on one side, capitalism on the other side, but of course neither is the right way to do it. Because it’s complicated. It’s like an electron.

James O’Brien :
He was a genius. 

Brian Cox :
And Yes, that’s true he was. So, EPPs, if you gave that lecture to all the people around our government, and he said, You know what, let’s just try and understand quantum mechanics. And then you can understand the idea. And then we’ll move that idea over politics, because it is applicable and that is what Oppenheimer was doing. 

James O’Brien :
Blind me!


James O’Brien est tout simplement époustouflé par ces mots sur la physique et la politique

James O’Brien commence la discussion en disant :

Vous étiez irrésistiblement attiré par les matières dans lesquelles vous n’étiez pas nécessairement le meilleur, en ce faisant, vous pouvez bluffer votre chemin vers une matière comme l’histoire ou bien l’ anglais. Et vous n’étiez pas attiré par les sujets qui permettaient d’admettre que vous ignoriez certaines choses.
Vous étiez attiré par les sujets qui avaient un avenir certain, c’est-à- dire, un sujet où vous pouviez vous asseoir, même si cela prenait sept ans et au final dire, je l’ai fait.
Brians Cox répond :
Oui, je veux dire, j’ai beaucoup d’universitaires en histoire qui seraient offensés par ce que vous venez de dire et avec raison…

James O’Brien interrompu :
Mais de toute façon il y aurait un autre universitaire d’histoire qui contesterait complètement leur analyse, comme, par exemple celle de Charlemagne…

Brians Cox reprend la parole et dit :
Je pense que vous avez besoin de toutes ces disciplines. Elles sont nécessaires, mais pas suffisantes pour comprendre la condition humaine, pour comprendre notre place dans l’univers et pour diriger un monde pacifique, vous avez besoin de tous. Vous en avez besoin évidemment…

James O’Brien dit en même temps :
Oui, l’imagination, aussi bien que la connaissance.

Brians Cox continue:
Et encore une fois, cela revient aux comportementalistes. Est-il pertinent de dire, Eh bien, j’ai un doctorat en histoire, donc, je sais comment diriger un pays, ou j’ai obtenu un doctorat en physique, donc je sais comment diriger un pays.

La vérité, c’est que toutes ces activités humaines, les arts, les sciences humaines, les sciences, la musique, la théologie, la philosophie, sont des tentatives de comprendre ce que cela signifie d’être humain. C’est-à- dire donner un sens à ces vies fragiles et limitées que nous avons.

Et aussi, il s’agit d’une tentative de s’entendre. Je veux dire, puisque nous parlons de politique, je pense que nous avons un problème en ce moment, parce que c’est devenu trop conflictuel.

Je pense que nous avons oublié ce que nous sommes censés faire. Nous ne sommes pas censés gagner l’argument en fait, nous ne sommes pas censés mettre en avant une vision de la société et gagner. Il semble que nous pourrions nous assurer que ce large mélange d’opinions que vous avez naturellement dans un pays de 60,
ou 70 ou bien 80 millions d’habitants est accommodé.
Vous devez comprendre que vous n’avez pas raison. Ce n’est pas votre vision car ta vision n’est pas forcément ou nécessairement la bonne, parce qu’il y a beaucoup de points de vue différents.

James O’Brien ajoute:
Je ne sais pas si cela vous surprendra, mais l’invité de la semaine dernière était Mike Lynch, chef du RMT, qui a adhéré à des pensées assez similaires lorsqu’il était assis dans cette chaise. Il a abordé le sujet du mythe de la victoire ultime, ce qui en quelque sorte consiste à obtenir une partie de ce que vous voulez tout en tenant compte des choses que vous ne voulez pas parce qu’il s’agit de s’entendre entre nous.
Brians Cox continu:
Oui, Oppenheimer disait dans ses réflexions , c’est-à-dire les compétences transférables, puis la mécanique quantique qu’il y a des analogies.

Imaginez que vous pensiez à un électron. Et c’est comme si c’était une seule particule. Vous devez le considérer comme un point, comme un objet un grain de sable. Probablement que la plupart d’entre nous ne pensaient pas à regarder les particules. Mais en fait, nous comprenons aussi que nous devons les considérer dans certains cas comme des choses ondulées qui remplissent l’espace dans lequel elles se trouvent.

Vous avez donc ces deux choses qui semblent contradictoires. Un point ou un objet qui ondule. La vérité est que ce n’est ni l’un ni l’autre. C’est un genre de comportement très complexe que cette chose est. Et ce sont deux bonnes analogies sur lesquelles nous devrions méditer.

Et ces analogies sont applicables dans différentes circonstances.
Donc, ils ressemblent à des idées qui sont complètement perpendiculaires l’une à l’autre, et qui se contredisent mutuellement. Vous devez les tenir tous les deux dans votre tête, vous devez avoir la compétence, qui est de les tenir dans votre tête.

Et la nature vous oblige à tenir ces deux choses dans votre tête simultanément, afin d’obtenir une image complète du système, ou il serait mieux de dire que la nature vous force à obtenir une meilleure image du système physique.

Et bien sûr, vous savez, cette perception peut être appliquée à la politique. Vous devez comprendre que les êtres humains ont des besoins individuels, par exemple, ils vont au travail et ils veulent garder autant d’argent que possible où qu’il soit, donc, ils ont une vie individuelle.
Mais ils ont aussi une vie sociale, les communautés existent, et tous les êtres humains comprennent qu’ils doivent faire des compromis et travailler ensemble. Et ils en ont fait.

James O’Brien dit vivement:

Brians Cox continue:
Et donc il semble que les humains se soient tirés dans des directions différentes. Oppenheimer disait que vous pourriez les appeler capitalisme et communisme. C’est comme cela qu’il en parlait dans les années 50.

Et MacArthur le poursuivait à l’époque. Donc il y avait le communisme d’un côté et le capitalisme de l’autre, mais bien sûr, ni l’un ni l’autre n’est la bonne façon de le faire. Parce que c’est compliqué. C’est comme un électron.
James O’Brien dit:
c’était un génie.
Brians Cox continu:
Et oui, c’est vrai qu’il en était un. Donc, si vous donniez cette conférence à tous les gens de notre gouvernement, et Oppenheimer disait, vous savez quoi, essayons simplement de comprendre la mécanique quantique.
Et grâce à la mécanique quantique nous dépasserons les idées de la politique, parce que la mécanique quantique est aussi applicable à la politique.
Et c’est ce que faisait Oppenheimer.

James O’Brien fini la conversation en s’exprimant:




  • (n.d.). ‘Blimey’: James O’Brien simply blown away by these words on physics and politics. [online] Available at: [Accessed 12 Aug. 2022].
  • ” (2022). Who is RMT leader Mick Lynch? [online] The Sun. Available at: [Accessed 12 Aug. 2022].



The Black female voices
Part 1.Fab Socialism
Hi this Fred from IVisible

For those who do not know my channel I encourage you to check my previous videos and most importantly my website by clicking on the link in the description box of this video.

I would love to hear from you regarding both the quality of the videos and the website

So please leave a few words in the comment section of this video.
Without any further a due let’s get into todays’ video topic!
I have worked on a series about Black female youtubers who are to me worth learning from.

Hence the first Youtuber of the Serie is Fab Socialism

She is very articulate, organised, able to quote and create a good atmosphere. It is easy to understand her point of view without feeling threaten by her ideas or any of her arguments

Her sense of humour is uplifting and respectful which is a breath of fresh air in todays constant search for sensationalism. That makes her entertaining and credible.

indeed, there are not many unlikeable or annoying features that could let the viewers think twice before watching.
Although some of her videos are long but this again is a plus to me because I love hearing her talking about what she cares about.
She is very pretty and smooth talking which makes the message easy to remember.
Finally, the quality of her editing skills or the person who manages her editing is excellent.
That is all for me today, I hope you did enjoy this video and let me know what you think of Fab Socialism in the comment section.
Thanks for listening and see you in the next video!


Reference (n.d.). The Ultimate Pick Me: Beyoncé. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022]. (n.d.). THEY ARE DONE WITH US AND ARE MOVING OUTSIDE OF THE US! [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022]. (n.d.). Social Media, Natural Hair, And The Conversation That WON’T Go Away. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022]. (n.d.). Masculinity, Submission & a Black Woman’s Place. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022]. (n.d.). The Internet is Turning its Back on True Crime. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022]. (n.d.). Men…in pearls…groundbreaking | Khadija Mbowe. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022]. (n.d.). Why don’t I just date out? | Black Love follow-up. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022]. (n.d.). Black Femicide and Intimate Partner Violence: A History. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 Aug. 2022].