Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

A GST On The Ethics of Democrats Appearing on Alt Right Sympathetic Media

1246727

Posts

  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud bear with us as we do some "rebranding" Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Did anyone actually stop to definitively demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host?
    Bashing on Hillary in 2016 doesn't really count since that was incredibly popular for literally every media personality at the time.

    Yes, in the third post on this thread:
    Kamar wrote: »
    I think it's important to point out that Rogan is notable as one of the big name entry points people take from mainstream and mainstream-ish news sources into the alt-right ecosystem.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/59ade5/inside-youtubes-alt-media-ecosystem

    The success of his Sanders episode above and beyond his normal success indicates that he's getting new views from Sanders more than Sanders is getting new views in front of Rogan's audience.

    Putting aside the ethics of endorsing by appearance a show that, by whatever magic, tends to lead people down the alt-right rabit hole, I think there's a pragmatic concern that Sanders Democrats who start watching Rogan might end up moving closer to the Bernie Bro of myth.
    Sorry I meant to say did anyone have something serious to contribute regarding the proof that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host.

    He is a tiny outer dot on their little right-wing-media graph and if you had actually read the article instead of breathlessly posting whatever it is you feel is the most morally urgent every 10 seconds you would also realize that.

    It's literally a demonstration of the actual argument people are making: that he is a gateway to the alt-right media ecosystem. The it does not demonstrate whatever other point you had in mind is kind of obvious because that's a different argument from the one being made.
    I am suggesting that the interpretation of the article is at best specious and at worst not really an actual interpretation. It should not be hard to demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an Alt-right personality since that is the main crux of why Bernie should not associate or use his platform.

    NebulousQoverride367
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    Did anyone actually stop to definitively demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host?
    Bashing on Hillary in 2016 doesn't really count since that was incredibly popular for literally every media personality at the time.
    Alleging that someone murdered someone is not “bashing”, no matter how popular it was in 2016
    It was super popular to explore the wild and wonderful world of Clinton conspiracies. You can clutch your pearls all you want about it but one in four neighbors definitely thought the Clintons had done all the bad things in the world. It was the unfortunate side effect of being life long politicians for the family.

    It was super popular to explore the wild and wonderful world of birther conspiracies about Barack Obama too. In neither case does that actually constitute a defence of supporting insane conspiracy theories.

    FencingsaxQuidNo-QuarterKamarCptKemzikmilskiMan in the MistsElldrenDarkewolfeFANTOMAS
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Rogan interviewed alex jones, and has had Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro on. On top of being a transphobic asshole, so I feel pretty safe in writing him off.

    I mean I even have one of his comedy cds and used to watch fear factor for his coked up shouting. To see where he's at now makes me sad, like dennis miller or david mamet.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    SleepQuidNytewarriorMan in the Mists
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    Rogan is a middle of the road shithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
    Yes, and...Julius
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Did anyone actually stop to definitively demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host?
    Bashing on Hillary in 2016 doesn't really count since that was incredibly popular for literally every media personality at the time.

    Yes, in the third post on this thread:
    Kamar wrote: »
    I think it's important to point out that Rogan is notable as one of the big name entry points people take from mainstream and mainstream-ish news sources into the alt-right ecosystem.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/59ade5/inside-youtubes-alt-media-ecosystem

    The success of his Sanders episode above and beyond his normal success indicates that he's getting new views from Sanders more than Sanders is getting new views in front of Rogan's audience.

    Putting aside the ethics of endorsing by appearance a show that, by whatever magic, tends to lead people down the alt-right rabit hole, I think there's a pragmatic concern that Sanders Democrats who start watching Rogan might end up moving closer to the Bernie Bro of myth.
    Sorry I meant to say did anyone have something serious to contribute regarding the proof that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host.

    He is a tiny outer dot on their little right-wing-media graph and if you had actually read the article instead of breathlessly posting whatever it is you feel is the most morally urgent every 10 seconds you would also realize that.

    It's literally a demonstration of the actual argument people are making: that he is a gateway to the alt-right media ecosystem. The it does not demonstrate whatever other point you had in mind is kind of obvious because that's a different argument from the one being made.
    I am suggesting that the interpretation of the article is at best specious and at worst not really an actual interpretation. It should not be hard to demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an Alt-right personality since that is the main crux of why Bernie should not associate or use his platform.

    Why would anyone be trying to demonstrate an argument they aren't making?

  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud bear with us as we do some "rebranding" Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Did anyone actually stop to definitively demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host?
    Bashing on Hillary in 2016 doesn't really count since that was incredibly popular for literally every media personality at the time.

    Yes, in the third post on this thread:
    Kamar wrote: »
    I think it's important to point out that Rogan is notable as one of the big name entry points people take from mainstream and mainstream-ish news sources into the alt-right ecosystem.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/59ade5/inside-youtubes-alt-media-ecosystem

    The success of his Sanders episode above and beyond his normal success indicates that he's getting new views from Sanders more than Sanders is getting new views in front of Rogan's audience.

    Putting aside the ethics of endorsing by appearance a show that, by whatever magic, tends to lead people down the alt-right rabit hole, I think there's a pragmatic concern that Sanders Democrats who start watching Rogan might end up moving closer to the Bernie Bro of myth.
    Sorry I meant to say did anyone have something serious to contribute regarding the proof that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host.

    He is a tiny outer dot on their little right-wing-media graph and if you had actually read the article instead of breathlessly posting whatever it is you feel is the most morally urgent every 10 seconds you would also realize that.

    It's literally a demonstration of the actual argument people are making: that he is a gateway to the alt-right media ecosystem. The it does not demonstrate whatever other point you had in mind is kind of obvious because that's a different argument from the one being made.
    I am suggesting that the interpretation of the article is at best specious and at worst not really an actual interpretation. It should not be hard to demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an Alt-right personality since that is the main crux of why Bernie should not associate or use his platform.

    Why would anyone be trying to demonstrate an argument they aren't making?
    its the title of the thread

    Julius
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Did anyone actually stop to definitively demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host?
    Bashing on Hillary in 2016 doesn't really count since that was incredibly popular for literally every media personality at the time.

    Yes, in the third post on this thread:
    Kamar wrote: »
    I think it's important to point out that Rogan is notable as one of the big name entry points people take from mainstream and mainstream-ish news sources into the alt-right ecosystem.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/59ade5/inside-youtubes-alt-media-ecosystem

    The success of his Sanders episode above and beyond his normal success indicates that he's getting new views from Sanders more than Sanders is getting new views in front of Rogan's audience.

    Putting aside the ethics of endorsing by appearance a show that, by whatever magic, tends to lead people down the alt-right rabit hole, I think there's a pragmatic concern that Sanders Democrats who start watching Rogan might end up moving closer to the Bernie Bro of myth.
    Sorry I meant to say did anyone have something serious to contribute regarding the proof that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host.

    He is a tiny outer dot on their little right-wing-media graph and if you had actually read the article instead of breathlessly posting whatever it is you feel is the most morally urgent every 10 seconds you would also realize that.

    It's literally a demonstration of the actual argument people are making: that he is a gateway to the alt-right media ecosystem. The it does not demonstrate whatever other point you had in mind is kind of obvious because that's a different argument from the one being made.
    I am suggesting that the interpretation of the article is at best specious and at worst not really an actual interpretation. It should not be hard to demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an Alt-right personality since that is the main crux of why Bernie should not associate or use his platform.

    Why would anyone be trying to demonstrate an argument they aren't making?

    Plenty of people have called Rogan alt-right and the alt-right sympathetic lean of the title is leading the witness. He has everyone on his show.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Rogan is a middle of the road shithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    Multiple people have clarified that the argument is not that he’s alt-right or a nazi himself. The argument is that he gets really close to those lines and so his show acts as a gateway to those communities.

    Darkewolfe
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    I'd say being a libertarian with shit views on gender makes him pretty right wing. Like that's not a moderate anything position.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    BandablefoursquaremanMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuLord_AsmodeusElldrenDarkewolfeFANTOMASZilla360
  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    edited August 8
    Kamar wrote: »
    Did anyone actually stop to definitively demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host?
    Bashing on Hillary in 2016 doesn't really count since that was incredibly popular for literally every media personality at the time.

    Yes, in the third post on this thread:
    Kamar wrote: »
    I think it's important to point out that Rogan is notable as one of the big name entry points people take from mainstream and mainstream-ish news sources into the alt-right ecosystem.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/59ade5/inside-youtubes-alt-media-ecosystem

    The success of his Sanders episode above and beyond his normal success indicates that he's getting new views from Sanders more than Sanders is getting new views in front of Rogan's audience.

    Putting aside the ethics of endorsing by appearance a show that, by whatever magic, tends to lead people down the alt-right rabit hole, I think there's a pragmatic concern that Sanders Democrats who start watching Rogan might end up moving closer to the Bernie Bro of myth.
    Sorry I meant to say did anyone have something serious to contribute regarding the proof that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host.

    He is a tiny outer dot on their little right-wing-media graph and if you had actually read the article instead of breathlessly posting whatever it is you feel is the most morally urgent every 10 seconds you would also realize that.

    He's a dot in terms of number of connections within the network.

    The article does note that, as a hugely popular host, he's a significant entry point because he's pushing around a lot of first-time volume over those few connections.
    Sorry but if we are going to use this article as definitive proof (tm) that Joe Rogan is alt-right, then we need to look at the square in the figure. His square is orange and smallest. Suggesting that of all the different media personalities in this alt-right network cloud, Joe Rogan is very much not a significant entry point.

    Read the description on the infographic.

    That specific chart has nothing to do with the number of viewers any of them has or sends elsewhere.

    Rogan dwarfs everyone on the chart for viewership and has the most mainstream appeal.

    BUT he's not had collabs with the entire chart to tie the whole network together, so his dot is neither large nor deep red.

    Kamar on
    shrykeQuidElldren
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Did anyone actually stop to definitively demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host?
    Bashing on Hillary in 2016 doesn't really count since that was incredibly popular for literally every media personality at the time.

    Yes, in the third post on this thread:
    Kamar wrote: »
    I think it's important to point out that Rogan is notable as one of the big name entry points people take from mainstream and mainstream-ish news sources into the alt-right ecosystem.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/59ade5/inside-youtubes-alt-media-ecosystem

    The success of his Sanders episode above and beyond his normal success indicates that he's getting new views from Sanders more than Sanders is getting new views in front of Rogan's audience.

    Putting aside the ethics of endorsing by appearance a show that, by whatever magic, tends to lead people down the alt-right rabit hole, I think there's a pragmatic concern that Sanders Democrats who start watching Rogan might end up moving closer to the Bernie Bro of myth.
    Sorry I meant to say did anyone have something serious to contribute regarding the proof that Joe Rogan is an alt right talk show host.

    He is a tiny outer dot on their little right-wing-media graph and if you had actually read the article instead of breathlessly posting whatever it is you feel is the most morally urgent every 10 seconds you would also realize that.

    It's literally a demonstration of the actual argument people are making: that he is a gateway to the alt-right media ecosystem. The it does not demonstrate whatever other point you had in mind is kind of obvious because that's a different argument from the one being made.
    I am suggesting that the interpretation of the article is at best specious and at worst not really an actual interpretation. It should not be hard to demonstrate that Joe Rogan is an Alt-right personality since that is the main crux of why Bernie should not associate or use his platform.

    Why would anyone be trying to demonstrate an argument they aren't making?
    its the title of the thread

    The title says "alt-right sympathetic media", so no, it's not in the title. You are again just misrepresenting the argument.

    The point is not that he is an alt-right media personality, but that he's one sympathetic to the actual alt-right media ecosystem and thus serves as a connection to it.

    Kristmas KthulhuDarkewolfe
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    Sympathetic as in "I'm just asking questions!"

    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
    No-QuarterjmcdonaldMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuDarkewolfeFANTOMAS
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    Looks if he has leftists on and alt-right. I don't get what your point is. Is he a sympathetic marxist as well?

    psn: PhasenWeeple
    Julius
  • Albino BunnyAlbino Bunny Quantronic Dreamgirl Registered User regular
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    YamiB. wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Pretty much every time a Dem goes on a right wing news source, unless they're tearing in to the hosts themselves, I can't help but feel they'd be much better served going just about anywhere else.

    Go shake hands in a battleground district or something.

    So which sources are acceptable to go on? Because pretty much all of the platforms we have going to a wide audience are right-wing and racist.

    There are plenty of options beyond Fox News and Rogan.

    I also didn't say it was unacceptable. Just a waste of time. The people consuming Fox News are the same ones outright denying reality when confronted with it. There's no appealing to them.

    This is almost as bad as accusing the North Korean people of being brain washed. There is always a way in. If you never try you wont find it though.

    The last decade has demonstrated otherwise.

    American conservatives are a group whose ideals repeatedly revolve around obtaining power at any cost for those with an R by their name and denying anything and everything that contradicts with what they claim to be true.

    The day they decide to grow up and approach society like adults is the day when trying to appeal to them is worthwhile.

    If you put the barrier of entry to the rest of society as immediately and completely renouncing all they once believed in you will never get anything other than a middle finger as a response.

    There isn't a middle position on stuff like LGBT rights or 'racism is bad'.

    Also the right wing media is like, active fucking grifters whose entire entire paycheck is based on middle fingers and not changing their minds. It's stuff like PragerU presenting itself as a faux educational channel while peddling lies and being funded by billionaire frackers or Stephen Crowder insisting 'Socialism is for F*gs' actually is calling socialist Figs. So even for stuff where there is some theoretical magical middle ground of only killing X people due to medical poverty or whatever is still a joke because they're lying about where the middle is from their point of view.

    I'm not talking about agreeing to a middle ground on racism/sexism/etc. I agree there is none.

    I'm talking about maybe they've reached a breaking point and are sick and tired about gun violence and want something to be done about it, so you explain all the things that could be done and how pretty much everyone that shows any initative to do something about it are Democrats. Then you might talk about other things you're fairly sure they would agree on, like more affordable health care or fixing gerrymandering (both of which have popularity across the aile) It's once you get them thinking about (or more than thinking) about actually voting D, you can start (politely) calling out on the racism and sexism and all the other awful stuff.

    But you don't go "why do you care now? You're a racist hick that have no problems when a cop guns down an unarmed man as long as they're black or brown."

    I remember former talk show jock Charlie Sykes saying that the best thing about getting fired for being an Anti-Trumper is that he now feels free to express an opinion that doesn't half to adhere to GoP dogma. You get them to stop thinking of themselves a "always Republican" you got at in that let's you tear down all the other awful ideas they've been fed until they've been made to believe them.

    This would be a great point if the last decade had not being a slow slide right in many countries while weak ass liberal ‘we’re the middle between these assholes and good’ parties flounder.

    I have no desire to describe all right wing folks as some silly skin head stereotype. Im just exceptionally sure they aren’t going to be mollified by polite and meek debate. Hands reached across the aisle just yank to the right.

    Again, I'm not talking about the political level, I'm not naive enough to believe the current people in charge of the GoP have a desire to find a common ground that isn't "everything I want and nothing you want."

    I'm okay with holding them in contempt and with the belief they will never change. I'm talking about outreach to the people who voted them in. Hoping they will change might be foolish, but treating them like they will never change is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    We should definitely keep meekly meeting in the middle and treating them as reasonable.

    That has worked so well so far. It’s a winning strategy as proven by *checks notes* the concentration camps???

    For the love of...


    IM NOT TALK ABOUT MCCONNELL, OR TRUMP OR ANYONE SITTING IN CONGRESS WITH AN R NEXT TO THEIR NAME, OR ANY OF THE STOOGES THEY'VE APPOINTED IN GOVERNMENT!! FUCK ALL OF THEM!! AND DONT GIVE THEM A FUCKING INCH!

    I'm talking about when you walk by your conservative aquaintice when they complain that they're tired about gun violence, and instead of blowing them off for being racist shitheels, you talk to them about what can be done and how the GoP isn't doing anything about it.

    You don't accept their racism, you don't look the other way when they call someone a homophobic term, but you don't end all conversation because they did it and treated them they are a lost cause forever tainted either. You might make dropping all that a condition for being on the Right Side, but it's shouldn't be a condition to apply in the first place.

    I'm not talking about tolerating the intolerable, I'm talking about patience and forgiveness for those willing to question the lies they've been fed even they aren't yet read to denounce all of them. And yes, there should be a limit to that patience.

    I know I definitely change my behaviour when my punishment for enabling concentration camps is to get some political talking points from a friend.

    That’s the kind of consequence that really helps change my world view. Now that they’ve explained the party’s talking points on guns to me (something I could do online or probably hear plenty of on the radio and social media) I will 100% vote for the mild mannered democrat.

    The liberal idea of just talking it out is a myth on the large, political scale. You shun people for being shit and give them lifelines to let them know they can escape the never ending paranoia despair zone that right wing rhetoric is if they work to get better themselves.

    Which is why going on shitty libertarian shows and giving that guy traffic is a trap.

  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Looks if he has leftists on and alt-right. I don't get what your point is. Is he a sympathetic marxist as well?

    Fox News has people from the left on too. Occasionally having people on with opposing views doesn't change what a show espouses overall.

    NobeardMan in the Mists
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    edited August 8
    Quid wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Looks if he has leftists on and alt-right. I don't get what your point is. Is he a sympathetic marxist as well?

    Fox News has people from the left on too. Occasionally having people on with opposing views doesn't change what a show espouses overall.

    That was not the evidence presented as rogan being alt-right sympathetic. The fact that he has people on that are alt-right is the evidence.

    Phasen on
    psn: PhasenWeeple
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudMrMisterJulius
  • PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    From a brain dead point of view, we don't have a lot of data on the effects of liberals going on right wing sympathetic media. Maybe it's bad, maybe it's not so bad.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudMrMister
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    YamiB. wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Pretty much every time a Dem goes on a right wing news source, unless they're tearing in to the hosts themselves, I can't help but feel they'd be much better served going just about anywhere else.

    Go shake hands in a battleground district or something.

    So which sources are acceptable to go on? Because pretty much all of the platforms we have going to a wide audience are right-wing and racist.

    There are plenty of options beyond Fox News and Rogan.

    I also didn't say it was unacceptable. Just a waste of time. The people consuming Fox News are the same ones outright denying reality when confronted with it. There's no appealing to them.

    This is almost as bad as accusing the North Korean people of being brain washed. There is always a way in. If you never try you wont find it though.

    What?

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Looks if he has leftists on and alt-right. I don't get what your point is. Is he a sympathetic marxist as well?

    Fox News has people from the left on too. Occasionally having people on with opposing views doesn't change what a show espouses overall.

    That was not the evidence presented as rogan being alt-right sympathetic. The fact that he has people on that are alt-right is the evidence.

    I'd say that he repeatedly spouts alt right talking points and conspiracies, along the lines of "just asking questions", is far more demonstrative of this. There is demonstrable harm in allowing these beliefs to be broadcast to the masses and he participates in that harm.

    PreacherNo-QuartershrykeMan in the MistsElldrenDarkewolfe
  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    QuidAngelHedgieSleepNo-QuarterMillFencingsaxFoefallerFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudMarathonLoveIsUnityBandableArchjmcdonaldNobeardMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuLord_AsmodeusElldrenLabelDarkewolfeFANTOMAS
  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Nothing To Fear But Fear ItselfRegistered User regular
    edited August 8
    Monwyn wrote: »
    Rogan has pretty consistently expressed that he thinks Trump is a disgusting idiot with no business being president as far back as 2015

    The notion that offhandedly mentioning a conspiracy theory for two sentences is considered "pushing" that theory is also a pretty dumb framing

    That "offhandedly mentioning of a conspiracy theory for two sentences" is actually a 10 minute conversation with Dore featured on Rogan's own official Youtube channel.

    The name of the clip is "Hillary Clinton Wasn't the Lesser of Two Evils" and has 3.1 million views, here you go:

    No-Quarter on
    KamarKristmas Kthulhu
  • SmurphSmurph Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Rogan is a middle of the road shithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    I think if you call yourself middle of the road or even 'left leaning' like a lot of these podcasters do, but everyone on the far left hates your guys and everyone on the far right is likely part of your fan base, then you're just kinda bullshitting yourself.

    You won't ever see Rogan put on a MAGA hat, but anti-PC culture screeds have been like 80% of his act from the beginning. And those just happen to be one of the far right's favorite dog whistles.

    "I'm not even a Republican, I'm an independent" was one of Bill O'Reily's favorite lines.

    SleepPreacherAngelHedgieQuidKamarMilliTunesIsEvilFencingsaxNo-QuartershrykeStabbity StyleBandableCptKemzikjmcdonaldmilskiMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuLord_AsmodeusElldrenLabelDarkewolfeFANTOMAS
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Also!

    There are podcasts about crazy conspiracy theories and groups that don't allow for advocates of those things to promote them. Oh No Ross and Carrie! talk about all of these. The main difference is they actually discuss them instead of just repeating what they hear.

    PreacherCptKemzikElldren
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    There is nothing to be gain from showing up on Fox News or other platforms that are entry points for getting people into shitty alt-right rabbit holes.

    -Showing up on those platforms gives them oxygen in a number of ways. First it gives them viewers they shouldn't have, they should have zero viewers. Those viewers equate into being a more tempting target for advertisers because viewers are more eyeballs that see whatever they are selling. If you don't show up on them, you don't introduce your audience to them and if you audience doesn't go to them, that means they aren't getting new views and that could be the difference between the network shitting canning the show when the contract ends, moving it to the shitty graveyard time slots or renewing it in the same slot or a better slot.

    -Yes, it's good try and engage with sympathetic voters on the other side, but that's not what these platforms are going to allow you do. They get decide if they'll air the interview or not, so if it doesn't go how they like, they'll just not air it. Or they'll cut the parts they can cut, while avoiding a potential lawsuit. They won't let you engage with the other side in good faith. Hell, given what some of them peddle and their track records, I wouldn't put it passed them to edit an interview to put someone in the worst possible light to further the shitty causes of that platform (lawsuits be damned). As Quid pointed out, the time, resources and energy are better spend elsewhere. Go to townhalls or door to door. If you want to engage with the other side it is actually more effective to cut the shitty alt-right and alt-right enabling pundits and networks out of the equation and engage with people that are willing to have a discussion in good faith. Hell, if you're successful on the door to door thing or townhall, those people brought over are going to do more to convince people on your policy ideas, where shitty platforms and their pundits will just go out of their way to undermine you.

    -Going on these platforms undercuts you in the long run. Think the inverse of "you can't full all the people, all the time," which is "not everyone will clue into a lie all the time." By bringing exposing your audience to these shitty platforms, you create a scenario where the ones struggling with crappy views or even backing a majority of your causes decide they like what the alt-right is peddling better. In the case of racism & misogyny, it probably ends up being they just like the idea of blaming an other and being mad at that other because the alt-right makes it sound like a quick and easy solution compared to whatever policy ideas you're selling. Hell, in the cases of them not staying on board with your because maybe they don't like taxes, you'd rather they got off the lane for a saner individual than for the most batshit crazy alt-righter because that just happened to be the first person they agreed more with.

    FryPreacherBandableNobeardMan in the MistsLabel
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    edited August 8
    Smurph wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Rogan is a middle of the road shithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    I think if you call yourself middle of the road or even 'left leaning' like a lot of these podcasters do, but everyone on the far left hates your guys and everyone on the far right is likely part of your fan base, then you're just kinda bullshitting yourself.

    You won't ever see Rogan put on a MAGA hat, but anti-PC culture screeds have been like 80% of his act from the beginning. And those just happen to be one of the far right's favorite dog whistles.

    "I'm not even a Republican, I'm an independent" was one of Bill O'Reily's favorite lines.

    I described him. I have no idea how Rogan describes himself I'm sure its some bs. Anti-pc culture exists everywhere in the older generations and in demographics other than white. Just yesterday I had to listen to Gordon fucking Ramsey go off about safe spaces on Hot Ones. Also I kinda don't care in the greater scheme of the thread. I wouldn't want someone I like to be a regular but doing an interview where your views get out there is great.

    Phasen on
    psn: PhasenWeeple
    Julius
  • FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    edited August 8
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    YamiB. wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Pretty much every time a Dem goes on a right wing news source, unless they're tearing in to the hosts themselves, I can't help but feel they'd be much better served going just about anywhere else.

    Go shake hands in a battleground district or something.

    So which sources are acceptable to go on? Because pretty much all of the platforms we have going to a wide audience are right-wing and racist.

    There are plenty of options beyond Fox News and Rogan.

    I also didn't say it was unacceptable. Just a waste of time. The people consuming Fox News are the same ones outright denying reality when confronted with it. There's no appealing to them.

    This is almost as bad as accusing the North Korean people of being brain washed. There is always a way in. If you never try you wont find it though.

    The last decade has demonstrated otherwise.

    American conservatives are a group whose ideals repeatedly revolve around obtaining power at any cost for those with an R by their name and denying anything and everything that contradicts with what they claim to be true.

    The day they decide to grow up and approach society like adults is the day when trying to appeal to them is worthwhile.

    If you put the barrier of entry to the rest of society as immediately and completely renouncing all they once believed in you will never get anything other than a middle finger as a response.

    There isn't a middle position on stuff like LGBT rights or 'racism is bad'.

    Also the right wing media is like, active fucking grifters whose entire entire paycheck is based on middle fingers and not changing their minds. It's stuff like PragerU presenting itself as a faux educational channel while peddling lies and being funded by billionaire frackers or Stephen Crowder insisting 'Socialism is for F*gs' actually is calling socialist Figs. So even for stuff where there is some theoretical magical middle ground of only killing X people due to medical poverty or whatever is still a joke because they're lying about where the middle is from their point of view.

    I'm not talking about agreeing to a middle ground on racism/sexism/etc. I agree there is none.

    I'm talking about maybe they've reached a breaking point and are sick and tired about gun violence and want something to be done about it, so you explain all the things that could be done and how pretty much everyone that shows any initative to do something about it are Democrats. Then you might talk about other things you're fairly sure they would agree on, like more affordable health care or fixing gerrymandering (both of which have popularity across the aile) It's once you get them thinking about (or more than thinking) about actually voting D, you can start (politely) calling out on the racism and sexism and all the other awful stuff.

    But you don't go "why do you care now? You're a racist hick that have no problems when a cop guns down an unarmed man as long as they're black or brown."

    I remember former talk show jock Charlie Sykes saying that the best thing about getting fired for being an Anti-Trumper is that he now feels free to express an opinion that doesn't half to adhere to GoP dogma. You get them to stop thinking of themselves a "always Republican" you got at in that let's you tear down all the other awful ideas they've been fed until they've been made to believe them.

    This would be a great point if the last decade had not being a slow slide right in many countries while weak ass liberal ‘we’re the middle between these assholes and good’ parties flounder.

    I have no desire to describe all right wing folks as some silly skin head stereotype. Im just exceptionally sure they aren’t going to be mollified by polite and meek debate. Hands reached across the aisle just yank to the right.

    Again, I'm not talking about the political level, I'm not naive enough to believe the current people in charge of the GoP have a desire to find a common ground that isn't "everything I want and nothing you want."

    I'm okay with holding them in contempt and with the belief they will never change. I'm talking about outreach to the people who voted them in. Hoping they will change might be foolish, but treating them like they will never change is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    We should definitely keep meekly meeting in the middle and treating them as reasonable.

    That has worked so well so far. It’s a winning strategy as proven by *checks notes* the concentration camps???

    For the love of...


    IM NOT TALK ABOUT MCCONNELL, OR TRUMP OR ANYONE SITTING IN CONGRESS WITH AN R NEXT TO THEIR NAME, OR ANY OF THE STOOGES THEY'VE APPOINTED IN GOVERNMENT!! FUCK ALL OF THEM!! AND DONT GIVE THEM A FUCKING INCH!

    I'm talking about when you walk by your conservative aquaintice when they complain that they're tired about gun violence, and instead of blowing them off for being racist shitheels, you talk to them about what can be done and how the GoP isn't doing anything about it.

    You don't accept their racism, you don't look the other way when they call someone a homophobic term, but you don't end all conversation because they did it and treated them they are a lost cause forever tainted either. You might make dropping all that a condition for being on the Right Side, but it's shouldn't be a condition to apply in the first place.

    I'm not talking about tolerating the intolerable, I'm talking about patience and forgiveness for those willing to question the lies they've been fed even they aren't yet read to denounce all of them. And yes, there should be a limit to that patience.

    I know I definitely change my behaviour when my punishment for enabling concentration camps is to get some political talking points from a friend.

    That’s the kind of consequence that really helps change my world view. Now that they’ve explained the party’s talking points on guns to me (something I could do online or probably hear plenty of on the radio and social media) I will 100% vote for the mild mannered democrat.

    The liberal idea of just talking it out is a myth on the large, political scale. You shun people for being shit and give them lifelines to let them know they can escape the never ending paranoia despair zone that right wing rhetoric is if they work to get better themselves.

    Which is why going on shitty libertarian shows and giving that guy traffic is a trap.

    You still have to show them where the lifeline is though. They still need to be shown that there is an alternative, even if their first reaction is to reject it, even violently so.

    That said, I'm not sure we're arguing for entirely different approaches. I'm just saying that there should be a guy at the top of the lifeline shouting encouragement for the people who are willing to grab hold, not continue to be nasty to them until they make it out. But a lot of people on these forums seem to think everyone that votes R today is irredeemable and beyond saving, and the logical conclusion to that train of thought would be... very hypocritical.

    Foefaller on
    steam_sig.png
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
    NSDFRand
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    I'm very willing and already have. I think it's pretty horrible! But it continues to not at all be the same as using conspiracy theories to support transphobia.

    Otherwise I would indeed prefer Dem candidates avoid spending time on shows that use deception to support demonstrably harmful beliefs.

    No-QuarterPreacherjmcdonaldMan in the MistsElldrenFANTOMAS
  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    I'm fine saying candidates should have avoided them, too.

    Don't legitimize shitheads.

    Put out a press release saying 'We were invited to guest with these shitheads, and said no, because of this this and this.'

    CNN should be the absolute worst platform any candidate lowers themselves to--and at least in that case, I doubt the candidate is bringing in new viewers.

    No-QuarterjmcdonaldElldren
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    Kamar wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    I'm fine saying candidates should have avoided them, too.

    Don't legitimize shitheads.

    Put out a press release saying 'We were invited to guest with these shitheads, and said no, because of this this and this.'

    CNN should be the absolute worst platform any candidate lowers themselves to--and at least in that case, I doubt the candidate is bringing in new viewers.

    If we are holding rogan to task then CNN ain't much different. They still peddle in the both sides teach the controversy bs that numbed me to this sort of thing.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
    YamiB.Julius
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited August 8
    Phasen wrote: »
    Rogan is a middle of the road [sb]hithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues[/b]. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    What exactly do you think the alt-right is? Because the bold generally translates to racist and sexist when you drop euphemisms. And he associates himself with alt-right figures and says alt-right stuff. He's a 9/11 truther who shields himself with "just asking questions". He has claimed the moon landings were fake.

    "Left racism is the real threat"



    Where they talk about Trump being bad, but Green New Deal is interesting if it makes magic trains but they attack the idea of racism being important and "identitarian" politics.
    or
    “Well, they’re constantly holding those two contradictions, right?” he said. “I mean, here’s another one: women’s rights and support of the hijab. I mean, what’s going on there? How do you do that? Don’t be Islamophobic but also support women’s rights and gay rights.”

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
    Darkewolfe
  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Nothing To Fear But Fear ItselfRegistered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    Because you were asked to provide evidence of the Breakfast Club pushing conspiracy theories similar to how Rogan does.

    I'll echo Marathon's response to you and say that moved the goal posts and gave us one link about the host having ignorant/gross opinions about the trans community, and the other being an interview with Warren where she is asked about, and responds to, criticism about her supposed Native American ancestry.

    Neither of those things is remotely in the same ballpark as Rogan saying (direct quote I've linked several times now):
    I was infuriated when people that I knew, that I am friends with, try to tell me that Hillary Clinton was a good choice, that she is the sane choice. Look, I don't know if she's murdered people, but I know that I'm worried she's murdered people. That's a real concern.

    Man in the MistsElldrenFANTOMAS
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    edited August 8
    PantsB wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Rogan is a middle of the road [sb]hithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues[/b]. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    What exactly do you think the alt-right is? Because the bold generally translates to racist and sexist when you drop euphemisms. And he associates himself with alt-right figures and says alt-right stuff. He's a 9/11 truther who shields himself with "just asking questions". He has claimed the moon landings were fake.

    "Left racism is the real threat"


    Where they talk about Trump being bad, but Green New Deal is interesting if it makes magic trains but they attack the idea of racism being important.
    or
    “Well, they’re constantly holding those two contradictions, right?” he said. “I mean, here’s another one: women’s rights and support of the hijab. I mean, what’s going on there? How do you do that? Don’t be Islamophobic but also support women’s rights and gay rights.”

    If you look at the chain of quotes you snipped it was pretty direct that I was asking for evidence of any of his alt right association because what we had is he hated Hillary Clinton(not uncommon) and he had alt-right people on.

    I dont know how moon landings being fake or being a 9/11 truther makes him alt right. I'm seriously not going to watch a joe rogan linked video one was enough for my youtube history. Are you quoting rogan or the guest?

    Phasen on
    psn: PhasenWeeple
    Julius
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    Because you were asked to provide evidence of the Breakfast Club pushing conspiracy theories similar to how Rogan does.

    I'll echo Marathon's response to you and say that moved the goal posts and gave us one link about the host having ignorant/gross opinions about the trans community, and the other being an interview with Warren where she is asked about, and responds to, criticism about her supposed Native American ancestry.

    Neither of those things is remotely in the same ballpark as Rogan saying (direct quote I've linked several times now):
    I was infuriated when people that I knew, that I am friends with, try to tell me that Hillary Clinton was a good choice, that she is the sane choice. Look, I don't know if she's murdered people, but I know that I'm worried she's murdered people. That's a real concern.

    Apologies to Hillary Clinton's campaign but Trans people are actually murdered and jailed. I'm going to dislike transphobic takes over some conspiracy theory that everyone knew was such. I didnt move the goal posts at all because one is actually fucking worse.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
    YamiB.Elendil
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Rogan is a middle of the road [sb]hithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues[/b]. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    What exactly do you think the alt-right is? Because the bold generally translates to racist and sexist when you drop euphemisms. And he associates himself with alt-right figures and says alt-right stuff. He's a 9/11 truther who shields himself with "just asking questions". He has claimed the moon landings were fake.

    "Left racism is the real threat"


    Where they talk about Trump being bad, but Green New Deal is interesting if it makes magic trains but they attack the idea of racism being important.
    or
    “Well, they’re constantly holding those two contradictions, right?” he said. “I mean, here’s another one: women’s rights and support of the hijab. I mean, what’s going on there? How do you do that? Don’t be Islamophobic but also support women’s rights and gay rights.”

    If you look at the chain of quotes you snipped it was pretty direct that I was asking for evidence of any of his alt right association because what we had is he hated Hillary Clinton(not uncommon) and he had alt-right people on.

    I dont know how moon landings being fake or being a 9/11 truther makes him alt right. I'm seriously not going to watch a joe rogan linked video one was enough for my youtube history. Are you quoting rogan or the guest?

    Conspiracy theories are intrinsically linked to the alt-right, just like "the real racism is from the left."

    The quote is Rogan from a different video. Rogan is incoherent and summarizing is more efficient, but that's an alt-right figure.

    And the reason you don't want Rogan on your YT timeline is the algorithm links you to alt-right videos because he's an alt-right gateway

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
    SleepNo-QuarterAngelHedgieshrykeFencingsaxStabbity StyleBandablejmcdonaldTorgaironNobeardMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuLord_AsmodeusElldrenLabelDarkewolfeFANTOMAS
  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Nothing To Fear But Fear ItselfRegistered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    Because you were asked to provide evidence of the Breakfast Club pushing conspiracy theories similar to how Rogan does.

    I'll echo Marathon's response to you and say that moved the goal posts and gave us one link about the host having ignorant/gross opinions about the trans community, and the other being an interview with Warren where she is asked about, and responds to, criticism about her supposed Native American ancestry.

    Neither of those things is remotely in the same ballpark as Rogan saying (direct quote I've linked several times now):
    I was infuriated when people that I knew, that I am friends with, try to tell me that Hillary Clinton was a good choice, that she is the sane choice. Look, I don't know if she's murdered people, but I know that I'm worried she's murdered people. That's a real concern.

    Apologies to Hillary Clinton's campaign but Trans people are actually murdered and jailed. I'm going to dislike transphobic takes over some conspiracy theory that everyone knew was such. I didnt move the goal posts at all because one is actually fucking worse.

    That has nothing to do with the fact you were asked to provide evidence of conspiracy theories from them instead of gross opinions. I mean, YOU might not think propaganda pushed by the Russian government to (successfully!) damage Clinton was important, but I sure as hell do.

    I'm also going to need a citation for "everyone" knowing that it was bullshit that was Clinton behind Rich's murder, because that shit, along with garbage from Wikileaks (which Rogan ALSO covered with validity), spread like wildfire among the Sanders supporters in my circle of friends.

    SleepFencingsaxBandablejmcdonaldmilskiMan in the Mists
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    I'm fine saying candidates should have avoided them, too.

    Don't legitimize shitheads.

    Put out a press release saying 'We were invited to guest with these shitheads, and said no, because of this this and this.'

    CNN should be the absolute worst platform any candidate lowers themselves to--and at least in that case, I doubt the candidate is bringing in new viewers.

    If we are holding rogan to task then CNN ain't much different. They still peddle in the both sides teach the controversy bs that numbed me to this sort of thing.

    CNN is terrible, yes.

    SleepshrykeNo-QuarterFencingsaxPreacherNobeardmilskiMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuLord_AsmodeusElldrenLabel
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited August 8
    Phasen wrote: »
    Apologies to Hillary Clinton's campaign but Trans people are actually murdered and jailed. I'm going to dislike transphobic takes over some conspiracy theory that everyone knew was such. I didnt move the goal posts at all because one is actually fucking worse.
    This is such a weird argument, because Joe Rogan is hugely transphobic and Bernie Sanders has appeared on the Breakfast Club

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
    SleepshrykeMarathonFencingsaxNo-QuarterPreacherQuidCptKemzikjmcdonaldMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuLord_AsmodeusElldren
  • dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    edited August 8
    Guests on Joe Rogan behave themselves to an extent. Even the weird vile ones. So while the show itself never struck me as alt-right and some really interesting interviews have come from it there are enough alt-right adjacent guests who get an attractive framing by the show due to a lack of critical analysis it's hard to disagree that it's a step into that end of the pool.

    As an example. Jordan Peterson is a smart guy who can sell the lite version of his transphobic misogyny in an appealing way to the uninformed when he goes on TV/Podcasts. While Rogan nods along with specific lines of logic he never pushes back on things he really should as a responsible host. Joe Rogan may (or may not) gently allow a palatable right ideology to be pushed directly, but he sure seems to like providing a sales platform similar to something a Google YouTube algorithm generates.

    I don't know if Bernie can reach Peterson or Jones fans, but maybe others who tune in?

    Not a fan of liberals going there to find a foothold, but it may be necessary to get heard by people who need alternatives.

    Now Henry Rollins is incredible and everyone I like should be on his podcast all the time (pick one).

    Edited for clarification.

    dispatch.o on
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudForarFANTOMASSiska
  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Rogan is a middle of the road [sb]hithead libertarian with shit views on most gender issues[/b]. I don't think he's alt right or a nazi or a fascist or whatever flavor of right wing fascist is popular at the moment.

    What exactly do you think the alt-right is? Because the bold generally translates to racist and sexist when you drop euphemisms. And he associates himself with alt-right figures and says alt-right stuff. He's a 9/11 truther who shields himself with "just asking questions". He has claimed the moon landings were fake.

    "Left racism is the real threat"


    Where they talk about Trump being bad, but Green New Deal is interesting if it makes magic trains but they attack the idea of racism being important.
    or
    “Well, they’re constantly holding those two contradictions, right?” he said. “I mean, here’s another one: women’s rights and support of the hijab. I mean, what’s going on there? How do you do that? Don’t be Islamophobic but also support women’s rights and gay rights.”

    If you look at the chain of quotes you snipped it was pretty direct that I was asking for evidence of any of his alt right association because what we had is he hated Hillary Clinton(not uncommon) and he had alt-right people on.

    I dont know how moon landings being fake or being a 9/11 truther makes him alt right. I'm seriously not going to watch a joe rogan linked video one was enough for my youtube history. Are you quoting rogan or the guest?

    Conspiracy theories are intrinsically linked to the alt-right, just like "the real racism is from the left."

    The quote is Rogan from a different video. Rogan is incoherent and summarizing is more efficient, but that's an alt-right figure.

    And the reason you don't want Rogan on your YT timeline is the algorithm links you to alt-right videos because he's an alt-right gateway

    My kids youtube videos will also link up with bloody sonic. Youtube just sucks.
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    Let's take a step back.

    Would anyone here argue if we said Rogan is a force for conspiracy thinking and pseudo-intellectualism?

    And from there, would anyone argue that conspiracy theories and pseudo-intellectualism are a leading route into the alt-right?

    He doesn't need to be a Nazi to be a problem.

    I dont know. Not many people wanted to comment on The Breakfast club having an Transphobic host because its the same team.

    Because you were asked to provide evidence of the Breakfast Club pushing conspiracy theories similar to how Rogan does.

    I'll echo Marathon's response to you and say that moved the goal posts and gave us one link about the host having ignorant/gross opinions about the trans community, and the other being an interview with Warren where she is asked about, and responds to, criticism about her supposed Native American ancestry.

    Neither of those things is remotely in the same ballpark as Rogan saying (direct quote I've linked several times now):
    I was infuriated when people that I knew, that I am friends with, try to tell me that Hillary Clinton was a good choice, that she is the sane choice. Look, I don't know if she's murdered people, but I know that I'm worried she's murdered people. That's a real concern.

    Apologies to Hillary Clinton's campaign but Trans people are actually murdered and jailed. I'm going to dislike transphobic takes over some conspiracy theory that everyone knew was such. I didnt move the goal posts at all because one is actually fucking worse.

    That has nothing to do with the fact you were asked to provide evidence of conspiracy theories from them instead of gross opinions. I mean, YOU might not think propaganda pushed by the Russian government to (successfully!) damage Clinton was important, but I sure as hell do.

    I'm also going to need a citation for "everyone" knowing that it was bullshit that was Clinton behind Rich's murder, because that shit, along with garbage from Wikileaks (which Rogan ALSO covered with validity), spread like wildfire among the Sanders supporters in my circle of friends.

    I'm glad you put those words in my mouth how else would I say something like that. The transphobic stuff is far worse. Call up Harris and Warren.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
Sign In or Register to comment.